« If Only... | Main | Lost in Translation » More Translation Folloies21 Jul 2008 09:12 am More unconvincing walkback in my NYT: “Unfortunately, Der Spiegel was not accurate,” Mr. Dabbagh said Sunday by telephone. “I have the recording of the voice of Mr. Maliki. We even listened to the translation.” Now a previous NYT story re-did the translation and said it was fine, which you might think the paper would mention here. Meanwhile, how did Dabbagh listen to the translation? That doesn't make any sense. Comments (29)
The interview was almost certainly in Arabic through an interpreter, whose voice (and translation) was also recorded. Doesn't negate your larger point that others who "listened to the translation" found it accurate, but it answers your question. 
This is the most plausible explanation of the whole kerfuffle I could find. (And before people start going on about Der Spiegel again, please explain this to me - note the time the article was posted.)
Face it, Maliki said and he meant it. His people want it. Our people want it. The only ones who don't want it are Bushco, McSame, and a minority group of supporters. They want to stay and control Iraq ... for 100 years. Is it any wonder that the leader of what is now a sovereign nation doesn't want his control to remain under the control of an occupying force?
With the audio, I suspect there's not going to be too much variation on the translation. It seems pretty clear what Maliki said. I also find the notion that he said this to exert political pressure on the US credible. It's a little hard to believe he didn't know what he was doing. He brought up Obama's name, not Der Spiegel. We'll have a little kabuki theater over this during the next couple of days, but the audio's the killer. This is a major score for Obama. McCain has to be shitting his pants.
Why not just come out and overtly advertise endorsements for Obama from the Iraqi PM and other world leaders? Maybe he can have Chavez, Castro, and Ahminajihad sing Obama's praise at the Democratic convention.
saying he "listened to the translation" makes sense if what he is referring to is a simultaneous translation such as you often see in tv interviews.
Why not just come out and overtly advertise endorsements for Obama from the Iraqi PM and other world leaders? Maybe he can have Chavez, Castro, and Ahminajihad sing Obama's praise at the Democratic convention. You putting Maliki in that company? Is that what we're fighting to defend now? Who's "he" in your second sentence? You sound a little bitter, understandably.
The senior editor is bylined, so one assumes it was a phone interview with a translator on the call.
Why not just come out and overtly advertise endorsements for Obama from the Iraqi PM and other world leaders? Maybe he can have Chavez, Castro, and Ahminajihad sing Obama's praise at the Democratic convention. Maliki comes out for Obama and already he's being grouped with Castro and Ahmednijad. Eh, he's Iraqi, he likely already knows how far Republican "friendship" goes.
Who's "he" in your second sentence? Fair point on the ambiguity. One must always capitalize Him in pronoun form. ;-)
This whole brouhaha seems like a good test of various media outlets. It's biggish news, it's so recent that it isn't impossible to know the extent to which any media outlet has treated it, and the treatment of it has varied dramatically, even within same tier of reputation (WaPo, for example, now seems all but openly committed to not harming the McCain candidacy at this point, while the NYT is actually struggling with making sense of it).
Wait -- did superpatriot MarkG just accuse Our Troops, in supporting the Purple Finger Democratic Government of Nuri al Maliki, of having fought for and strengthening of the government of a dictator of the likes of Fidel Castro? Is that why John McCain backed The Surge, to install an Iraqi Fidel? MarkG should immediately wash his mouth out with soap and quickly consume an entire bag of Frozen Freedom Fries as penance.
The article does mention the Times' verification of the translation, but it's on page 2 of the online article.
Wait -- did superpatriot MarkG just accuse Our Troops, in supporting the Purple Finger Democratic Government of Nuri al Maliki, of having fought for and strengthening of the government of a dictator of the likes of Fidel Castro? To be fair, MarkG is finally coming around to the fact that Maliki is a prominent member of the Iranian backed, terrorist Islamic Dawa party. Just goes to show you that Americans shouldn't butt in where they have no clue as to who the players are. Luckily for the Republicans Maliki belongs to a recognized Iranian backed terrorist organization. That will make it easier for them to make their accustomed pivot on a dime.
OK, this is just getting nuts. How bad would the translation have to be to mess up something he says two or three times in different ways? Can someone please get us *any* accurate translation, preferably along with printing the Arabic (and German) original transcripts somewhere on the web?
