Let's go through the various possibilities, here. I see three of them: 1. this is over interpretation and there is no message 2. there is a message because wi

Let's go through the various possibilities, here. I see three of them: 1. this is over interpretation and there is no message 2. there is a message because wikileaks account is under control and want to get a message through 3. there is a message because wikileaks want to gain favors from conspiracy theorists (please people, feel free to add more) I would tend to see the first possibility as the most probable, because indeed, the "rules" used to compose this message are really not rigorous. I would give same probability to the two next ones. Gaining access to the people handling the account and forcing them into tweeting damaging things seems possible. I would not understand why this would be accomplished instead of just taking over the account, though. Leveraging conspiracy theorist also sounds like a possibility. Rumors are a strong weapon, easily undermining convictions with background doubt. And if confronted about it, they could totally say they never intended to do such thing and it's plain over interpretation. But of course, tin foil support is not the best support you can hope for.