Carefully timed means biggest impact, which means Wikileaks stays high profile, gets more funding, etc. There's nothing wrong with being a bit self serving if that results in an overall higher score on whatever your final criteria are.
Fine, but then one can't claim his philosophy has anything to do with "releasing everything without any consideration or censorship." He is de-facto censoring/holding back knowledge that he possesses, with a specific agenda in mind.
Yeah, like someone submitting stories at a certain time of day to HN instead of just when the idea hits them... oh sure, of course they would say "I thought you might find this interesting, that's all I'm doing here", but I'll feel secure in the knowledge that you'll show up to call out their "specific agenda".