Wait -- did superpatriot MarkG just accuse Our Troops, in supporting the Purple Finger Democratic Government of Nuri al Maliki, of having fought for and strengthening of the government of a dictator of the likes of Fidel Castro? Just pointing out Obama's unique ability to expand equality worldwide: He's a true unifier and peacemaker. He'll make the whole world love us all. Instead of Obama at the Berly Gates, fittingly, He'll speak at Berlin's Siegessäule, modern backdrop of the Love Parade. We'll soon learn that the lamb lies down next to the lion in Obama's presence, and so on.
Just a reminder, MarkG, who al-Maliki and his Dawa organization is. You know - the same Maliki that you right wing fucktards were so orgasmic that purple fingered Iraqis voted for him: 1981 Mid-December - Iraqi embassy in Beirut is leveled by a suicide bomber. Iraqi al-Da'wa party claims credit for the attack, citing Iraq's invasion of Iran. Perhaps the first Shia suicide bombing, the attack was an "oft-noticed precedent" for the 1983 bombing of the American Embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut. [20] 1982 - Al-Dawa assassination attempt on Saddam Hussein in Dujail fails. Heavy crack-downs on al-Dawa by Hussein's regime. Many flee to Iran, where it suffers from competition with SCIRI. 1983, 12 December - In Kuwait, the American and French embassies, Kuwait airport, the main oil refinery in Kuwait, and a residential area for Raytheon employees are bombed. 17 suspects were soon arrested, mostly al-Dawa members, including Jamal Jafaar Mohammed (currently member of Iraq's parliament as a member of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's ruling coalition). Jamal Jafaar Mohammed escapes from Kuwait before the trial starts and is sentenced to death in absentia in 1984. And quite naturally, now that the Bushies have facilitated the Shi'ite terrorist takeover of Iraq and kicked out the secular opposition, now they want us to leave. Heck of a job, bushie!
So first the Bush administration touts the Maliki quote embracing Obama's plan in a press release, then it strongarms the Iraqi government into retracting the comment. I don't get it... http://www.political-buzz.com/
Why not just come out and overtly advertise endorsements for Obama from the Iraqi PM and other world leaders? Maybe he can have Chavez, Castro, and Ahminajihad sing Obama's praise at the Democratic convention. Deny, then distort, then disparage. We've reached stage three for this crisis. SOP for Republicans, as the facts have a known liberal bias.
It is not a fiendishly clever plan, Matt. They're tripping over their own feet.
I'd like to see a paraphrase of Maliki's words (either translation) from the people who suggest that Maliki didn't support Obama's time scale. To me, both translations support the first impression that was disseminated. So, ante up. Contrive a paraphrase that supports the notion that the first impression was not only wrong but contradicted.
First, the totally wrong version presented in the New York Times, since they claim it is a "literal" translation:
Okay, now here is a much more sensible translation of his comments which could be taken seriously by right wing thinkertons:
If everyone was so confident that the translation "supporting Obama" is correct, they would have released the audio already. They haven't. It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure out the reason why.
First, it depends on what conditions Maliki insisted upon. Second, it depends on what Der Spiegel might be able to sell this now apparently hotly sought-out audio / videotape for. You're the free marketeer, Al.
If everyone was so confident that the translation "supporting Obama" is correct, they would have released the audio already. They haven't. It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure out the reason why. So do you speak Arabic and German, Al? I speak one of those languages but I'll bet you wont trust my mis-translation because I'm a dirty fucking hippie. So why do you care if the tapes are circulated for wide release or not?
Al, you might want to stop spinning and sit down before you get dizzy and puke. MarkG, can I buy some pot from you?
The most charitable explanation for the bigfoot media's burial of the Maliki story is that their more competent editors must be on vacation, or took buyouts. The least charitable is that they're in the tank for McCain. I wouldn't want to be the NYT or WaPo ombudspersons this week.
Comments closed August 04, 2008. |
Search
Subscribe to this blog by Email Books by Matthew Yglesias
Recent Comments
Recent Posts
Weekly Archives
Categories
|
Copyright © 2008 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Still no indication of what they are claiming is inaccurate about the translation and no provision of a corrected version. At this point that is so glaringly weak as to be bizarre.
[...] which you might think the paper would mention here.
They do mention it, and provide their 'direct translation' again, second paragraph after your blockquoted passage.
Posted by guyx | July 21, 2008 9:26 AM