[Bigh4u2]

"Using the hypothesis established from examining the Bush memos, it becomes possible to create a virtually flawless replica "

Totally wrong.

Look at the numbers, such as the '7', used in the original and the typed line underneath.

The '7''s are different. The 'new 7' being more slanted and slightly larger (bolder).

Also in the heading,'MEMORANDUM FOR 1st, Lt. George W. Bush', the 's' character is also different.

Not by much, but it is different.

The spacing, although very close, is not and 'exact' duplication of the memo.

This author may have found a typeface 'similar' to what the memo's used, but by making on side by side comparison, he seems to have fallen for the same trap as the the memo author, and that is he used a 'computer' for the final analysis, which would have skewed the results.

The biggest problem is that he doesn't take things like the 'date' of the memo, or the fact that the person, who should have been the 'typist' for Killian has already disputed them as being 'fakes'.

[Bigh4u2]

One more thing.

Even if the documents were typed on a typewriter, which I don't believe they were, the Signature is very suspicious.

When I sign my name, it is in a continuous movement and generally flowing.

Looking At Killians signature, it appears to be 'jagged' throughout the entire process.

Similar to what a 'forger' would do trying to duplicate someone else's signature.

The 'jaggedness' usually appears because the forger cannot produce a flowing movement, because of the foreigness (being unfamiliar) of the name.