Yes, They're Lying

For some reason, the NYT chose to bury their lead about the Maliki endorsement of Barack Obama's Iraq plans. CENTCOM wants us to think that endorsement was a mistranslation, but Der Spiegel has tapes and the tapes show Maliki in Arabic endorsing Obama's view:

But the interpreter for the interview works for Mr. Maliki’s office, not the magazine. And in an audio recording of Mr. Maliki’s interview that Der Spiegel provided to The New York Times, Mr. Maliki seemed to state a clear affinity for Mr. Obama’s position, bringing it up on his own in an answer to a general question on troop presence.

The following is a direct translation from the Arabic of Mr. Maliki’s comments by The Times: “Obama’s remarks that — if he takes office — in 16 months he would withdraw the forces, we think that this period could increase or decrease a little, but that it could be suitable to end the presence of the forces in Iraq.”

Note also the following hilarious moment in lack of self-awareness on the part of at least one US military officer:

But a senior military official in Iraq said top American commanders expressed surprise and confusion over Mr. Maliki’s published remarks. The official added, however, that no American officers spoke to the Iraqi prime minister or any of his top aides about them.

“This isn’t the first time this has happened with the prime minister,” said the senior military official, noting that Mr. Maliki or his top aides had had to issue clarifications previously of comments that Iraqi or foreign journalists reported the prime minister said. “All of us were going, ‘What? What did he say, why did he say it and was it accurate?’”

Because in fantasytown, the fact that Maliki repeatedly endorses a timetable and keeps being forced by the Bush administration to walk it back undermines the authenticity of his support for withdrawal. Back in realityville, Maliki keeps saying this because he wants us to set a timeline, viewing this as the only politically feasible way forward.

Comments

Matt:

Off-topic, but since you are leaving The Atlantic, you should reactivate your MatthewYglesias.com domain name and have it send visitors to MatthewYglesias.TheAtlantic.com until you leave for your new site, then have it point there.

Posted by Steve Sailer | July 21, 2008 2:32 AM

Now that Iraqi democracy has spoken, can we go home now?

Posted by Steve Sailer | July 21, 2008 2:40 AM

I really can't figure out the media on this. Are they bending over backwards not to be seen as preferring Obama or are they really "McCain's base"? I'm not being sarcastic. I really can't tell.

Posted by CJ | July 21, 2008 3:02 AM

“This isn’t the first time this has happened with the prime minister,” said the senior military official, noting that Mr. Maliki or his top aides had had to issue clarifications previously of comments that Iraqi or foreign journalists reported the prime minister said.

Ack! Ack! New song... er, new butchery! Stolen from "Leave My Monkey Alone" by Warren Zevon!

Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone

Down in Iraq where the bedouin roam
And the sand piles high on the plain
In our old colonial home
We shorted our shares while the empire fell

Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone

One day al-Sadr came
All we had was lost
In our old colonial home
Under the southern R's

Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone

Down in Iraq where the bedouin roam
And the sand piles high on the plain
In our old colonial home
We chugged our brews while the empire fell

Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone

al-Sadr came in '04
The sun went down and we drew the drapes
In our old colonial home
We hid behind the Green Zone gates

Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone
Leave my puppet alone

max
['Gentlemen, STOP! We can't have you going and telling the truth all the time! This is the Press Room!']

Posted by max | July 21, 2008 3:42 AM

You're welcome, Matt.

Posted by El Cid | July 21, 2008 4:38 AM

Uh oh. There are going to be a lot of granite countertop investigations now.

Posted by calipygian | July 21, 2008 6:12 AM

On a more serious note, I'll bet the difference in translations is due to an elaborate game of telephone - Arabic is tough to pin down a translation from Arabic to a second language already, and I'll bet Der Speigel translated his remarks from Arabic into German, and then the whole interview from German into English.

Translations tend to drift and change when they are translated along multiple languages.

Posted by calipygian | July 21, 2008 6:16 AM

It may have taken the story a while to get its passport stamped by the gatekeepers of the US media, but once it did, it spread rapidly. I live in East Central Illinois, and it's all over my local news. They're using the NYTimes translation.

Posted by Ted | July 21, 2008 6:38 AM

preferring Obama or are they really "McCain's base"? I'm not being sarcastic. I really can't tell.

There was a revealing comment on Ambinder's blog a little while back. He said that the consensus in the elite media was that the surge worked. He didn't explain what that meant, exactly, but most people who state loudly the awesomeness of the surge aren't using it as a reason to leave, but a reason to stay.

The elite media has always supported adventurism and imperialism. They will need to be pushed, kicking and screaming, to recognize that American troops aren't wanted in Iraq.

Posted by DivGuy | July 21, 2008 7:49 AM

Nuri Al Maliki = Ngo Diep Diem

He should be keeping a very very close eye on 'his' generals.

Posted by JohnMcC | July 21, 2008 8:16 AM

Of course the media have concluded the surge worked. It did.

The main goal of the surge was to derail the likelihood of any serious change in U.S. policy toward Iraq in 2006, given increasing pressure prompted by the Democratic victory in the Congress and the Iraq Study Group.

The news media remembers how the surge re-directed the entire discussion from "When do we begin planning to end the Iraq occupation" to "BUT YOU WILL ADMIT THE SURGE IS WORKING!!!"

And there's nothing the media admire more than when hawks demonstrate manly manipulation of the media. They like that sort of thing.

Posted by El Cid | July 21, 2008 8:25 AM

Just watched Meredith Vieira, of all people, eat John McCain for breakfast. She pushed him a bit on the Maliki story.

