WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Julian Assange ably defends himself in an op-ed for The Australian:
WikiLeaks is not the only publisher of the US embassy cables. Other media outlets, including Britain's The Guardian, The New York Times, El Pais in Spain and Der Spiegel in Germany have published the same redacted cables.
In its landmark ruling in the Pentagon Papers case, the US Supreme Court said "only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government". The swirling storm around WikiLeaks today reinforces the need to defend the right of all media to reveal the truth.
His most powerful point is that WIkiLeaks is not the only publisher of this material, yet it's the only one being treated as a criminal enterprise, to the point of politicians publicly calling for its editor's assassination.
WikiLeaks isn't the source of these documents. They were allegedly leaked by a U.S. soldier, and if so, what he did is against the law. Publishing the information after it was leaked is not against the law. The New York Times has published more of it than WikiLeaks has. Is the Times also a terrorist organization? What's the difference? Does Sarah Palin think the editor of the New York Times should be charged with treason, too?