Piers Akerman has been caught out again; this time the “fruits of his research” all came directly from a press release published by the Israeli Ministrey of Foreign Affairs.

Sealed section Monday December 9

The Australian Muslim Public Affairs Committee (AMPAC) has sent through the following piece questioning where controversial right wing Daily Telegraph commentator Piers Akerman sources his material from.

AMPAC writes:

“It is interesting to note that 31% of Piers Akerman’s latest article in the Daily Telegraph seems to have been “lifted” verbatim and without attribution from a press release issued by the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) just four days prior. To Piers’ credit, he did at least replace “terror organization” with “terrror organisation”. It would be an interesting and worthwhile investigation to subject Piers’ past offerings to a similar scrutiny.

Akerman writes:

“…Abu Aiman Al-Hilali, a senior member of the Al-Qaeda terror organisation, marked the US, Britain, France, Italy, Canada, Germany and Australia as enemies of the organisation.”

“He also justified terror attacks perpetrated by Al-Qaeda “Jihad warriors” in the US, Tunisia, Pakistan, Yemen, Bali, Moscow and other places.”

“Al-Hilali listed the following reasons as justifications for the killing of western citizens in terror attacks:

“The citizens of the democratic western countries take full part in the decisions taken by their governments. The residents of those countries are not classified as ‘civilians’ as they were classified during previous wars in history.”

“In light of their influence on the decisions taken by their governments, they do not comply with the definition of ‘elderly, women and children’ (who are immune from being targeted in terror attacks).”

“The Western citizens who object to the actions of their governments are but a minority and lack substantial influence. They can not be separated from the entire population during an attack (by Al- Qaeda).”

According to Hilali, the aims of Al-Qaeda terror attacks are as follows:

“Promoting understanding of the virtues of the Islam for which the warriors of the Jihad are fighting.”

“Providing reason for the US allies to withdraw their support from it (by perpetrating terror attacks in those countries.”

“Putting pressure on the people of those countries to force their governments to cut all ties with the US.”

“Outlining a future plan for the Al-Qaeda organisation by perpetrating terror attacks.”

“Promoting the perception that targeting citizens in western countries is legitimate.”

Ends

The Israeli Defence Forces Press Release (http://www.idf.il/newsite/english/1204-3.stm) reads:

“…Abu Aiman Al- Hilali, a senior member of the Al- Qaida terror organization, marked the US, Britain, France, Italy, Canada, Germany and Australia as enemies of the organization. He also justified terror attacks perpetrated by Al- Qaeda “Jihad warriors” in the US, Tunisia, Pakistan, Yemen, Bali, Moscow and other places.”

Al- Hilali, listed the following reasons as justifications for the killing of western citizens in terror attacks:

“The citizens of the democratic western countries take full part in the decisions taken by their governments. The residents of those countries are not classified as “civilians” as they were classified during previous wars in history. In light of their influence on the decisions taken by their governments, they do not comply with the definition of “elderly, women and children” (who are immune from being targeted in terror attacks).”

“The western citizens who object to the actions of their governments are but a minority and lack substantial influence. They can not be separated from the entire population during an attack (by Al- Qaida).”

According to Hilali, the aims of Al-Qaeda terror attacks are as follows:

“Promoting understanding of the virtues of the Islam for which the warriors of the Jihad are fighting.”

“Providing reason for the US’ allies to withdraw their support from it (by perpetrating terror attacks in those countries).”

“Putting pressure on the people of those countries to force their governments to cut all ties with the US.”

“Outlining a future plan for the Al- Qaeda organization by perpetrating terror attacks.”

“Promoting the perception that targeting citizens in western countries is legitimate.”

Australian Muslim Public Affairs Committee (AMPAC)

PO Box 180

PASCOE VALE SOUTH VIC 3044 Email: [email protected]

Web: http://www.muslimaffairs.com.au

PIERS AKERMAN AND ISRAEL: PART II

It is worthwhile pointing out an earlier incident in which Piers Ackerman
seems to have again adopted the role of Israel’s defacto press secretary in
Australia.

In Akerman’s December 13, 2001 article in the Telegraph: “Gulf seperating truth and terror”, Akerman describes his trip to Israel. And how, whilst he seems to have spent a significant amount of time meeting Israelis, he made only made a handful of phone calls to Palestine representatives Saad Erekat, Hanan Ashrwawi and Ahmad Qurie.

Apparently, all three brought up the issue of the numerous UN resolutions that Israel has belligerently failed to recognise. Ackerman then proceeded to “refute” these claims by referring to quotes by Lord Caradon, Michael Stewart (British Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, 1969) and Lyndon Johnson, the former US President.

