Guardian caves in to bullying on Josh Trevino


A joint press statement just published announced that Joshua Trevino and the Guardian “have mutually agreed to go [their] separate ways”.

So, the Guardian has rounded off a week and a half of despicable treatment of a new employee (including a torrent of deliberately un-moderated abuse under his debut article) by caving in to the organised bullying campaign executed by Ali Abunimah and his minions.

Joshua Trevino

Whilst the press statement regarding the Guardian’s parting of ways with Joshua Trevino cites another patently ridiculous reason for the termination of what could possibly be the shortest contract in the history of journalism, it is all too obvious that the real background is the recent high-profile – and often vicious – campaign against Trevino. 

Strikingly, the Guardian does not even have the guts to admit that it has succumbed to the pressures of extremists and instead, cynically contrives a breach of conflict of interest under its editorial code as the pretext for terminating Trevino while ignoring  the real reason behind his termination. 

No doubt Abunimah and company will soon be crowing from the rooftops, but their ‘victory’ is a Pyrrhic one because it has exposed once and for all the fact that their favourite Trojan horse of terror-condoning extremism in the guise of a mainstream media outlet is susceptible to pressures from a tiny, but vocal, minority which includes Hamas supporters, terror excusers and racists

One doubts very much that the majority of the Guardian’s already drastically dwindling print readership will be content with the knowledge that freedom of speech in their newspaper of choice is dictated by a tiny cult of extremist cranks. Not only has Ali Abunimah succeeded in exposing the sad truth that comment is anything but free, he has in addition proved that facts are far from sacred. 

He has also exposed himself and his fellow travellers for the crude bullies that they are. Had Josh Trevino tweeted anti-Semitic comparisons between Israel and the Nazi regime, support for a proscribed terror organisation or the annihilation of a certain sovereign state, he would have kept his job and inevitably become a darling of the anti-Israel crowd.

Instead, Abunimah has made a mockery of the right to freedom of expression by insisting that anyone who holds opinions different to his own not only forfeits the right to be heard, but also forfeits the right to employment – at least at a newspaper which anti-Israel campaigners appear (not without reason) to think they control.  

One cannot but conclude that ultimately, Joshua Trevino will thank his lucky stars that he got out of an association with a media outlet which meekly allows itself to be dictated to by the likes of Ali Abunimah. But this whole mismanaged farce also makes one wonder about the current quality of relations between the Editor of CiF America, Matt Seaton and  Guardian US Editor in Chief, Janine Gibson (who only ten days ago was proudly announcing the addition of Trevino to the US team) and their London-based colleagues who so clearly and very publicly undermined that acquisition by publishing the letter of complaint headed by Sarah Colborne of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign.  

After all, the bottom line of this story is not about a writer named Joshua Trevino, but about the Stalinesque silencing of certain brands of opinion by intolerant extremist bullies.  

78 comments on “Guardian caves in to bullying on Josh Trevino

  1. I am assuming that this will not go down well in the USA. The yanks take their freedom of speech very seriously and don’t appreciate the uk’s censorship. What a dismal start for their US venture. Look out for the press reaction by national US publications.

  2. “Strikingly, the Guardian does not even have the guts to admit that it has succumbed to the pressures of extremists…”

    Are you at all surprised about that?

    The Groan went native, Islamist-fashion, years ago

  3. You dont have to be Jewish or a friend of Israel to fall foul of The guardians Pro-Islamic agenda, As someone who was on pre-moderation on comment is free [thats a good laugh] and has now been banned merely for raising Sikh issues i,ve a feeling The Guardian does’nt like us Sikhs as well as Jews, Israel or Israelies. So after that I have finally given up on the islamic propaganda sheet formally known as the guardian and it has now lost another reader to add to the myriad of former Guardian readers who have had the sense to dump the now increasingly dire Guardian Ps I wonder that those comment is free mods who banned me realise that this means The Guardian has now lost another £400 a year. You Good people at CIF watch have my total support in shining the light of truth into the sewer that is The Guardian and its comment is free blog. Keep up the good work you are needed

    • Joginder,
      That is a good point. If every subscriber of the Groan, who gets banned or treated badly by the censors pulls their subscription, which we have to assume happens, that is a great deal of money lost on political censorship.
      The Economist lost my subscription many years ago over politics. The bbc lost my readership over Israel and its outrages ‘reporters’. I could imagine there are many other middle of the road readers who have left the Groan for political reasons. Competition is tough, there are many good reads out there. Maybe you should donate a few £ to Cif watch ?? I know I will.
      The thing with Al Jazeera is that it Is fed with oil money. Which is a curse not just for the Muslims, for it makes thinking harder. If you don’t need to compete for ideas but simply throw money at it, as Arabs are used to. Fortunately they have not yet figured out a way to gold plate their brains. Only their jumbo jets…..and of course the AK47

