Regarding the "mistranslation" (of the Iraqi PM)

[4themind]

Do you think this newspaper was smart enough (and isn't it protocol for an interview of this calibur) to at least have audio tape of the interview? If so they can release it and let translators around the world decide. They can also use voice recognition software (the same types the current admin use to make the case for Bin laden recordings). If I were the Obama campaign this is what I'd be calling the newspaper about right now, let's get those things released if they're there.

EDIT: here are the PM remarks that I'm basing this on
<http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/19/almaliki.obama/index.html>

""U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months," he said in an interview with Der Spiegel that was released Saturday.

"That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes," he said.

But a spokesman for al-Maliki said his remarks "were misunderstood, mistranslated and not conveyed accurately."

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said the possibility of troop withdrawal was based on the continuance of security improvements, echoing statements that the White House made Friday after a meeting between al-Maliki and U.S. President Bush."

[vaberella]

1. Let's pray the BBC can get their hands on it first. They love Obama.

[BlooInBloo]

2. Then you'd be the stupidest campaign ever, which thankfully Obama's isn't.

[4themind]

3. Can you explain why?

And also the "ever"(is that in U.S. history or world history as well?) comment as well. I can ammend what I'm saying to mean that if I were in the campaign I'd at least be very interested in finding out if there's an audio source to verify this ( The Obama campaign has already come on record saying that they welcome the prime ministers comments, having additional support that these indeed WERE his comments is not something that the "stupidest campaign ever" would do in my opinion at least (if that's the idea that you were referring too). If its a question in regard to actually finding out whether these things exist I'm not advocating public calls for the tapes, I don't think a discreet (through an intermediary source) solicitation for the existance of such a tape is necessarily out of line given the campaign goals. This can be especially important since press releases (and MSM reporting) are being fired off right NOW, whearas the release of this tape (if it exists) isn't matching that speed. I'd agree that the campaign shouldn't just trust the word of the paper before it's released (but if they said "no we don't have such a tape" I'd try to just drop that specific subject and focus on the "time horizon"/prior-maliki statements to bolster obama's case (i.e. the strategy before today)

[BlooInBloo]

4. He already went out on a limb for Obama. Obama's not gonna push him *farther* out on it.

Duh.

[4themind]

5. I apologize if my post wasn't clear

the O.P. was a reference to an update from a CNN article <http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/19/almaliki.obama/index.html>
where a Maliki spokesperson says that the prime ministers remarks were "were misunderstood, mistranslated and not conveyed accurately." So I was suggesting that IF the interviewer (for the magazine itself) had an audio tape of the prime ministers remarks, they could be offered as additional evidence. Again the push from the tape can be done discreetly and may not even need prompting (the magazine may want to protect its own interpretation) but I think the campaign would benefit from to seizing (and have already stuck out its neck) on the remarks if they were made, so they can't just be explained away by McCain or the white house as a "mistranslation".

[Igel]

6. Even if the words are translated correctly,

that doesn't mean that the context was presented properly, along with any doubt that might be "in the background".

It's one reason for being clear on the context and asking questions. It's another reason that many politicians use translators even when they're competent in the foreign language: translation provides deniability. And it's certainly a reason for being aware of previous things that a speaker has said, what's before and after the quote in the verbal context, and what's culturally appropriate and politically necessary.

Which is, of course, exactly what we all know--and obviously so--whenever an Obama quote is taken out of context or misconstrued by the media. But the process only works in our favor, when we're in charge of the discourse (it works in mirror image for repub-controlled discourses).

But al-Malikiyy's been fairly consistent: He wants the US out, but doesn't want them to leave until things are sufficiently settled--then he wants reconstruction and training teams left, along with some quick-response guys just in case. Which aspect of that is highlighted depends on context, but an utterance in one context doesn't negate those from other contexts. The Iraqi generals are mostly of the same mind, I think. Both know that while the Iraqi army did reasonably well in Basrah and al-3amarrah, they're not out of the woods yet (I've decided that I can't drop out consonants, and the Arab Internet 3 and ' work perfectly fine. So it's now "al-qa3ida" for me, to represent the pharyngeal.)

It's mostly when you get to people whose opinions really don't matter that they can afford to say, "Out, now, and don't let the door hit you on the ass".

[4themind]

8. Interesting points to consider

btw Here's the transcript the interview posted for the magazine <http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,566852,00.html>. I guess my main point was that audio evidence of this same transcript can be used as supporting evidence to defend against certain charges (the mistranslation portion of the spokesperson's comments). But you're right in that context is also important. Ultimately I would hope that voters would seek out (and the combined media would provide) as much information as is reasonably avaliable(compendium of statements, statistics and analysis) and the voter will make decisions as to what criteria they wish to adopt for their position on the role that the U.S. should play in Iraq and who should lead in carrying out that policy. So if the tape is out there, I'm eager to hear it, and then arguments about the context or lack therof can be argued based upon that.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

7. Supposedly, al-Maliki is in a tough spot regarding internal Iraqi politics

Al-Sadr has stated that his call for a boycott of the 2005 elections by his Shiite faction in Iraq was a mistake. I've read that now he's going all out to get his own supporters into positions of power in the forthcoming October provincial elections. And the Sunnis who also boycotted the previous elections are supposedly going to come out strongly as well. And I don't think these power blocks in Iraq will favor al-Maliki and his party. Al-Sadr is very outspoken about wanting the U.S. to pull out now. Under the circumstances, al-Maliki has got to also call for a U.S. withdrawal to not be seen as a puppet of America by the Iraqi electorate. At the same time, he's got a MonkeyMan on his back. Maybe he doesn't want his statements to be too clear and doesn't mind them being a bit misunderstood by Americans.