The US government is not censoring WikiLeaks by banning access to the information or telling employees not to access it, it is enforcing the law.

Just because something is published doesn’t de-classify it, and it is illegal to receive or transfer classified documents unless you are authorized to do so. If a government employee, especially someone with a clearance, accesses the WikiLeaks documents they are breaking the law.

I realize this is rather pointless, but there are a lot of pointless laws on the books, almost everything labeled as a “victimless crime” for a start, but they are the law, and government employees are expected to obey the laws, [unlike Congresscritters who have a habit of exempting themselves from a lot of laws, and ignoring a lot of others].

They have to maintain the fiction that that this stuff is secret if they have any hope of a legal case against WikiLeaks or Assange.

This was good day for people, according to the BBC widget on my sidebar:

In 1689 the British “Bill of Rights” established the primacy of the Parliament over the Monarchy. This was the template for the first ten amendments of the US Constitution, and they are also referred as “the Bill of Rights”.

In 1773 the Boston Tea Party took place. As I have already noted, the action was an expression of the dislike of the colonists for corporate tax breaks, and corporations themselves. Unlike our current leaders, the Founding Fathers disliked and distrusted corporations. The East India Company had much in common with WalMart, as many of its products were the result of the labors of poorly paid labor in Asia, and the Company tended to drive local businesses under with its lower prices because of its monopolies in certain areas and its favored tax status.