This shit is blown way out of proportion. This guy looked himself up on Wikipedia, and found that someone had done his biography and included a statement saying he was a suspect in the death of president Kennedy. Now everyone is in an uproar about it, questioning the credibility of the website and the information there.

Hmmm, lemmee see. Here we have an online encyclopedia. We're not talking Britannica, which has years of research behind it. This one is strictly online, with articles written by anyone that feels the need to tell the world about a particular subject. They can be written and edited by ANYONE.

Translation - the information is not reliable, was never meant to be viewed and sourced as reliable. Anyone with half a brain should be able to figure this one out. Anyone with any kind of experience with the Internet knows to be leery of anything they read on the Internet, that all the information you can find should be independently verified if the information is important to the individual reading it. Hell, even Britannica has a disclaimer on their website, because they know it is impossible to guarantee the information will be 100% accurate. It should go without saying, but because we live in a litigious society it has to be said at every keystroke.

So why all the fuss? Some are even suggesting that because of this the site is irresponsible and should be taken down. I think the news agencies are being irresponsible for giving the 'story' more hype than is warranted. There are a lot of people on the Internet willing to deface websites if they can, and now more people will know how easy it is to mess with this website, and they will have their hands even more full than they have had until now.