In an editorial decision surely linked to today's Gonzales confirmation hearing, the Washington Post front page has the look of a torture tabloid, drawing together every story with the word in it. One of these stories involves a man named Habib, born in Egypt, living in Australia, who claimed he'd been turned over under a "rendition" practice  to the Egyptians for torture. The story includes a sad picture of his wife and  nothing much of his alleged background. In rebuttal there is only a mention, paragraphs into the tale,that Egyptian authorities had denied ever using torture.
 
The Australians, however, tell a different story than Habib, though apparently the Washington Post never interviewed them.The man clearly is a terrorist, his claims include one made in an affidavit that this torture took place in the presence of an Australian consular official. The Australian Attorney General says all consular officials have denied the claims in the affidavit.
 
Well, gee, you mean, especially on this day, an effort should be made to put the claim in full perspective? Give the reader all information relevant to make a reasoned credibility resolution?

Nah...Ignore the details of his background, go only to the Egyptians whose word on the subject will be considered less credible by any reader with a hint of knowledge about Middle Eastern prisons, and ignore absolutely the Australian officials.

Clarice Feldman   1 06 05