Nobrainer’s Think Tank

New Documents from Saddam Hussein’s Archives Discuss Bin Laden, WMDs

So reads the headline from ABC News. Our government recently released Iraqi documents about the items in the title. I was initially impressed with this report from ABC because it very quickly gives a link to the actual documents — a habit worth developing.

It goes on to summarize 4 of the 9 documents. After each summary, however, I was surprised to see an Editor’s Note, each seemingly meant to minimize the weight each document carries.

While the assertions contained in this document clearly support the claim, the sourcing is questionable…

How often do editors go out of their way to emphasize that “the sourcing is questionable?” in their own reports, or even repeated reports from other media outlets? Apparently, documents from “unnamed” “informants” are usually of “limited evidentiary value.” I agree, but this standard should be applied more thoroughly and evenly.