I agree with you 100 Not only is the footnoting unclear in some spots there s also missing footnotes It says that the documents were later proven to be frauds and mentions new FBI techniques but does not give any support to this Not a bit of backup While it may not be the intent it makes it seem like the author is slanting the point of view and just saying that the document was a forgery without proof because that s they want the story to end The only information he footnotes on the document are either opinions or state that they can t prove it s a forgery I shouldn t have to go to another site to find the proof and information on this which I haven t done yet so I m not yet sure it exists if it does it should be footnoted here if not there should be no forgery conclusion just speculation based on other evidence Kelly