Should confiscated Iraqi documents be released to the public for translation?

DjaugheOld · December 27th, 2005, 05:47 AM

I think so.

Quote:

Needed: Arabic translators
By Peter Hoekstra
Published December 23, 2005

During Operations Desert Storm, Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom, coupled with the ongoing global war on terror, the United States has collected a vast array of foreign papers, documents, electronic media and other materials. These documents, stored in more than 35,000 boxes in a warehouse in the Persian Gulf, could constitute a treasure trove of intelligence related to Saddam Hussein and actions taken by his regime prior to the war in Iraq.

Despite the possibility that these documents may contain critical information, a vast and untold amount dating back to Operation Desert Storm in 1991 still remains untranslated. At the government's current rate of translation, there is a high probability that many of these CDs, books, ledgers and other items will go unreviewed for decades or more. This is unacceptable. We need to know what is in these documents now, not sometime in the future or possibly never. Why, you may ask, is it taking so long to translate these documents? Given the insight they could provide into prewar Iraq, shouldn't everyone want to know what the documents may say?

Much of the blame for the slow translation can be attributed to the fact that the United States has few trained Arabic translators in its intelligence community. Of the ones we do have, their focus and priority, as it should be, is on translating current information to assess potential threats and to provide support for our troops in the field.

The other significant problem, and one that is entirely of our government's own making, is that current intelligence community requirements allow only people with top security clearances to handle the documents.

Given the limited availability of translators, and legitimate questions as to whether the U.S. government could ever employ enough translators to review the documents, the most prudent course is to eliminate the classification requirements surrounding the documents. They could then be published, so academics, journalists, bloggers and other interested individuals could have access and help translate them.

An undoubtedly enterprising spirit resides in the American people, and others around the world, that we can harness to assist in translating the documents. Regardless of one's political perspective, there are many on all sides who would like to know more about the happenings and thinking in prewar Iraq.

I, along with Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, recently proposed that the federal government take a bold and unprecedented step to immediately turn this archive into a valuable source of information on Iraq. Specifically, we called on Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte to declassify the millions of pages of documents and make them available to the public.

In making the request, we asked Mr. Negroponte to develop a process for the release of the documents, including posting them on the Internet for general public access. Clearly, a means of ensuring document integrity would need to be developed, but the ultimate goal would be to use the entrepreneurial, linguistic and analytic abilities available in the public to sift through the materials and help pinpoint the subsets of documents that require closer intelligence community scrutiny.

In addition to this public effort, Mr. Negroponte should consider creating an international academic institute or commission dedicated to studying these documents. Such a commission, which should include Iraqi academics, could be located near U.S. document analytic facilities to give its members access to the original documents. This proposal represents a radical departure from traditional approaches used in the intelligence community, but clearly tradition is not getting the job done.

At the end of the day, the director of National Intelligence must ask, "If you have a warehouse full of potential intelligence papers and there is no one around to translate them, can they still be called 'intelligence'?" The answer is no. They are just wasted trees.

Peter Hoekstra is chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and represents Michigan's Second Congressional District.

AzCards21 · December 27th, 2005, 06:11 AM

Maybe. I would be concerned about getting the translations correct.

DjaugheOld · December 27th, 2005, 06:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AzCards21

Maybe. I would be concerned about getting the translations correct.

lol...like the quality our CIA has shown in the past?

Derm · December 27th, 2005, 06:26 AM

I'm sure most will be in due time.

Papers from Hitler's Germany still pop up from time to time. But, now most "new material" is used to prop up some bizzare theory. Like "Capitol Hill Blue" is a credible source...

jenna2891 · December 27th, 2005, 06:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derm

Like "Capitol Hill Blue" is a credible source...

geez, derm, didn't you read this?

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/...ad.php?t=66255

they are credible because they say they are.

AZZenny · December 27th, 2005, 06:40 AM

You'd love them if they were called Capitol Hill Red.

