I was check the sha1sum of the script downloaded directly from bitaddress.org and compared that to it's github repo, and the sha1sum's do not match.  Taking a very quick look at the scripts revealed that the github version contained the line "window.Crypto_scrypt      MIT License" whereas the one downloaded directly from bitaddress.org did not.  Now I'm not saying something malicious is going on, but the scripts do not match.  Maybe someone was updating it right when I checked?  I only looked at the first page or two of the scripts for differences.  I assume there's more changes than just the license comment at the beginning.   Anyone have any ideas whats up?

The file sizes are different as well...

Version directly from bitaddress.org:
1d5951f6a04dd5a287ac925da4e626870ee58d60  index.html  445062 bytes (this matches what the site says the correct sha1 is, and what people on here have verified it to be)
bc20a5368bce817fbe61ef8d6063a2a660000be4  bitaddress.org.html 507233 bytes (from the hithub repo. No hits on any search engines for bc20a5368bce817fbe61ef8d6063a2a660000be4)