Remember when DOD dumped Saddam docs on the web for "translations"?

[Gold Metal Flake]

Remember a year or more ago that the DOD or something dumped a bunch of documents siezed from SH's offices onto the web to be "translated" by anyone? These docs are claimed to have proof of WMDs or WMD-related programs by Republican Americans (not to suggest that Republican Americans have an innate inability to read and comprehend)?

Anyone have details on this?

[BuyingThyme]

1. Are those the ones that teach terrorists how to make nuclear weapons?

[Lasher]

3. That's the ones

I think it was House Republicans who initiated that brilliant coup, then said there really were WMDs after all because they found some empty artillery shells that could have been loaded with chemical or biological agents if Iraq had any. Saddam had just lost track of them, much like we did of mustard gas stockpiles that turned up about a year ago near Washington DC.

[BuyingThyme]

2. Here's the article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/world/middleeast/03cnd-documents.html?ex=1320210000&en=a9532d192572f9f8&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[Gold Metal Flake]

5. Ahh.

"But in recent weeks, the site has posted some documents that weapons experts say are a danger themselves: detailed accounts of Iraq’s secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war."

Emphasis mine. Certainly, a Republican-American would not emphasize "before the 1991 Persian Gulf war".

I heard a Republican-American who called in to Hartmann's show yesterday to crow about how the documents proved that a grave threat existed and thus provided all the reason necessary for the 2003 invasion and current occupation. Poor Republican-Americans, they just can't help themselves.

Thanks for the link!

[CabalPowered]

4. I think the memoryhole.org got a copy of all of them. n/t

[triakis36]

6. OMG is this for real?! D'oh

Doesn't the defense department have anyone that can translate these documents..oh wait..they fired them all under DADT. Sounds to me like the DoD is this nations greatest security risk.

[Gold Metal Flake]

7. Yes.

Seems Republican-Americans get strange feelings when they learn that people who happen to be homosexual are working for the safety and security of this nation. They have an uncontrollable need to fire such citizens. Now, I'm not saying that Republican-Americans are less capable of reason or logic than other Americans, or that they consistently put their personal prejudices before the safety of their fellow countrymen, but it does seem to fit a pattern.

[Igel]

9. They fired a handfull.

They were seriously backlogged (the Arabic translators, that is) before 3/03. The load of documents from Iraq added to the backload.

It took a long time to bring the number of Russian-language translators up to what was needed. With greater population, you'd think it wouldn't take as long for Arabic, but 5 1/2 years is nowhere near enough. This assumes the faculties at colleges/universities would even like the idea--most don't. For Arabic, even good language learners would need at least 6 years to be qualified. (As for native and heritage speakers, they pose a different set of challenges.)

Hiring the gay translators back would help, but it wouldn't be an especially large help.

[Igel]

8. It wasn't a bad idea.

They didn't know what was in them--they were backlogged before they got the Iraqi documents.

Having a mess of amateur translators read them and do any kind of precis would probably be an aid--an unwanted aid--to the government translators (I've found translators to be a snarly lot, on the whole). Half the intelligence-agency translator gig involves precis writing, skimming and briefly summarizing skads of documents or hours of tape so that they can decide what to have summarized in greater depth or to have out-and-out translated.

[Lasher]

10. Here's a Keith Olbermann video clip about the fiasco

Keith Olbermann video clip

Led by Representative Peter Hoekstra and Senator Pat Roberts, who chaired the intelligence committees in the House and Senate, diehard Republicans launched a campaign of distortion last year to try to convince voters prior to the November elections that the primary justifications for the invasion of Iraq (WMD & ties to Al Qaeda) did exist after all.

On June 22, 2006, Hoekstra made headlines by announcing on the Fox News Channel that weapons of mass destruction had been located in Iraq in the form of 500 chemical weapons.

However, the Iraq Survey Group's Duelfer Report had already dismissed this find almost two years earlier: "While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991". A number of other media outlets disputed the claims made by Hoekstra and Rick Santorum regarding the existence of weapons of mass destruction, reporting that the claims were disputed by both Pentagon officials and the intelligence community.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Hoekstra