Piers terms this the “fruit of his research”, however it seems that his response to the Palestinians is ripped directly from an “information sheet” provided by the same Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs that brought Piers to Israel and hosted him there.

The sequence in which Piers quotes these people is even in the same order, along with other consistencies. It is beginning to seem clear from which songbook Mr Akerman is singing.

The article is below. After reading it, refer to this “information sheet”, produced by the same Israeli government department that hosted Piers.

— START ARTICLE —

THE photograph of young masked Palestinians draped in belts of mock explosives and pretending to be suicide bombers published by The Daily Telegraph on Tuesday was as great an obscenity as any image of hard-core child pornography displayed in recent times.

If it demonstrated anything, it was that the cultural gulf between Western

and Arab thinking on the sanctity of life and the difference between
military and civil action.

It also went some way towards explaining why so many young Palestinians

find themselves in the firing line whenever Israel responds to a terrorist
attack upon its civilian population.

By promoting this sort of behaviour among children, by teaching them to hate, Palestinian extremists clearly demonstrate their inability to relate to Western values. Since returning from a study tour of the conflict, it has become apparent that while many Australians are deeply concerned about the
issues some, unsurprisingly, have missed the detail.

Before endeavouring to remedy this, I will forestall those critics rushing to claim that the media generally, and this writer specifically, are all part of a (non-existent) international Jewish conspiracy.

Yes, the tour was organised by the Israeli Foreign Ministry, but one of

the most senior members of the Israeli government, Dany Ayalon, the
principal adviser to the Prime Minister, urged the Australian media group to
contact leading members of the Palestinian Authority to ensure balanced
reporting.

Because my mobile telephone was most convenient, contact with three of the

most senior Palestinian spokesmen, Saed Erekat, Hanan Ashrawi and Ahmad
Qurie (also known as Abu Ala), who has been widely-tipped to succeed Yasser
Arafat, was initiated by me via the most helpful offices of the Australian
embassy.

Those particular Palestinians, others, and a number of readers have since

raised United Nations Resolution 242 to justify the Palestinian demand that
Israel withdraw its borders to the pre-1967 ceasefire lines. The fruit of my
research follows, the emphasis is mine.

The late Lord Caradon, sponsor of the draft, stated before the vote in the

Security Council: ” … the draft Resolution is a balanced whole. To add to
it or to detract from it would destroy the balance and also destroy the wide
measure of agreement we have achieved together. It must be considered as a
whole as it stands. I suggest that we have reached the stage when most, if
not all, of us want the draft Resolution, the whole draft Resolution and
nothing but the draft Resolution.”

IN an interview in February, 1973, he reiterated: “the purposes are

perfectly clear, the principle is stated in the preamble, the necessity for
withdrawal is stated in the operative section.

“And then the essential phrase which is not sufficiently recognised is

that withdrawal should take place to secure and recognised boundaries, and
these words were very carefully chosen: they have to be secure and they have
to be recognised. They will not be secure unless they are recognised. And
that is why one has to work for agreement. This is essential. I would defend
absolutely what we did. It was not for us to lay down exactly where the
border should be.

“I know the 1967 border very well. It is not a satisfactory border, it is

where troops had to stop in 1947, just where they happened to be that night,
that is not a permanent boundary …”

The following exchange in the British Parliament on November 17, 1969, is

also instructive. Michael Stewart, then Secretary of State for Foreign and
Commonwealth Affairs, was asked: “What is the British interpretation of the
wording of the 1967 Resolution? Does the Right Honourable Gentleman
understand it to mean that the Israelis should withdraw from all territories
taken in the late war?”

Mr Stewart replied: “No, Sir. That is not the phrase used in the

Resolution. The Resolution speaks of secure and recognised boundaries. These
words must be read concurrently with the statement on withdrawal.”

Across the Atlantic, then US president Lyndon Johnson confirmed that view

on September 10, 1968, stating: “It is clear, however, that a return to the
situation of 4 June, 1967, will not bring peace. There must be secure and
there must be recognised borders. Some such lines must be agreed to by the
neighbours involved.”

Deliberate misinterpretations of this important Resolution betray the
Palestinian people.

Their sympathisers should take note.

— END ARTICLE —

————————————————

THE AKERMAN DEFENCE

Sealed section Friday December 20

A Piers fan sent the following email to the fat toad:

“Dear Mr Akerman,

I understand you’ve been on the receiving end of a number of accusations of plagiarism after your recent article concerning an al Quaeda agents statements.

I’d like to make two points before asking you a question on this matter.

1. I think it’s admirable that you at least reply to the sources of these accusations, when many people would simply ignore them. My compliments to you in that regard.

