Unintentional humor, part one

The Los Angeles Times for Sunday reported that

[f]ive months after embarrassed State Department officials acknowledged widespread mistakes in the government's influential annual report on global terrorism, internal investigators have found new and unrelated errors — as well as broader underlying problems that they say essentially have destroyed the credibility of the statistics the report is based on.

So not only is the original (April) report, which the White House trumpeted when it said terrorist attacks and related deaths had dropped to their lowest levels in three decades, a pile of crap, but the revised (June) report, which revealed terrorism-related attacks and deaths at a 21-year high, is also useless because of a wholesale lack of consistent standards of reporting and a restricted definition of what constitutes "terrorism," one that omits many incidents in Chechnya and Iraq.

Now, that's pretty funny in itself, but this is what I was referring to in the title:

"We become the laughingstock if we redo [the report]. But [not doing it (sic)] poses a serious credibility problem," said the official, a terrorism analyst on Capitol Hill. "This determines where we put our resources, what we tell other countries, what we think the trends are. And this just ruins our credibility. People just don't trust us anymore."

Uh, "anymore?"