Thanks for the thoughtful response. And I tend to agree. In the case of Wikileaks, the guy did something substantive at least (whether you agree or disagree w

Thanks for the thoughtful response. And I tend to agree. In the case of Wikileaks, the guy did something substantive at least (whether you agree or disagree with it) so I can understand the fascination with the man behind the story as his motivations, methods, etc are potentially interesting. In this case, this whole thing appears void of any real "substance" which I guess is what led to the question.