The parents arguments still hold. Wikileaks may release larger chunks of information, but is'nt that a given considering that the horde of information that wiki-leaks has is far larger than the Pentagon Papers?

The fact remains that Wikileaks has withheld and redacted a lot of information voluntarily and permanently.
http://www.wikileaksforum.net/ in fact has a thread on redactions which they feel should not have been performed.

"The Pentagon Papers were held back for over a decade to protect diplomatic relations."
To make a couple of simple points:
Ellsberg->1970s NYT: :: Manning->Wikileaks. If you want to be consistent, blame Manning for not showing Ellsberg's restraint, do not blame Wikileaks.
NYT is US based. Wikileaks is not. Why the heck should Wikileaks care about US Diplomatic relations? American diplomatic power has often coerced it allies into taking actions that were against their national interest, against the will of their citizens and sometimes against their laws.
Even without being a 1st amendment fundamentalist, it could be argued that reduction of the US ability to do things in the dark diplomatically is not a bad thing for most countries.

Weaker woman's tournaments are the reason, Judit Polgar, the strongest ever woman chess player does not compete in women's only tournaments. On the flip side, I seem to recall her sister, Susan Polgar (who was a Woman's world champion herself) write in favor of having a woman's only field as well. Her argument was having only mixed tournaments, would lead to vicious cycle. Basically, she thought that if there were no women's only tournaments, a lot of women players would perform badly and a lot of them would not get a chance to qualify to play, and as a result would drop out of chess.This would discourage a lot of women entering the field. The diminishing size of the pool of players would in turn lead to fewer high ranking womens players, and so on.

Kasparov at 22 became the youngest unified chess champion. But he is not the youngest ever -- Ruslan Ponomariov won the Fide chess championship in 2002 (during the split, in a knockout format).He was 18 at the time.

Sarcasm is irony? Yeah, sure it is.

The Time man of the year award, is a silly recognition that no one cares about anymore, other than to point something to snicker at. (remember the silly foil on the cover with the award going to "You" sometime back).
Besides, more often than not, being selected as the time man of the year has been kiss of death for the person's influence / career. I definitely prefer that fate to occur to Zuckerberg rather than to Assange :-).

Very few features actually are dependent on a data plan. I have a Motorola droid 1 (bought second hand for ~$150) on a voice and text plan. (although technically I do get 50mb of data in my plan.) I can get internet access through wifi. That gets me all the internet access I need for email and Facebook and basic news feeds. Most of my phone uses are offline -- My main use of my Android phone is for music (it plays flac while my itouch does not.) I also use the maps features while traveling as a GPS substitute (mapdryoid). I use the games on it often and sometimes the ereader. I would like to get a data plan, except that almost all data plans in the US are a rip off.

Think of it this way: the person running the place comes to know of the conversation. It will hurt only if this boss is immature or if the conversations are of a type that should not have occurred. It might hurt the people having the conversation, but it will not hurt the boss.
Assange's work is ultimately not harmful, because in a democracy, the people are supposed to the ultimate boss.

As GP said read up the details. Hint: If the victims do not think something was sexual assault (vs "sex by surprise") , it wasn't.

by and large the list should not come as a surprise to anyone.
As for potential damage, this can be a good thing as well as a bad thing.
If the government publicizes the list and its ramifications, then people will realize that spending additional billions upon billions on security in airports and airlines for ever diminishing returns is an utter waste of money, and the money can be better used.
If they do not use this information, then the only
Ultimately, a lot of the wikileaks information was kinda known to folks in the field that a leak covered, and to news junkies.
Wikileaks still adds value because it has removed uncertainty in a lot of discussion, and this should help bring clarity to even the experts thinking.
But mainly wikileaks is a test of civil society. Our society has been making a lot of bad decisions, bad on bad information. Wikileaks has now given the layman easy access to a lot of useful, accurate information.
Whether people use it to get rid of bad policies and build a better society is a test for them and the governments that they voted to rule them.

Nice.. I wish I had mod points...

The cables contain a lot of confidential information about Russia. Today's release in particular. go to the http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/the-us-embassy-cables
The prominent ledes right now on the page are:
"Russia armed Georgian separatists"
"Moscow mayor: 'pyramid of corruption'"
"Cables condemn Russia as 'mafia state'"
"Russian government 'using mafia for its dirty work' "
"Cables link Russian mafia boss to EU gas supplies"
"Litvinenko death 'likely had Putin's OK'"
I do not think they say anything that comes as a shock, but they are informative and in some cases entertaining. (there is one about a alcohol filled wedding where drunk soldiers pull out guns)

The US already has a center-right party. Recently, they have been quite pro big business, against government provided healthcare, and have emphasizes tax cuts as a part of any stimulus, which is willing to violate international law to uphold the war on terror and is right now fighting the courts to keep those darn activist judges from undermining DADT.

Come to think of it, I guess they drifted out to the far right too...

I was going to mod you down, but I am giving you the benefit that you are misinformed, rather than a troll.
So here, this should make you happy
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1334432/WikiLeaks-boss-Julian-Assange-goes-US-bank-explosive-new-dossier.html

Agree or disagree with his process, but Assange makes some very reasonable points in the full interview. Judge for yourself here:
http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/11/29/an-interview-with-wikileaks-julian-assange/

Sure, if the US govt's actions were not important more private information would have come out, but right now the US, is by far the most dominant world power, and it is fairly assertive in using its power, so documents revealing its workings carry a corresponding importance. So it seems that Assange has his priorities right.
Also, one thing that I have noticed is that Wikileaks does seem to be listening to criticism, and every release seems to incorporate lessons learned from the previous ones. Wikileaks is certainly worth supporting.

Simple ... grad students in the sciences provide a source of cheap labour that pays off any taxpayer funding several times over in ultimate research benefits. Universities cannot afford to run out of talented, hardworking grad students. It does not matter which countries the grad students come from.

Except this is not about "Give an opinion that I don't like and I shall call for your death." As numerous other posters above have noted, Yasmin basically said that its wrong for the practice of stoning people to death to be criticized. The response the tweet basically replied how would she like it it it was done to her.