ViriiK]] 

 So vote on a consensus on a questionable and "corporate watchdog" site 
The problem is that you are giving more validity to a 1 person managed website that is hardly corroborated than a credible site like Global Security, Federation of American Scientists, CNBC, Yahoo!.  That website does not belong on the site.  I would accept controversy but the problem is that it needs to be corroborated.  You can't put a website that accuse Dick Cheney of a secret plot against the President based on a site like Rense for example.  You want to support lunancy?  This isn't your soapbox to do so