Your article "WikiLeaks: A Terrorist's Best Friend?" would be quite amusing if it wasn't so ill-informed. The publication of such a list does nothing to increase the chances of these installations becoming a target. But it does demonstrate contrary to US claims that their embassies engage in intelligence gathering. Seriously, do you really think terrorist organisations haven't already made their own lists of these strategic installations? The information to identify and locate these facilities is and has been available in the public domain for a very very long time.

My response: The Pentagon Papers were also STOL--er, stolen property. It took a landmark Supreme Court decision to determine that the public's right to know trumped the government's desire for secrecy. I just don't think the public good was served by WikiLeaks publishing a list of vital facilities, no matter who may have already known about them.

Not everyone was ticked off about my presumed about-face on WikiLeaks. Reader V. L. writes:

It's nice to see some reporting on the turn for the worse this has taken instead of the blind support for what this organization once stood for.

Next up: Theo de Raadt, the founder of and OpenSSH projects, has a more international take on the WikiLeaks cables. I'd written that regardless of whose side you're on, . Theo says maybe that's not such a bad thing: