Publication of what sites? Sorry, the question doesn't make complete sense. I assume you mean to ask 'are the documents published on these sites strategically important, and do they place people named in them at risk?'

WikiLeaks claims to take great pains at ensuring that sensitive information such as names are REDACTED from the published documents, therefore the question you pose is not very clear. The initial imposition of violence by the state puts everyone at risk, named or otherwise.

As for strategically important, one must ask for WHOM, and WHY. Is it strategically important for Hillary Clinton to steal credit card numbers of foreign dignitaries? Has anyone contacted her for comment?

I contend that is does not push it too far.  People already know where piplines exist, communications hubs, and Snake Anti-venom production laboratories exist.  Just because this information has now been widely disseminated does not bother me in the least.  You can look at google earth, and see the many piplines, and communication hubs, and all sorts of buildings.  You could even label the objects and then disseminate the information.

Personally, I don't ever plan on attacking anything.  My main objective is to get out of the way of warring forces, and to encourage transparency by coercive governments. If they have nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear by these disclosures of their activities.

Wikileaks is a very good thing as its doing far more to hold government accountable then the electorate.

Right now the media is too busy with Democratic 'outrage' concerning Obama's tax and unemployment proposal, and Obama has been distracting with his Mythbusters stint to avoid an honest address of the the disclosures. My guess is that he's trying to avoid alienating the youth vote by appearing as hostile to anti-war and pro-transparency supporters. Ironic since he's advocated for transparency.

Even Rush Limbaugh has been covering this Obama tax story day after day and ignoring the WikiLeaks fodder, namely the Hillary Clinton espionage evidence. He detests the Clintons, yet he's been silent about it as far as I've paid attention. Strikes me as odd.

It is as if the media and the established political parties have a silent agreement not to use the revealed information against one another, let alone to report on it accurately. Given this, I would strongly encourage the pro-liberty media to do what it can to report on the various facets of the leaks, particularly taking time to address the most heinous scandals, and addressing the noise of political rhetoric if it continues to threaten the innocent. This news needs to get out there.