Just how dishonest is The Oz willing to be?

It would be hard to miss recent argument and counter-argument concerning the Rudd Government pledge to guarantee all deposits held in APRA-regulated financial institutions.
The media has been playing the Federal Opposition's attack for all it is worth.

The Australian in an effort to act as Teh Opposition Gazette worked really hard to make the grade and ended up basically accusing the Rudd Government and Treasury of lying over the issue of an unlimited guarantee.

Along with Liberal Senator Abetz*, it was caught out using this tack and Treasury Secretary Henry told a Senate estimates economics hearing that The Australian's report was W.R.O.N.G.!

In the process Ken Henry pointed out that the issue of capping the amount at which deposits would be able to evade a levy was being considered:

“Far be it from me to offend anyone, and especially you Senator,” Henry began drily, “ but there’s been some misunderstanding about the term ‘cap’.” He went on to explain the difference between a cap on the guarantee and a cap at which point deposits would be treated as wholesale lending and thus attract a cost to access the guarantee. [Crikey.com.au, 22 October 2008]

Now after declaring it was right all along, The Australian has switched tactics and in a less than honest report it included a virtually unreadable version of the Stevens letter to Henry dealing with the levy.
Obviously hoping that the general public will conflate the two cap types.

The Australian version of the Stevens letter here.

* I would wishfully like to think the reason why the relevant online Senate transcript was not available at time of writing was because a contrite Senator Abetz and staff were busying trying unsuccessfully to obliterate his very unwise remarks from Hansard and history.