While we are not necessary in favor of publishing peoples social security numbers along with their tax papers either, we agree that in the spirit of peoples right-to-know its makes much use for the readers to be able to get to see themselves fx documents concerning Guantanamo Bay, as well as possible money laundring etc. The practice at least favors no authoritatives of any kind as leaking Amnesty´s abortion politics somewhat reveals. Also we (in MSW) have to say concerning this case, that typical journalistic customaries based on ´professional´ selectiviness of sources, are much in related to logic don´t-bite-the-hand-that-feeds (Let´s say, self-censuring, often unavoidable if to to earn a place from gatekeepers; that meaning publishing´judges´ of written word). A typical ritual in some journalistic circles, unfortunate for the freedom of word and the reason which makes a good informative article to appear in public papers as rare gem as within within blogsphere. Quality or truthfulness not necessary related to professionalism, in reality its much often other way around. So we are not clapping hands for the introduction of army of professionals to get accustomed with the pre-release wikileaked-papers. But at least its still in favor to lessen peoples ignorance of the things their companies and governments aim to hide...
Buff...we seem to be not short of words, but promise to use more brief sentences on next post.
Wish(?) to check the news(feed), motherlode of all the important information.