But more broadly, the problem was that he seemed rambling and incoherent. She asked him about Phil Gramm and he was like

"Actually, he was just one of many -- I have a very strong -- hydrogen hy -- ah, with hybrid fuels -- I have a plan"

I actually wanted to look away, because it was getting embarassing.

Posted by Ted | July 21, 2008 8:29 AM

The point was, he wore an onion on his belt -- which was the style in those days.

Posted by El Cid | July 21, 2008 8:34 AM

I find it fascinating that the NY TImes has accepted that Der Speigel got it wrong, but Matt is certain that everyone on the planet other than the left wing fantasy crowd has it wrong.

Posted by James Robertson | July 21, 2008 8:35 AM

What El Cid said: the point of the surge was "shut up, shut up you dirty fucking hippies, bow down to General Petraeus".

Now we're seeing that the right has defined surrender in such concrete and diverse terms that a withdrawal based upon the explicit wishes of the Iraqis is nigh-on impossible. That's about as pure a case of imperial hubris as it gets.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | July 21, 2008 8:40 AM

Like I said before, al-Maliki should simply "change his mind" rather than pretend he didn't say what he said. With his words out there, it will be (rightly) perceived that his masters are threatening to have him killed. A change of mind will also look like his masters threatened to have him killed, but there's at least the advantage that a change of mind would be literally true.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | July 21, 2008 8:41 AM

As for the surge, I don't think it's difficult for the media to say "if the surge worked, why don't we leave?" It's certainly true that policy-makers who invoke the surge tend to be Republicans who want to stay. But there's no real logic behind that, and -- well, I'll just point to Meredith Vieira. Not exactly an old Iraq hand, but she gets it. "They want us out, they think they're ready to stand up, so . . . ?"

What would be smart would be for John McWar to say "okay, I was right about the surge, so now we get to leave."

Sadly, he seems unwilling to move in that direction. He's digging in to this incoherent position. "I was right, things got better, which is why we must stay, no matter what the Iraqis want -- or at any rate, not commit ourselves to leaving in any foreseeable time frame."

I don't think it's going to play well, outside of that roughly 40% slice of the electorate who support belligerence just for the sake of belligerence.

Posted by Ted | July 21, 2008 8:42 AM

James Robertson. The NYT did not accept that der Spiegel "got it wrong".

The reason they gave a literal translation was because of the weird, fetishistic pseudo-controversy over the secret, impossible, numerological meanings which the nut squad insists Maliki must have had. (Maybe he didn't literally say the word "timetable" in Arabic! Ha! Maybe he said "schedule based on clocks!" Gotcha!)

Arabic is a very different language than English. You don't normally translate it anything close to simplistically literally because the sentences aren't even formed the same.

No one translates interviews from Japanese or Chinese officials literally, because it would sound horrible and be more confusing than a sensible translation. Why is it you think that computerized translators make foreign statements of any complexity so awful in English?

You know, every couple of years someone trots out a new translation of Beowulf, and no one cries out how this makes it all fake and how dare they try and pull the wool over our eyes.

Are you really this dense, or is someone paying you to act this way?

Posted by El Cid | July 21, 2008 8:43 AM

He can't really be that dense, and no one would pay him for crap like that. He's got to love the idea of spin -- intensely, and for its own sake.

Posted by Ted | July 21, 2008 8:48 AM

There are dozens of translations of the bible translated from Hebrew and Aramaic through Greek, Latin and or Old Church Slavonic and some serious differences between those translations.

I guess the bible is completely wrong because of it.

Posted by calipygian | July 21, 2008 8:48 AM

should have initiated that stupid war, those that supported it are idiots...

mud dumb - i am talking fucking morons

dumb

Posted by SydB | July 21, 2008 8:48 AM

I find it deeply disturbing that CENTCOM is making political statements about a foreign leader. But of course, if any Democrat said so, our not-so-illustrious media would be on their fainting couches for days, decrying how all Dems hate the military.

The effective control the GOP has obtained by placing loyal Republicans in key military positions (and firing anyone who disagrees with them, eg Taguba) is frightening.

Posted by esaund | July 21, 2008 9:06 AM

I'm surprised there hasn't been a bit more pushback about Admiral Fallon being trotted out on Fox to say "Obama's plan is dangerous."

It's a gray area, I understand -- because they don't make it explicitly about Obama.

But I strongly agree that the phrase "loyal Republicans in key military positions" is a chilling one. There really ought to be some pushback on the administration's efforts to use the Pentagon for domestic propaganda; it's not a good precedent at all.

Posted by Ted | July 21, 2008 9:13 AM

El Cid, trust me, James Robertson is really that dense. Ask him to provide a translation that doesn't say "we want you to leave and at least Obama has the right idea." He can't do it.

You can't really expect much of the idiots who, with the benefit of hindsight, still think murdering hundreds of thousands of Iraqis was a good idea. They are idiots and they are unteachable.

Posted by Not as stupid as James Robertson | July 21, 2008 10:35 AM

great post, and I agree - its clear he is open to Obama's plans. On the obama trip, I find it amazing to watch. The trip is in fact showing that Obama has a full grasp of foreign policy. Can you imagine a governor, such as Huckabee or even Romney -- going to Iraq and speaking to Lara Logan in depth about what's going on there?

The fact is that if elected, Barack Obama will have more foreign policy experience upon entering office than G.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan. This trip has been a home run so far.

Posted by norge | July 21, 2008 10:50 AM