I'm not a 9-11 truther, but am interested in conspiracy theories and studied the ones around 9-11 at length. Many are of course nonsense or simply poorly informed, but there were many sincere inquirers who raised troubling questions about everything from forensic incongruities to the bizarre chain of unlikely coincidences in the official narrative. I mostly turned away from the subject after the NIST reports emerged, though I was interested to note that some people were still researching the topic and expected to learn more from time to time as computational and informational capabilities improved, just as we have learned more about many historical events, such as the eruption of Vesuvius.
On a preliminary read, this seems a thoughtful and cogently argued review of the literature. However I don't agree with all of the author's conclusions by any means, notably his allegation that Osama bin Laden was killed in late 2001; if so, military and political strategists have constructed a very elaborate narrative of failure to cover up their success eg https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/S%20Prt%20111-3...
While doubting some of the assertions, I agree with the author's general contention that academic inquiry has failed by allowing 9-11 to be investigated as a purely criminal enterprise while accepting some well-known and flaws and widely-acknowledged lacunae therein (eg the exact nature of the US-Saudi relationship in relation to these matters). A historic and strategic reassessment is long overdue.
It's also possible that the publication of a paper like this might arise out of other states' desire to strategically distance themselves from or redefine their relationships with the US, and what they know or believe about the events of 9-11 could be secondary to the desire to change their own national conversation on the topic.
On a preliminary read, this seems a thoughtful and cogently argued review of the literature. However I don't agree with all of the author's conclusions by any means, notably his allegation that Osama bin Laden was killed in late 2001; if so, military and political strategists have constructed a very elaborate narrative of failure to cover up their success eg https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/S%20Prt%20111-3...
While doubting some of the assertions, I agree with the author's general contention that academic inquiry has failed by allowing 9-11 to be investigated as a purely criminal enterprise while accepting some well-known and flaws and widely-acknowledged lacunae therein (eg the exact nature of the US-Saudi relationship in relation to these matters). A historic and strategic reassessment is long overdue.
It's also possible that the publication of a paper like this might arise out of other states' desire to strategically distance themselves from or redefine their relationships with the US, and what they know or believe about the events of 9-11 could be secondary to the desire to change their own national conversation on the topic.