    • how do they get £400 a year from a cyber stalker like you? and who are the ‘Israelies’ ? I presume it’s only ‘Israelies’ like Joshua that keep whinging and projecting their Zionist fantasies that the Guardian should cater to, wait till ‘Israelies’ attack Iran, Joshua will be on the frontline before you can say ‘scum of the earth’ LOL

      • Can’t argue that you’re an expert on ‘scum of the Earth’. In fact you’re a prime example to us all!

      • pfff….you will clearly never be the brightest lightbulb in the socket will you “how do they get £400 from a cyberstalker like you” Oh dear we have a live one here….It goes like this {or rather it went like this} moneys to friday I come out of underground station and walk over to news kiosk that is directly opposite entrance to underground station any buy copy of Al-Guardian Saterday I take my Bullmastiff for an early morning walk past newsagent at top of street walk in buy copy of Al-Guardian as for calling me a cyberstalker oh dear you have proved your clear lack of intelligence just like the idiots who call me osama bin laiden just because of my beard and turban and dont know the difference between a Sikh {me} and a muslim {not me} pfff they say ignorence is bliss then you must be in Nivanna though i will stick with Motorhead

  4. @einfal, are you sure Trevino will sue the Guardian? I fear he might shoot them and then deface their walls with a picture of the Prophet Mohammed.

  5. no such thing as freedom of speech in the private sector.

    dont really like josh, but its good to know that he lost his gig as a result of a campaign run by fringe elements and not the mainstream

    shows where the guardian is holding

  6. ahahahahahaha weep in eternal irrelevance for your Christian Zionist bigot sockpuppet LOL what a paranoid deluded cesspit of self-flagellating morons, go condole poor Joshua on Twitter, that wimp can’t take a question without blocking you, go suck a lemon together LOL

  7. How about “Guardian caves to people telling them to fire useless neocon dimwit who encouraged and celebrated the murder of US citizens by Israel”? That would be far more accurate.

  8. so apparently that douchebag @jstrevino sulks on twitter and monitors his own mentions. cue blocking spree LOL

  9. as for your rant here about ‘dwindling readership’ of the Guardian’s print edition, your homophobic Zionist redstate.com lovejoy never stood a chance of having his comatose delusions printed for the amusement of UK readership. ‘Stalinesque silencing’ LOL delusion galore, done with!

  10. They stepped into it and then lost is, they hire Trevino,and then fire him,

    Because of a Nazi Lookalike called Ben White a Muslim Terrorism sympathizer called Abunimah and a handful of washed out loony leftists pressured them…..

    Like Alan Rustbridger admitted… “I have no idea what is happening here”……

  11. I say good riddance to the wanker. Hack journalist is what he is. By the way, who wrote this article, his mum? His lover? Or both?

  12. If my computer were paper, the journalism would have yellowed it by now.

    This is so hypocritical, misinformed, and biased, only a fool would take this as news.

    It is scary so many people do, and the most stupid will reply to this with all sort of vitriol thereby proving the entire content is just nonsense.

    I will reply to not reply nor engage, just submitted the OBVIOUS observation that this ‘article’ has in spades done all what it claims others do have done, only moreso.

    If it is okay for some to say lies and distortions like the opinions here, but okay for others not too, then is that by definition racism or inequality?

    Read some Plato and get an education that includes some sort of thinking!!!!

    • Assad al Ali………YOU obviously haven’t read Plato,I doubt whether you even know who he is,no he’s not that Greek guy that sells Souvlaki.

      Go back to that cesspit called the Guardian………..

  13. And just in case you doubted what Hadar said the trolls have come to demonstrate their well developed brilliance in hatred and disdain. No need to search for them in the Graunida.

  14. The internal politics in newsrooms – great and small – has always stunk to high heaven. It’s all about creative egos jostling one another for ascendancy. Your story here about Trevino is a particularly unpleasant twist on this theme. What’s more, you’ve managed to bring hordes of the usual semi-literate Jew haters scuttling out of the wainscot They simply betray themselves, over and over. Oh, dear!.

  15. Pingback: Tacitus now blogging at the Guardian? | Edinburgh Eye

  16. Oh dear. How sad. Never mind. Had Trevino advocated the murder of US supporters of Israel by the Palestinian Authority do you think he’d have been appointed in the first place? You’d have rightfully gone apoplectic. Good riddance to the man. His malign and destructive influence no longer sullies one of Britain’s last objective liberal newspaper.

    • Raymondelauney………Britain’s last objective liberal newspaper……Neither objective nor liberal….Just a nasty racist rag run by nasty racists pigs…….

      Breathing it’s last gasps……….

      • @sunshinerainbows I expect nothing less from a CifWatch reader but what of the point I made? I’ll rephrase it if you like…

        Lets say Trevino shrugged callously at the shooting dead by the Palestinian Authority of unarmed American protesters supporting Israel in international waters and then called for more of the same – do you seriously think he would have been appointed to the Guardian in the first place?

    • to raymonddelauney firing someone who has an opinion is correct behaviour for an objective newspaper. No opinions here ma’am just the facts and all the facts provided you say nothing detrimental to or even slightly critical of the Palestinians.

      • Germolene,
        Not sure of the point you’re trying to make. Trevino applauded the IDF murder of a US and Turkish citizens in international waters. To cap it all he called for more of the same. The man isnt fit to write for Der Sturmer let alone The Grauniad. I’m disappointed though not surprised he has so many supporters on this site.

        • Having watched the videos carefully and having personal knowledge of the injuries that the Israeli marines received I know that they were acting in self-defense.

          Der Sturme would have delighted in the death of Jews because they are Jews. So yours is an unfair characterisation.

          • @Germolene

            Do you not have it in your heart to look at the flip side of the coin I suggested to you earlier? Trevino shrugged. He advocated the extra judicial killing of US citizens exercising their right to freedom of speech in International waters. Does that not bother you or have you become so monocular in your devotion to Israel that you elect to ignore the weird fellow travellers in your midst?

            It’s ironic that the long shadow cast by Israel’s act of piracy in the eastern Mediterranean has found its final victim in Texas.

            • If you would permit me to add my observations:
              You ruined a perfectly valid point, by adding:
              “Israel’s act of piracy in the eastern Mediterranean”
              So, a group of rollicking, Hamas-supporting “activists”,
              protesting a *legal* naval blockade, were denied a chance to ship expired(!) medication/items to the Gaza Strip?
              Why didn’t they unload their goods(for the “Humanitarians” they are) in Al-Arish?
              Why not in Ashdod, and oversee the land-transfer of this cargo themselves(after it’s vetted)?
              Clearly, they were seeking a publicized provocation. Any loss of life is deplorable; but these clearly indoctrinated and vitriolic “activists”, hardly models for any Humanitarian, got what they wanted. Simply put.

              • @Commentary101
                The vessel was in international waters. If a vessel is boarded illegally and by force there is no other legal term for it. Had the vessel been inside Israel’s 12 mile limit you could begin to argue the toss but it wasn’t. We could also consider the professionalism and dedication shown by some of the military personnel selling impounded laptops and cameras as booty stolen from the wounded and dead.

                Perhaps you should have Trevino write a piece for here where can explain what on earth was going on in his head when he tweeted his vulgar and callous thoughts.

                • You’re ignoring a major point.
                  The naval blockade itself *is* legal(Hamas is a hostile, terrorist entity). And breaching it mandates some sort of response(this one, unfortunately, ended with deaths and injuries).
                  Yes, selling off some of the equipment on board was reprehensible. No question.
                  I wonder though, how much would the knives, and makeshift weapons assembled by those there(“peaceful activists”), asea, rake in?
                  And still, why didn’t they dock at Al-Arish, or Ashdod(if conveying Humanitarian assistance was *all* they were aiming for?)

                  Lastly, I am not here to defend Trevino. Nor am I going to excuse any Hamas propagandists.

                • @Commentary101
                  Well bravo for you! You’re not here to defend Trevino but will defend the people he was applauding and encouraging to carry out more killings.

                  Walk a mile in the other man’s shoes. Consider this. What would Netanyahu do if an Iranian warship attacked a vessel in international waters carrying unarmed US & Israeli human rights activists who were trying to protest the treatment of Iranian Jews. The Iranians kill nine of them in storming the vessel. The Iranian government backs its forces adamant the people killed were terrorists. “Casus Belli” I think are the words you’re looking for.

                  To round it off an American journalist applauds the Iranian’s actions. In fact he wants more bloodshed. Then he obtained a job at the Grauniad – what would your reaction be?

                  A Texas big talker who walks other peoples walks, and talks up other peoples fights is hardly someone I’d be keen to have on my side. No matter how many “friends” I feel I need in this world.

