Poll: Should WikiLeaks be targeted or defended?

[whyme]

I'm curious, based upon what you currently know and if you had to choose sides, would you defend WikiLeaks from onslaught by targeting it's enemies or would help destroy WikiLeaks?

[kes]

Maybe there should be an option: "I will defend Wikileaks in my words and actions, but not step over any bounds in doing so" or is that the same as "I'm too chicken"?

[trafficlight]

That's along the lines of stopping child abuse by changing your Facebook profile picture to a cartoon character.

[wladimir]

No one should be attacked, neither Wikileaks or it's enemies.

If I really had to choose "I would attack people making stupid polls on HN"

[whyme]

Obviously you have a limited interpretation for the word attack:

Amongst the others:

  .. .to direct unfavorable criticism against; criticize   
  severely; argue with strongly: He attacked his opponent's 
  statement. 

In fact your post is technically an attack suggesting no attacking. Still you feel justified to go around attacking?

Seriously - get over yourself - Do you really have nothing better to do than make comments like this?