WikiLeaks and Julian Assange- A Threat to National Security?

I just found this infographic on digg.com about censorship on the internet:

What most interests me here is the last image: Why are they censoring the internet? There seems to be three major motives: (1) Censoring to maintain traditional social values, (2) Censoring to maintain political stability, and (3) Censoring to maintain national security.

The U.S. has been placed in the "Censoring to maintain national security" category. This is very fitting considering the recent debate over whether the government should be censoring WikiLeaks.

The argument is quite clear: Do WikiLeaks pose a national threat? If so, we should censor them. But if not, censoring WikiLeaks is infringing on freedom of speech. An article, "Harvard Law Reviews WikiLeaks Censorship," examines the case.

The following quote is very relevant to some of our class discussions: "Benkler explains, “The political attack on WikiLeaks as an organization and on Julian Assange as its public face was launched almost immediately upon release of the cables. Their defining feature was to frame the event not as journalism, irresponsible or otherwise, but as a dangerous, anarchic attack on the model of the super-empowered networks of terrorism out to attack the U.S.”

So, it is clear that from the beginning, the government tried to frame WikiLeaks in a negative light. Then, main stream media started an echo effect:  "Immediately after top U.S. officials falsely framed WikiLeaks as a terrorist organization engaged in an attack on America, the main stream media picked up on the false framing and ran with it. Benkler shows commentator after commentator, on all the main stream media outlets, began echoing the 'WikiLeaks hurts America' theme."

Julian Assange has now attained celebrity status. He is thought of as a hero to some, a terrorist to others. The media had a large role to play in the way in which WikiLeaks and Julian Assange was framed. 

I believe this was an attempt by the government to justify censoring WikiLeaks. By protraying WikiLeaks as terrorist-like activity (a very extreme accusation), they were able to garner mass distrust of the site. Therefore, people were content with the censorship. 

I think the biggest question that results from all of this is: How do we know when something threatens national security? Where do we draw the line between freedom of speech and terrorist activity?