                • Your comment there, will due respect, is slightly silly.
                  Are Israeli/American Humanitarian activists going anywhere(especially Iran)? Are they trying to reach a location, that is classified a terrorist hotbed by Iranians(“Zionist entity”, and Iranian anti-Semitic drivel aside)?
                  I think, frankly, the word you’re looking for, is Hamas.
                  That makes all the difference. Those people were trying to score points for a terrorist organization – as I’ve said, they got what they wanted.
                  Having lived under Hamas’ “emissions of peace and goodwill”(i.e. the missiles it and its proxies regularly fire @ southern Israel ),those activists’ affinity for Hamas(et al) is beyond misguided. It’s abetting Hamas’ activities.
                  As I have said, a Humanitarian mission, concerned with the welfare of Gazans, would:
                  A. Provide still valid(that is, not-expired) provisions.
                  B. Deposit their cargo, where it can be inspected: Al-Arish, Ashdod, wherever; then travel with it(if they so please, on land, straight-off to Gaza). There is legitimate concern here:
                  See Karine A, and Victoria, Santorini.
                  Finally, to “round off” your point: Were you equally as incensed when the Guardian gave its floor to Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas, recently(far more vicious, you’d agree, I hope, than Trevino)?
                  How about his venom against everything I hope you stand for(and forget Israel for a moment, I am sure that’s not something with which you’d associate yourself):Women’s rights, Gay rights, Religious freedom, anti-Semitism, etc?
                  My guess is, a flat “No”.
                  Try settling that, for a change.

                • “The vessel was in international waters. ”

                  You keep stressing this non-point. The vessel was not boarded “illegally” and if Israel had waited for it to enter the “12 mile” limit you’d still be harping on about it.
                  I and many regular supporters of this blog are not supporters of Trevino, but what about your own “vulgar and callous thoughts?”

                • If you’re saying, as is implied in your comment, that 9 people lost their lives because the IDF didn’t wait for it to traverse a 12 mile limit, I’m afraid that it is a little far fetched at best.

                • I have no problem that the nine were shot and killed. They attacked with deadly weapons and were killed. They all wanted to die as they all said as much infront of cameras while still in harbor. Screw there Islamists. They wanna die, it can be arranged. Anywhere .

                • International waters
                  You should inform yourself about sea blockades before exposing yourself as completely ignorant.

  17. I went from suddenly wishing the Guardian well (when reading of Trevino’s hiring), to complete disillusionment.

    Guardian management is obviously populated by mealy-mouthed hypocrites. “Comment is Free,” indeed.

    May GuardianUS follow the mothership into irrelevance.

  18. Humm… I certainly didn’t expect this.
    I thought they would brush aside any criticism stemming from their rank-and-file audience, and move on, peacefully.
    At any rate, with G. Greenwald continuing to heave anti-American nonsense, there’s no doubt the Comment sections(with, or without Trevino) are headed down-hill henceforth.

  19. The Guardian is brave only when they employ anti-Israeli reporters….They turn to jelly when encountered by the bigots like Abunimahs and Ben Whites……

    No backbone……….

  20. It’s worse than one might think. A search for Trevino’s name in any part of the Guardian fails to list him as a contributor or refer one to any of his articles. It’s the old Stalinist technique of wiping him out of the archive as if he never existed.

  21. Let me just wade through the sour grapes…

    OK, so CiFWatch is a small number of dedicated people who spend a great deal of time criticising the Guardian. Perversely, when the Guardian takes on a writer who has prima facia committed incitement to murder, CiFWatch does an inexplicable 180 and spends its time defending him and trying to mitigate his actions.

    But when a small but dedicated group of individuals do what CiFWatch does on a daily basis, only with greater success, CiFWatch wheels out the editorial sour grapes.

    This is a seminal moment in CiFWatch’s history. It outlines exactly what this blog is.

    • You, and your summoned acolytes, are welcome not to read anything here, if you don’t like it.
      And invoking the apparent disparity in perception once more:
      Either CiFWatch is influential, or it isn’t.
      Either it does have sway, or it doesn’t.
      It can’t be both.

      • Considering the raison d’etre of this blog is reading and commenting on another blog which it holds in low esteem, I find your comments as brainless as always.

