And? How is that relevant?
I really quite loathe this line of argument that the source or even the intentions behind a probably factual statement should be taken into account when evaluating the truthfulness of the statement. It's textbook ad hominem, literally argument to the person.
PH has a demonstrable problem with child porn on its service. I don't care if it's the US government, a different government, a religious fundamentalist, a competitor, a lobbying group, or some random anonymous internet user surfacing that problem so long as it's verifiably true.
Intention factors into evaluation of the speaker, not the content. To do otherwise is to discard important, actionable facts because you dislike the speaker. In other words, it discards logic.