I said Maybe - personally, I'd see if the Israeli's want to help translate a bunch of it. They have plenty of translators. Possibly Jordan, too.

Do you mean there isn't half-way competent translation scanning or voice recognition software that could do at least a preliminary thinning? Weed out the 'Central Baghdad brush and bulk trash removal schedule for 1999' page from the 'Do not leave nuclear waste with recyclables' page?

Southpaw · December 27th, 2005, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jenna2891

geez, derm, didn't you read this?

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/...ad.php?t=66255

they are credible because they say they are.

They do not lack credibility, because you say they have none.

AzCards21 · December 27th, 2005, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallyburger

They do not lack credibility, because you say they have none.

They don't gain any because you say so either.

Southpaw · December 27th, 2005, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AzCards21

They don't gain any because you say so either.

I guess he is lying about his track record, huh?

Why don't we just kill all threads that have any opinions from published sources. According to some, they are all just liars. We will all just live in an uninformed world and try to figure out what went wrong, when it is too late. Just another example of an exercise in futility. Why do you want people like him to be wrong even when he is right? Is it less [painful when you don't know what hit you?

AzCards21 · December 27th, 2005, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallyburger

I guess he is lying about his track record, huh?

Why don't we just kill all threads that have any opinions from published sources. According to some, they are all just liars. We will all just live in an uninformed world and try to figure out what went wrong, when it is too late. Just another example of an exercise in futility. Why do you want people like him to be wrong even when he is right? Is it less [painful when you don't know what hit you?

What "Track record" are you refering to?

2-cups of paranoia
1/4-cup of this may be true or not but facts don't matter if it helps my cause
2-table spoons of I really, really hate being under Republican rule
1-teaspoon of I'll even hinge my opinion on capital hill blue if they say what I want to hear
A smidgion of if it's printed it must be true
And a dash of Republicans suck no matter what special sauce
Mix it all together, bake at 350 for 45 minutes
Top it off with some Dammit I been lied to but can't prove it frosting
Top with a sugar statue of the Bush family in effigy

And you have a Wally Cake.

I think what's hitting you in the face is your own concoction.

Southpaw · December 28th, 2005, 02:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AzCards21

What "Track record" are you refering to?

2-cups of paranoia
1/4-cup of this may be true or not but facts don't matter if it helps my cause
2-table spoons of I really, really hate being under Republican rule
1-teaspoon of I'll even hinge my opinion on capital hill blue if they say what I want to hear
A smidgion of if it's printed it must be true
And a dash of Republicans suck no matter what special sauce
Mix it all together, bake at 350 for 45 minutes
Top it off with some Dammit I been lied to but can't prove it frosting
Top with a sugar statue of the Bush family in effigy

And you have a Wally Cake.

I think what's hitting you in the face is your own concoction.

In the spirit of the Holiday season and hoping to return your creative gift in kind, I put you on the Capitol Hill Blue e mail direct list. Now you won't have to wait with bated breath for me to post them to this forum. Just sharing the wealth. Just wondering why you cannot have a civil discourse without getting so personal.

jenna2891 · December 28th, 2005, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallyburger

They do not lack credibility, because you say they have none.

true. i never claimed that. i just think it's funny that they have a whole article about how they are credible because they say so. "trust my opinions, because, in my opinion, they are trustworthy." i find that humorous, and not in the "i'm laughing with capitol hill blue" kind of way.

jenna2891 · December 28th, 2005, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AZZenny

You'd love them if they were called Capitol Hill Red.

you sure have me pegged, zenny. get out of my head!

AzCards21 · December 28th, 2005, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallyburger

In the spirit of the Holiday season and hoping to return your creative gift in kind, I put you on the Capitol Hill Blue e mail direct list. Now you won't have to wait with bated breath for me to post them to this forum. Just sharing the wealth. Just wondering why you cannot have a civil discourse without getting so personal.

That may just be the best gift I received this season. Sorry if sometimes my humor comes across as harsh.