Maybe I am inordinately cynical, but thus far I have seen nothing shocking in the most recent wikileaks document dump, this TPM article notwithstanding.
Is it really surprising that authoritarian, Sunni, Arab regimes would like the U.S. to do the dirty work of removing what they perceive to be as the Iranian and Shiite threat to the region? I would suggest that the fact of such support does not, in any way, improve the case for attacking Iran. The funny thing about authoritarian regimes is that they often do not reflect the opinions of their general publics nor are they repositories of great foreign policy wisdom. Their leaders have their own selfish interests at heart, interests that do not often reflect the best interests of the United States. This seems to me childishly obvious.
The other items noted by TPM -- that North Korea furnished Iran with missile technology, that Iran used the Red Crescent for improper ends during the last Israeli-Lebanon conflict, that the State Department wants foreign service officers to obtain information about their counterparts, and that diplomats traffic in gossip hardly rise to the level of shocking.
In short, unlike the disturbing (if already suspected) revelations from wikileaks regarding the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and the tactics associated with them, this seems to me to be a pretty hohum release thus far, even if it is an uncomfortable one from a diplomatic perspective for the Obama Administration.
Am I missing something? Or have I lived in DC too long?