• @DolphinMath@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Relevant section from the WSJ article for anyone interested:

    In the new report, which was completed last week, the U.S.’s National Intelligence Council, a group of veteran intelligence analysts, said it assessed with “low confidence” that a handful of Unrwa staffers participated in the Oct. 7 attack, those familiar with the findings said.

    A low-confidence assessment indicates that the U.S. intelligence community believes the claims are plausible but cannot make a stronger assertion because it doesn’t have its own independent confirmation. The U.S. concluded the claims are “credible,” a U.S. official said.

    U.S. officials said that American spy agencies haven’t traditionally focused on gathering intelligence on Gaza, and that Israel hadn’t shared the raw intelligence behind its assessments with the U.S., limiting their ability to reach clearer conclusions.

    • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      39 months ago

      And that’s where the article is lying. “Low Confidence” is the rating that’s essentially the trash bin. If they believed the claims were plausible they’d at least rate it moderate.

      The official that says it’s credible is Jake Sullivan, he said it publicly right after Israel made their claims.

      I cannot overstate how trash the WSJ is on international politics. It’s heavily biased at the least.