Simon Tisdall

From The Guardian biography:

Simon Tisdall is an assistant editor of the Guardian and a foreign affairs columnist. He was previously a foreign leader writer for the paper and has also served as its foreign editor and its US editor, based in Washington DC. He was the Observer's foreign editor from 1996-98.

NB: The Observer is owned by The Guardian.

Iran in bed with Al Qaeda?

On 22 May 2007, Simon Tisdall wrote a front page article for The Guardian extensively quoting unnamed sources suggesting that Iran was preparing to harass US forces in Iraq, and that for this purpose Iran was cooperating with Al Qaeda and Sunni resistance forces in Iraq^[1]. The Media Lens analysis of this article states:

The claim was based almost entirely on unsupported assertions made by anonymous US officials. Indeed 22 of the 23 paragraphs in the story relayed official US claims: over 95 per cent of the story. The compilation below indicates the levels of balance and objectivity:

"US officials say"; "a senior US official in Baghdad warned"; "The official said"; "the official said"; "the official said"; "US officials now say"; "the senior official in Baghdad said" "he [the senior official in Baghdad] added"; "the official said"; "the official said"; "he [the official] indicated; "he [the official] cited"; "a senior administration official in Washington said"; "The administration official also claimed"; "he [the administration official] said"; "US officials say"; "the senior official in Baghdad said"; "he [the senior official in Baghdad] said"; "the senior administration official said"; "he [the senior administration official] said"; "the official claimed"; "he [the official] said"; "Gen Petraeus’s report to the White House and Congress"; "a former Bush administration official said"; "A senior adviser to Gen Petraeus reported"; "the adviser admitted".

No less than 26 references to official pronouncements formed the basis for a Guardian story presented with no scrutiny, no balance, no counter-evidence - nothing. Remove the verbiage described above and a Guardian front page news report becomes a straight Pentagon press release.^[2]

Edward Herman commented to us:

"I saw that story and was amazed that what we call here the 'Judy Miller syndrome' has caught on in the UK 'liberal media.' Pretty amazing, after the overwhelming evidence of the past five years that the U.S.-Bush government is in the very business of disinformation, and their steady and obvious desire to demonize the Iranians, that this unconfirmed propaganda is treated as news (and not news pathology)." (Email to Media Lens, 22 May 2007)

Juan Cole, Professor of Modern Middle East and South Asian History at the University of Michigan, dismissed Tisdall's "silly article", describing the anonymous sources as "looney in positing a coming offensive jointly sponsored by Iran, the Mahdi Army and al-Qaeda". (Juan Cole, parliament-building-shelled-iraqi.html formed Comment blog May 22, 2007;

The holes in the story were obvious, Cole added: "At a time when Sunni Arab guerrillas are said to be opposing 'al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia' for its indiscriminate violence against Iraqis, including Shiites, we are now expected to believe that Shiite Iran is allying with it."

He concluded:

"US military spokesmen have been trying to push implausible articles about Shiite Iran supporting Sunni insurgents for a couple of years now, and with virtually the sole exception of the New York Times, no one in the journalistic community has taken these wild charges seriously. But The Guardian?" (ibid.)

Noam Chomsky described the Guardian cover story as: "Disgusting, but not far from the norm," adding that, in any case, "the whole debate is utterly mad." (ibid.)

Neocon on Nicaragua, Venezuela...

Simon Tisdall has often written about Venezuela and other Latin American countries with a distinct US-centric point of view. In 2 June 2006, Tisdall wrote:

Daniel Ortega led a rogue state before rogue states were invented. As chief engineer of Nicaragua's 1980s leftwing Sandinista revolution, he became Ronald Reagan's favourite Central American whipping boy. The US government conspired with so-called Contra rebels to overthrow him. He was eventually voted out of office in 1990, beaten by a US-backed candidate.^[3]

Ortega and the Sandinistas booted out a the bloody Somoza dictatorship and proceeded to implement revolutionary change in Nicaragua: land redistribution, literacy campaigns, empowering cooperatives, increasing access to education and health services ... At the same time major elections were carried out twice -- under difficult circumstances. The first election results didn't change the US attitude towards Nicaragua/Sandinistas, and this was because the US-backed candidates lost throughout in those elections. About Tisdall comment: "US government conspired with so-called Contra rebels"; first, the US government/CIA funded, armed, trained, organized and directed the contra terrorists (the correct term for this group). Furthermore "beaten by a US-backed candidate" ignores the fact of massive US manipulation of the Nicaraguan political process (before the 1990 elections) by, (1) funding 16 small parties; (2) extensively funding these parties before the 1990 elections (e.g., most were given brand new vans or 4x4 Jeeps); (3) funding widespread anti-Sandinista propaganda; (4) spreading propaganda about massive US aid flows in case the Sandinistas were defeated, and (5) retaining the threat of the Contras should the US-favored candidates be defeated.

Tisdall adds:

But like other leftwing parties fighting tight election races in Latin America this year, the new-look Sandinistas have a problem they cannot control. It is called Hugo Chávez, the Venezuelan president and self-styled socialist revolutionary who seems hell-bent on recreating cold war-era confrontation with Washington. As political hopefuls from Mexico to Peru are discovering, Mr Chávez can be a dangerous friend. (ibid.)

Chavez "hell-bent" to recreate the cold-war era confrontation with Washington? NB: this statement was uttered after a US-instigated coup against Chavez and an attempt to roll back democratic change in Venezuela. And why would Chavez be considered "dangerous"? The article continues in much the same fashion.

Contact

Email: simon.tisdall@guardian.co.uk

Articles by Tisdall

• ^Simon Tisdall, The Chávez effect, The Guardian, 2 June 2006
• ^Simon Tidsall, Iran's secret plan for summer offensive to force US out of Iraq, The Guardian, 22 May 2007.
• (audio), Simon Tidsall on Iran, Guardian, 22 May 2007.

External Sources

• Pentagon Propaganda Occupies The Guardian's Front Page, Media Lens, 25 May 2007.