2. I also think the article in question when compared to the original source could be defined as plagiarism. What I find equally troubling though is that you not only refuse to even treat this perception seriously, but the tone of your responses are both arrogant and belligerent.

I generally don’t mind your articles, and am disturbed that you would treat your readers with such disdain.

My question Mr Akerman is what is worse, plagiarism or arrogance?

I think we as your readers deserve a lot better.

Kind Regards, Pablo

And Piers replied as follows:

Dear Mr Berrutti,

Thank you for your note. No, I don’t consider repeating quotes or reporting news which has appeared elsewhere to be plagiarism. Neither act involves the theft of original ideas. Nor do I consider it arrogant to point out the deficiencies of those who act maliciously and seek to create controversy where none exists.

Regards, Piers

CRIKEY: News Ltd management have been decidedly quiet about this plagiarism debate. Is it because Piers still exchanges birthday presents with Rupert and is one of his closest friends in Australia?

————————————————

ANTHONY ALBANESE JOINS IN THE AKERMAN THUMPING

Federal MP Anthony Albanese’s reference to Ackerman’s use of Israeli Defence Forces propaganda, including the articles in question, was tabled in Parliament.

Below is the extract from Hansard:

— START HANSARD EXTRACT —

Multicultural Affairs: Media Standards

Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler) (10.40 p.m.)

The terrorist act on September 11, 2001 changed the international landscape forever. The terrorist act on October 12 in Bali changed the way Australia sees our relationship in
international politics forever. Terrorism is the ultimate expression of
intolerance. Political leaders in Australia have been careful to make sure
that that intolerance does not have a role here in domestic politics. The
Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and my colleague the shadow
minister for foreign affairs have been careful to emphasise that people from
an Islamic background should not suffer as a result of intolerance in our
community. This has been mirrored by many in the political community, not
the least of whom is Bob Carr, the Premier of New South Wales, who has
established a youth partnership with the Arabic-speaking community.

On Tuesday, 13 August 2002 Piers Akerman in the Daily Telegraph referred
to the events where Hazem El Masri, the winger for Canterbury, launched one
of those campaigns. Mr El Masri said:

“I urge you (Mr Carr) to help put an end to the isolation our community is
suffering … We do not condone rape … this is how we are being portrayed.
Today the Muslim community is the most hated in the nation.”

He went on to say, encouragingly, that he preferred to be thought of as
Australian: “… so that we can all feel part of one family.”

Piers Akerman, unfortunately, went on to say: It is impossible, in such
cases speaking about the rapes that occurred to separate the racial or
religious identity the criminals boasted from their nauseating acts and
somewhat difficult to warm to all of their co-religionists.

He went on in the same article to say:

“There have been very few acts of discrimination against Australian
Muslims since September 11 or the gang rapes because this remains largely a
stable and law-abiding society.”

Unfortunately, that is not true. Mr El Masri was saying that many Muslims
have indeed suffered racial vilification and violence in the wake of these
events. Gerard Henderson pointed out in an article on Tuesday, 18 September
2001 that accusing fellow Australians of disloyalty can be a very bad thing.
He said that Mr Akerman:

“… signed an advertisement in The Review … In recent times, Akerman
has attempted to pass this as an expression of his opposition to Australias
Vietnam commitment. But it was much more than that. The signatories claimed
that Australians in the ADF had become mercenaries in the cause of
‘American imperial politics’. In recent years even leftists like Jane Fonda
have apologised for past critical references to Allied servicemen. But not
Akerman.”

In yesterday’s Sunday Telegraph, there was another extraordinary article
by Mr Akerman. He stated:

“… as Abu Aiman Al-Hilali, a senior member of the Al-Qaeda terror
organisation, marked the US, Britain, France, Italy, Canada, Germany and Australia as enemies of the organisation.”

That article goes on to quote, word for word indeed, 31 per cent of that
article is direct quotes from the press release issued by the Israeli
defence forces on 4 December 2002. It is absolutely extraordinary that a
journalist, without any attribution whatsoever, has gone through and quoted
every single word written in this press release. While much of the press release is quotes from an article by Mr Al-Hilali, it is absolutely extraordinary that someone who speaks later in the article about protecting our national sovereignty and standing up for a secure Australia quotes a
press release from the defence forces of another country without
attribution.

Piers Akerman, week after week, produces articles which vilify the Islamic
community in Australia. This simply must stop. It is inappropriate for a
journalist in a newspaper with the widest readership in Australia to engage
in this sort of conduct. Quite frankly, it contrasts markedly with what both
sides of this House have tried to do to ensure that tolerance has its place here in Australia and that intolerance has no place.

I seek leave to table the press release from the Israeli defence forces.

— END HANSARD EXTRACT –>