PS all of this is not to say there aren't plenty of legitimate criticisms of what wikileaks is doing. Clearly there is some stuff on there that does need discretion if it's genuinely endangering lives and there are parts that should be redacted for the public interest. But the coverage from The New York Times and other traditional media as well as across the web shows there is genuine public interest and public good served in exposure of where there is wrong doing. There is clearly scope for sensible discourse about it. But I don't believe in government assassination hit-lists or smear campaigns and trumped up sex crime charges as a replacement for honest discourse over matters of genuine and valid fourth estate purview.