[bradleyjg]

They talk in the Times article about the government asking them not to publish at all, and them refusing but agreeing to omit some details in response to concerns that officials raised.

I don't know much about The Guardian, but The Times, for better or for worse, has always self censored based on its own perceptions of the trade offs. It considers itself a responsible part of the establishment -- the loyal opposition if you will. You aren't going to see a wikileaks-esque dump from them.

[trevelyan]

Enough with the anti-Wikeaks crap. They reviewed and redacted and if you don't know that you just come across as ignorant at this point.

And if you DO know it, then suggesting which specific document was unethical to release would be a good start.

[bradleyjg]

They redacted for a year and then released everything. Allegedly inadvertently, if that makes you feel better.

In any event, you misunderstand my intended tone. I'm not saying the New York Times' establishmentarian leanings are great, just they have them.