Glaring contradiction

The Australian reveals:

Hicks's graphic account of his treatment by the Americans, contained in a sworn statement to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission in Britain to support his bid for British citizenship, is at odds with the assertions in his Guantanamo Bay plea agreement that he was not mistreated by the US. It also explains why the US has banned him from talking to the media for a year. Hicks's story, detailed in the affidavit obtained by The Weekend Australian, is not one the US Government is keen to have re-told.

Orwell would be proud of the Australian and American governments which claim to be the guardians of civilisation, while simulatenously offending every civilised notion of justice in their treatment of David Hicks.

Meanwhile, the Opposition remembers to keep its moral outrage in the closet. While on radio earlier in the week Rudd faced the following question:

Do you believe the David Hicks guilty plea is justice served or justice denied?

RUDD: What I am very careful about commenting on is that Mr Hicks, advised by his legal advisers, has taken a course of action in Guantanamo Bay and that has been part and parcel of the process before the US Military Commission. Once that process is concluded, once Mr Hicks is returned to Australia there may be then an opportunity for a broader debate on these matters, but I think we’ve got to be very mindful of the legal process which is still on foot.

On its face a very sound response, much like Hick's plea bargain. Operative phrase, 'on its face'.