Nusbacher Associates

Further to my post earlier today about the Benghazi cover-up allegations accumulating more proof, the State Department’s difficulties with the truth there make it very difficult to believe their statements about anything else in the region.

For example, this Canadian article reports State’s official line on today’s disturbance in Sanaa, claiming four things:

  1. it was not gunfire;
  2. it was “wedding fireworks”;
  3. there wasn’t an attack; and
  4. it certainly was not an embassy attack.

But the article’s tone is skeptical, and for good reason – not just due journalistic caution, but because State is no longer a reliable source.

Yes, really… State is no longer a reliable source. Allow me to demonstrate:

For example, let’s read AFP’s reporting which, in my experience of following this region’s news, is usually reliable. AFP states:

  1. there was gunfire;
  2. there was no wedding;
  3. there was an attack of some kind; but
  4. the embassy wasn’t targeted.

Now in addition to these four points of narrative, let’s look at three points of evaluation:

  1. Consider that AFP’s narrative is more plausible by Occham’s Razor. State’s narrative relies on a few hundred people mistaking gunfire for fireworks… As a combat veteran myself, that’s not something people confuse easily, especially in a well-armed and volatile place like Yemen.
  2. Consider too that AFP doesn’t have an overt political motivation… unlike State, which needs to keep both itself and this Adminstration looking good.
  3. Consider thirdly that State’s reputation is already taking a beating over Benghazi, so that its reliability is already in question.

In making an objective evaluation of a source’s bias and history, State loses more points on the old 1A-6F scale than does AFP. Therefore we may conclude that AFP’s narrative is likely more accurate here.

So what does this say about State? It means the single, solitary, truth among State’s four assertions is their one assertion that the embassy wasn’t targeted.

1 out of 4. A quarter-truth.

That’s not a reliable source.

No wonder the OSint folks don’t give State any more credence than RT lately… It’s all just Pravda.

Subscribe

We can let you know about coming workshops and events exclusive to subscribers. We will not, of course, sell or give our mailing list to anyone else, on our honour as Devil's Advocates.

Name

Email

Enter text captcha