17 thoughts on “Trevino Fired by Guardian – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. “I reported here just after Trevino’s appointment that he was likely a paid shill for the Malaysians”

    Great catch!

  2. Thanks God it was not Israel – I can only imagine the furor that would have arisen… (Malaysia is sure to pass with equanimity). Albeit, I think the likely cheers here would be premature – the Guardian is likely to replace him with another commentator that represents the mainstream views in the US, which in particular are starkly different vis-à-vis Israel than those in Europe. It appears that a strategic decision has been taken by the Guardian already some time ago to let itself unchained from an ideological-tilt image so as to taken seriously by wider circles. Its US-related choice reflects that – after all the US is the superpower of the day and if you want to project to your readers realities as they are, you have to overcome the temptation to tell them only what they like to hear.

    1. Though the official statement from the Guardian doesn’t mention Israel, Electronic Intifada – who has been a major mobilizer behind the campaign against Trevino as Richard wrote – became involved because of Trevino’s extreme pro-Israel bias.
      Trevino wrote on June 3rd 2010 on his Twitter:
      “There are some Americans we’re better off without. Furkan Dogan is one of them”.
      Furkan Dogan was the young Turkish-American who was killed on Mavi Marmara at the age of 19, just before starting his medical studies.

    2. Tibor writes: the Guardian is likely to replace him with another commentator that represents the mainstream views in the US, which in particular are starkly different vis-à-vis Israel than those in Europe.”

      Trevino’s views aren’t maintstream, they are out and out rascist and murderous, and are shared by a very small minorty of the American population.

  3. Any word on who they are bringing on to balance Glenn Greenwald? Presumably they will grab another right-wing US voice, right? Or do you think they won’t feel the need to hire a replacement for Trevino’s spot?

  4. Sounds to me like the Guardian is just hunkering down until the whole mess fades away. Acknowledging their stupidity in hiring Trevino publicly would be too embarrassing, but I imagine some heads rolled behind the scenes.

    I don’t think Greenwald needs “balancing” – he’s in favor of human rights and the rule of law. How do you “balance” someone like that?

      1. Well, they might be able to hire a hack who is in favor of surveillance without a warrant, extrajudicial killings, indefinite detention, racial profiling and the “special relationship” of the US with Israel. Maybe they’ll lure that moron Tom Friedman away from the NY Times.

  5. “There are some Americans we’re better off without. Josh Trevino is one of them”

    Glenn Greenwald is a such an amazing addition to The Guardian – too bad the Trevino fizz was such an avoidable distraction. Greenwald is a major ‘WIN’ for international voices debunking the Israeli/Netanyahu hoaxing of the US into a war with Iran

  6. Mr. Trevino has an interesting resume (on Linkedin), one that shows he has not stayed at one job for more than about 2 years.
    Hmmmmm? Some were temporary positions such as his working for the deVore campaign, but others …….. He has also not updated (as of 26 August 8 am EDT) his resume to show the Guardian job is KAPUT!

  7. A good journalist speaks truth to power and seeks to “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable”: Greenwald passes the test, Treviño doesn’t. Sadly, all too many ‘journalists’ out there are only interested in sucking up to power; the Guardian doesn’t need that kind of “balance”.

  8. I think some people here miss the key point. The issue is not this particular commentator Trevino. The question the way I see it is: are you ready that the Guardian will hire any pro-Israel commentator US style? (Electronic Intifada admits that this general aspect was their main drive here). Anybody who watched any of the Republican Party primary-debates must have grasped the hugely supportive sentiment of Israel among the leaders of that party (and the situation in the Democratic Party is not that much different). What the Guardian endeavors to do is to reflect that to its readers – the alternative amounts to an ostrich attitude.

  9. Andy, I don’t know who you quoted: “to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable”, but this sums up in one small quote why I don’t call myself “progressive” but rather “liberal”.

    So called progressives (perhaps in your eyes “a good journalist”) always supports the afflicted or underdog irrespective of what they mave have done to deserve to be afflicted, and will always fight the comfortable as if to say that if they are comfortable they must have bulleyed their way to be confortable at the expense of the “afflicted”.

    A true journalist and a liberal looks for the facts and reports them irrespective of who is afflicted or comfortable.

    1. That’s all fine, shmuel, but there are very few “true journalists” as you describe them and the “true journalists” won’t find any shortage of powerful comfortable people who deserve to be afflicted. Glenn does a good job afflicting them. Trevino is usually on the other side.

      Your second paragraph is too vague to mean anything without examples. I have a sneaking suspicion of what you might have in mind.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link