I don't think you read it that closely, or are operating with the same biases as the author, as arguably yes, there are obvious inaccuracies.

A simple example

"Unit 8200, for example, has been the source of much of the world’s most infamous spying software, including Cellebrite and Pegasus"

Cellebrite and Pegasus aren't products of Unit 8200. They are not the source of them. At best one can say that alumni of 8200 created them (or if one wants to get the closest the source, "products" (i.e. alumni) of 8200 created them).

The language they use is not accurate and they do it purposefully to be inflammatory.

If they wanted to write Unit 8200 has trained a pipeline of people that these companies can gobble up, that would be accurate. But how is that fundamentally different than MIT, Stanford et al training a pipeline of people that go to big tech firms that also arguably violate privacy? Would we blame the schools for the privacy violations or simply blame the companies their alumni work for?