        If Adam and his “summoned acolytes” don’t like the Guardian…they could always not read it :) :D ;P :/ :O

        • Well, “brainless” is certainly your department, I’ll give you that.
          Again, this is a blog, that attempts to hold an institution(the Guardian) with a declared mission accountable.
          (You’re welcome to start a blog, called “CifWatch-Watch”, where you could wax poetic on the shortcomings you ascribe to this site).
          That is its sole agendum. It cannot, as I understand it, nor could it, cover every possible infraction at the Guardian.
          I’ve asked you this before: Have you read the title, that illustrates:
          “Monitoring and Combating anti-Semitism, and the assault on Israel’s legitimacy”?
          I’ll leave you to find out the answer.
          (But clearly, since you’re in no hurry to leave, one can infer that you’re concerned with the impact this site has had. That’s all the proof that one needs to see, on how accomplished this site is – a few trolls are riled up; the more the merrier, eh, Avram ;))?

  22. Even if one wants to believe that the reason the Guardian gave for dumping Trevino (“conflict of interest under its editorial code”) it shows again their inability to do basic fact-checking.

    In addition, of course,it shows the Guardian’s hypocrisy – do Ben White or Ali Abunimah not have conflicts of interest that should prevent them writing for the Guardian?

    • Anybody publicising his own new book -like dear Tony Lerman -has a conflict of interest since he has something to gain (like money, if anybody wants to read it after the horrible sample his article presented.

      Anybody who is a politician like Haniye has a conflict of interest though perhaps I should exclude him since he is a terrorist and nothing conflicts with his self-interest.

    • Have you any proof, of your allegations against Dershowitz?
      (I don’t think you do, frankly ;))…
      Blame anything/anyone, rather than review Finkelstein’s less-than-academic conduit(straight off Finkelstein, by the way).
      Right then, carry on!

    • He [Raymond deLauney]ought to also check out the Turkish IHH government-connected terrorist group.

      Yes he should. But you know he won’t.

  23. this is beyong hilarious. So some closeted paranoid platfor which makes it job to creep and shriek scanning ‘stalinesqu’ Guardian hyperventilates when some rent-a-republican gets fired because suddenly ‘stalinesque’ Guardian realises that having a bigot on their books won’t translate into much advertising revenue, cue damage limiting press release and poor Trevino (I don’t give too hoots about how you spell it) goes hush on his Twitter account.

    Now how are you better’ than those ‘fringe extremists’ and Israel haters’ to comment on the Guardian’s staff choices? Are you some ‘leading liberal’ whatnot? in fact, who the fuck are you, hiding behind noble words while acting like some stuck-up morons? I am yet to find anything resembling ‘debate’ on this website, so not stalinesque, my my, a real voice of diversity, hypocrites corner par excellence, now bring ont he star wars, I feel like in Daily Mail already.

    • “… hyperventilates when some rent-a-republican gets fired because suddenly ‘stalinesque’ Guardian realises that having a bigot on their books won’t translate into much advertising revenue…”

      That’s not the reason they gave. You missed the point entirely. Go back and re-read.

      • oh dear, I don’t need to read some idiotic press release based on technicality, just as I didn’t have to read the one that told me he’s there for some ‘perspective’, to realise that really, having a redneck hatemongerer on ‘liberal’ and ‘stalinesque’ Guardian’s books would have helped it so much to franchise into the LaLa-Land, it really would.

        And I assume ‘liberal’ on these pages means anything that involves bending backwards in front of rightwing idols in Israel, I also presume all concerned here type from their little settlement rooftops?

        compulive-obsessive, beyond pathetic, carry on

  24. When you come to think about it, The Guardian employs Mr Trevino for just the one article. A mawkish one full of hubris, in which he commits Johanhari, or ritual journalistic suicide. The saintly Mr Rusbridger then has the last laugh in firing him. What’s not to like? Champagne all round!!

    • Harriet Sherwood’s articles rarely have a comments section and this one is no exception. The fellow in the video- he doesn’t say whether he was a conscript or a reserve soldier – was clearly an ordinary private with no access to any information concerning the situation outside his checkpoint. He admits to disobeying an order and, worse, endangering the girl by allowing her to be on the streets during a curfew. No surprise that some Border Police may have roughed her up; they have an unenviable reputation. What got me was that he could have queried the curfew order with whoever was in charge, but didn’t.

      His other story is “normal,”too. Patrolling in a hostile area requires being prepared to face whatever is around the next corner. In his account he met a five year old, but could, just as easily, have come face to face with an armed adult.

      Oh, yes. From the article, we also learned that frightened children wet or soil themselves, even when Israeli soldiers just try to make conversation with them. This certainly reflects the situation but I hesitate to describe it as evidence of child abuse.

  25. Pingback: UK gets 2 more mosques, Libya bulldozes one — Winds Of Jihad By SheikYerMami

  26. But, let us not forget – Joshua Trevino is an ignorant ginger tosser and should be studiously ignored by all sane people.

Comments are closed.