Linkbait title.

Or Wikileaks have been lying all the time.

Previous wikileaks statements make a big show of saying how sources are anonymous by system design (i.e. "It is impossible to say if Bradley Manning was a source".).

Now they are saying that they think Swartz was a source? What is it. Is their system anonymous or not. If it is anonymous then this is non-news. If it is not then Wikileaks is broken

To me it just seems like them trying to get some more advertising by tying into this story, which is frankly disgusting.