Sorry for the double post... could a mod please delete this thread and leave the other? Thank you Mod Edit: Since this thread has responses and the other does not, I am instead deleting the other one and pasting in your comments here. Note: In the future, please use the report button to request changes--we're more likely to see requests there. We the people, the public are the force of goodness in our world. Good works can no more take a hold over corruption and evil than through the very hearts and actions of the people who live upon the face of our planet. Yet when journalism takes an irresponsible view to freedom of the press, then the powers that give voice to the freedom of information, take away the virtuous aspect of the voice. I am all for someone pulling information out of private sources to open the channel for the people to oversee and defeat the wrongful abuse by the government to cover up or illegitimately control without responsibility. Yet when I see the wrongs committed by Wikileaks in publicizing information that does nothing but harm the public, then I must condemn their greed for notiriety and publicity scandals. Anyone that would defend them in their recent irresponsible actions under the guise of protecting our freedom to information is acting foolishly rebellious just to stand behind their own personal podium and rant moronically. If you happened to be shopping one day and just happened to be present when a friend's son got caught trying to shoplift, yet the store and the police decided to let the matter go since it was a menial item and let him off with a warning, it would be a foolish act for you to run to the boy's parents and "squeal" on him just for the purpose of getting him in trouble, under the guise of being a responsible friend protecting their own personal right to know about it. If they came to you and asked you directly if you knew anything ablout it, then it would be a different matter maybe. In the same manner, Wikileaks being a "squealing Fink" to merely tell people "I know something you don't know" when that something does nothing but harm innocent people, then their action speaks louder than words. There is no purpose served in releasing information containing private memos and reports by emissaries and ambassadors of the Untied States who made private comments that would be taken as insults by other country's political offices. We obviously have severe problems in places like Pakistan, but leaking private information containing information that would defeat our purpose to resolve issues with that country in combating Taliban influence, serves nothing other than Wikileak's own personal gain. If someone claims freedom of press and information acts to fraudulently permit them to leak information that does nothing other than harm the public safety presented by the security of such information, then Wikileaks SHOULD be regarded as a terrorist threat source if their actions promote a defeat in our policy with Pakistan (or Iraq, or Afghanistan) that is held so closely to brittle negotiations against our purpose as we battle the Taliban.