WIKIPEDIA is not factual. It never has been. With Wikipedia it is a source of information. Where Wikipedia archives information. In this topic the very fact it is mentioned by a database means something exists. Because it exists, it is therefore upto yourself to draw any picture, by connecting the dots of original claims, as an independent researcher. Lots of stuff exists it doesn't make it factual or genuine, only by it having a claim of existence for any archiving. Of course there are far too many idiots today who don't research any further then the Wiki, and they blindly swallow whatever has been served. You haven't provided much in the way of debunking, where carbon dating would date, again not factual, but it could rule out modern forgery, and obviously there is the source, with it a whole trail of leads of how it came into being which your post hasn't followed in any real research. Apart from its mention. There would be an original manuscript of the speech, recorded and archived. If not the notion is fiction because as a judge of character the people promoting it are bias.

Of course with such a claim it would be vehemently denied because of what it implies. Undoubtedly any Wiki would have to refute it. But without ever hearing about such a document. Perhaps there is some truth. The founding fathers were masons not semites.