This argument reminds me of how science evolved from philosophy. The ancient Greeks believed that if something was arrived at through reasoning, it represented absolute truth. Aristotle "reasoned" that heavier objects must fall faster than lighter objects, simply because their weight would impel them to reach the ground faster. This was unchallenged for over a thousand years, because the great Aristotle said it was so. This was finally disproved by experimental observation, showing that to arrive at truth science had to be based on measurable data, and not rely on the authority of any individual to determine truth. Religion is all about authority; i.e. this is true because my Pastor said so or it is written here in my holy book. In science people can make big names for themselves if they prove something that is accepted is false, just as much as they can for proving a new hypothesis. Every well established scientific theory is still there because it has been continuously challenged, and either survived those challenges or was modified to accommodate the new data. The theory of Evolution has been challenged innumerable times, and has been refined over the years as genetic data and other information has become available. It is still there because it fits ALL the observed data.

The problem with this viewpoint is that every fact is political to someone. Evolution is a big hot button, but there are people who have issues with Astronomy because it asserts the existence of distant objects, so distant that the light must have traveled far longer than what some believe is is the age of the universe (c 6000 years). Same thing for geology (radioactive dating of rocks), etc. When people insist that their beliefs trump readily measurable observations, they can not perceive science as not attacking their beliefs.

Wikileaks claims some sense of moral superiority by releasing this data to show us America's flaws, but this is only possible due to our strengths. We have a free and open society, and value free speech. If WikiLeaks released this level of documentation from Russia, Iran, or some other more repressive society, their people would be dying or disappearing. If they are truly interested in making the world better by releasing classified information, they should release Iranian documents on their nuclear program or Russian documents showing their government's organized repression of dissidents and open press. But they won't, because they want to remain alive.