*Most thoughtful people will not be surprised at the revelations ... hardly world-shattering.*

Well of course. Politics, like the legal system, is a bit of a
circus, where everyone knows everyone, many are indeed friends,
but they give the public what they want, bread and circuses!

We have our share of voyeurs, who seemingly want to read all about
diplomatic dirty washing, laundered in public. But then the
public are seemingly fascinated too, by the press airing Paris
Hilton's dirty washing in public, or who Warnie slept with this week.

All this keeps the punters amused and interested. So the circus
goes on

Of course there is no comparison Yabby

The trouble with free speech is it's too liberating and becomes a mere cacophany. For my money free speech has to mean something and have intention, otherwise it's just noise. The trouble with the communication revolution is that it too often amounts to the latter, so that rather than fomenting for reform, or better still revolution, it bogs everything down in impressive verbiage. The Assange revelations too run the risk of being all sensation and no action; in fact desensitsing us yet more---and modern westerners are already like petrified wood!
Withal the fuss and brooding, as long as the creature comforts (the nests) are maintained, the vast majority will resettle soon enough.
Thus we have the Yabbys of the world complacently (and rightly) accusing the self-conscious circus Hens of voyeurism etc.
It's all just a bit of juicy gossip that only succeeds in lowering the bar as to what the keepers can get away with.
Assange shall eventually grow hoarse, or else join the ranks of the mithering martyrs in pergatory.
I do hope someone can disabuse me of my cynicism :-(

Are the Assange revelations 'sensational'?!

Also, none have put forward comment about my question.

" Whilst Assange is being lauded as 'Christ-like,' what is the opinion of Bradley Manning, a 21 year old, facing life imprisonment with hard labour. Is he also 'Christ-like' or a criminal? Should people in his position be held accountable for releasing top-secret material?

Should the Official Secrets Act in our country be done away with?"

If Manning is believed criminal, where does this put Assange who actually released the information - is Assange the active agent to its release, or complicit?

Manning's mental state at the time of his passing information to Assange was extremely poor. He stated "im a source, not quite a volunteer ... and I've developed a relationship with Assange." (Weekend Australian, December 11-12, p.11). Did Assange exploit the situation?

Manning hasn't been tried yet. What emerges in the trial should be interesting.

Squeers:

So glad to read that you're a hopeful cynic. Although I would never have described you as a cynic at all (i.e. one who looks at the world with a monocle in his mind's eye). Anyway, this may not dispel your cynicism but you may find it entertaining:

http://newmatilda.com/2010/12/13/free-speech-sxy-again

Squeers and Lexi,

Looking at it from a certain point of view, Julian Assange is symbolic of a freedom fighter in the same manner as many who have gone before him. He's a certain type of individual who personifies the struggle against injustice by the common man...don't know what that means in the long term, but it's fascinating to watch the machinations.

Danielle,

The difference (so far) between the situation's of Bradley Manning and Julian Assange is that the U.S. Government has found grounds upon which to charge Manning. If he is at some point found guilty of those crimes he will be "believed to be guilty" in the eyes of the U.S. justice system.
Wikileaks has raised international government ire to such an extent due to the sheer scale and randomness of its leaked information. Consequently, there appears to be a scramble on to improvise certain laws selectively forbidding the dissemination of leaked information