Last week, in collaboration with three of the world's most prestigious publications, the new media outfit released 91,000 documents detailing the Afghanistan war at the grass roots level. "This material shines light on the everyday brutality and squalor of war," WikiLeaks founder Julian Paul Assange said of the documents. "The archive will change public opinion and it will change the opinion of people in positions of political and diplomatic influence."

The trove reportedly showed that civilian casualties are much higher than previously believed, that Pakistan’s police collude with the Taliban, and that the U.S. military may have a secret “hit” squad targeting suspected terrorists.

Since then, the U.S. media have widely reported that the documents hold few if any shocking revelations about the ground war. And President Obama himself said: “The fact is these documents don't reveal any issues that haven't already informed our public debate on Afghanistan.”

Yet U.S. officials seem hellbent on implementing a secret military idea to destroy WikiLeaks. They’ve detained a volunteer WikiLeaks editor at a New York airport for three hours and confiscated his cell phones, and have accused WikiLeaks editor Julian Paul Assange and his staff of having “blood on their hands” for for revealing U.S. sources in Afghanistan.

President George W. Bush’s former speechwriter and Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen calls Assange a "criminal" and now aggravates for U.S. authorities to charge him with violating the Espionage Act.

And Michigan Rep. Mike Rogers demagogues that suspected leaker Pvt. Bradley Manning, in military custody awaiting possible trial on 12 offenses, should be executed if found guilty of leaking classified documents -- an idea that's being called absurd.

These choreographed attacks on WikiLeaks follow recommendations by a senior Army analyst two years before the release of the “Collateral Murder” video.

Senior Analyst Michael D. Horvath wrote in a counterintelligence investigation of WikiLeaks that the group’s “center of gravity” – its sources’ trust -- could be damaged or destroyed if leakers were identified, prosecuted, forced out of their jobs or exposed. The classified document was published on WikiLeaks’ website.

Since the release of the damning video in April, Americans have witnessed WikiLeaks sources or employees identified, prosecuted and exposed.

In recent weeks, the admittedly confrontational Assange seems to have tempered his remarks in press outings. The man who likes “crushing bastards” says it is not his intention to judge the validity of America’s wars, only that they be waged humanely. He's smart and correct to say that.

But in a nation where the listless media provide anemic counterbalance to the “official” line, WikiLeaks is demanding accountability from those who claim to be working in our interests.

Despite the drumbeat of fear, the full consequences of the release of the 91,000 documents won’t be known for years.

What Americans now have to ask themselves is, by pursuing WikiLeaks, is the military serving the country's best interests -- or its own?