April 08, 2006
IBD Decries 'Amateur' Effort On Saddam Translations
******************************AN EXCERPT *********************************
An editorial in the Investors Business Daily scolded Congress and the White House for not putting more of an official effort into translating the tens of thousands of documents captured during the fall of Iraq in 2003. CQ reader Angry Dumbo points out one passage that stands out regarding the efforts made by the blogosphere (especially at Free Republic, which translated the document I posted earlier this week):
*****************
******Excerpted*********************
At present, we're relying too much on translations by bloggers and other amateurs [emphasis mine -- CE]. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., says the White House has been dragging its feet for fear of embarrassing supposed allies (such as Russia) whose links with Saddam would come under scrutiny.
********************************************
I understand Angry Dumbo's irritation. It really does not matter whether amateurs or professionals translate these documents -- rather, the accuracy of the translation is all that we need to ensure. Bloggers have done this because the government simply didn't want to commit the resources necessary to do it. Rather than scold Rep. Hoekstra, IBD should congratulate him for getting someone engaged in determining the contents of this treasure trove of documentation.
******************Excerpt.....*************************************
However, knowing the extent of IND's support of the blogosphere, this does not appear to be meant as an insult to bloggers. IBD wants to press the government to take responsibility for the evaluation of these documents rather than push it off to a community of volunteers. That's commendable; the government never should have let these sit for three years unexploited. We could have bridged a gap in our understanding of the war much earlier and avoided a lot of political infighting as a result.
****************************************************
And Finally
*****************************
On the other hand, I'm not sure that I agree with IBD's overall assessment of this credibility gap between the volunteers and the professionals within the intelligence agencies. The administration has to deal with a high level of distrust, a lot of it irrational, that would make anything they produce suspect in most circles.
*******************************
And in CONCLUSION
************************************
One argument that I received after posting the translation supplied by Laurie Mylroie was that because the translation came from Free Republic, it made it unreliable.
After that argument was made, I contacted two professional translators who will translate page 6 of the BIAP document independent of each other. When I receive those translations -- for which I paid a fee to both -- I will post them along with the FR translation as soon as they arrive. That should put an end to speculation about the motives of the translators, and put to rest the worries about "amateurs" involving themselves in the process.
************************************
***********************************
I have chopped up this for a quick flavor ........One really need to read both with concentration to understand what IBD is saying.....etc....
But it is getting interesting ......
And of course we are all Amateurs here.....
Sorry for any double p[ings....
Well well well...isnt Laurie Mylroie the same person who is a god to some on this site.
I will post them along with the FR translation as soon as they arrive. That should put an end to speculation about the motives of the translators, and put to rest the worries about "amateurs" involving themselves in the process.
Posted by Captain Ed at April 8, 2006 11:49 AM
Is there a ping list for this?
As to the ability to make sense of a series of documents by creating a time line and adding context...
I would put the analytical ability of Freepers against the whole stinking government intelligence community. Screw 'em. They blew it.
That's a poor argument. For one thing, the translation can be verified by other sources...and once verified, the document becomes sourced, verified evidence.
At that point, the person who blindly claimed that the translation was unreliable (due to FR), herself becomes unreliable instead.
The Pajamhadeen Rule!