• Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    Low confidence generally means questionable or implausible information was used, the information is too fragmented or poorly corroborated to make solid analytic inferences, or significant concerns or problems with sources existed.

    According to the Wall Street Journal, the intelligence report, released last week, assessed with “low confidence” that a handful of staff had participated in the attack, indicating that it considered the accusations to be credible though it could not independently confirm their veracity.

    The Wall Street Journal lying about how analysts rate intelligence to help Israeli propaganda? Why I never!

    For those having trouble putting 2 and 2 together, this means our intelligence analysts are calling bullshit on Israel’s claims.

    • DolphinMath@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      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
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 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.