Stephen Franke wrote:
May one observe that while MEP, the particular contractor firm cited in that article, has seem to have a profound problem, other contractors providing linguist support services deserve independent and objective assessment before journalists and would-be reporters try to lump all of those firms together and bash them without hard evidence.
I read a number of procurement procedures of the US army and imagine that the strict steps will qualify translators effectively. But how the processes are nullified in Afghanistan, one of the most critical military operation zones today. In other countries, US military personnel seek local assistants for procurement who ignore the generic US procedures. Is this news one of the declining roles of US [including screening of local translators and interpretors] before her withdrawal of the troops out of this country?