Another article supportive of the 9/11 Truth Movement is published in a mainstream academic journal:
“Is Infiltration of ‘Extremist Groups’ Justified?” International Journal of Applied Philosophy 24:2, pp. 153-168. (Fall 2010). By Kurtis Hagen, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, SUNY Plattsburgh. (Yes. That would be me.)
Website for the International Journal of Applied Philosophy: http://secure.pdcnet.org/pdc/bvdb.nsf/journal?openform&journal=pdc_ijap
Unfortunately the article is not freely available, but here are some highlights:
that groups that espouse such theories ought to be infiltrated and undermined by government agents and allies. While some may find this proposal appalling (as indeed we all should), others may find the argument plausible, especially if they have been swayed by the notion that conspiracy theories (or a definable subset thereof), by their nature, somehow or another, do not warrant belief. I will argue that Sunstein and Vermeule’s proposal not only conflicts with the values of an open society, but is also epistemically indefensible. In making my case, I will adopt their favored example, counter-narratives about 9/11. (p. 153)
response to [the issue of molten metal] is to suggest that it is not necessary to assume that the columns actually melted in order to explain the collapse. But the issue here is not at all about explaining the collapse. It is about the multifaceted independent evidence that there was in fact a large amount of melted steel (or iron). But how can that be? How can the official story account for that? And yet a common counter-narrative does account for it: Molten iron is the byproduct of a thermite reaction. So, on the theory that thermite of some kind was used to help bring down the towers (and building 7), molten iron is to be expected. Indeed, when comparing video of thermite reactions with video of the orange liquid substance flowing from the South tower shortly before its collapse, the similarity is striking. This is direct prima facie evidence of the use of thermite. But it is the combination of this kind of prima facie evidence with scientific studies documenting significant quantities of iron-rich spheres in the dust, and so on, that makes casual or flippant denials inappropriate. (p. 165, footnote 21)
, to which interested readers are hereby directed. (p. 163)
(end of quotations from the article)
I have also written a second paper criticizing the Sunstein article that is currently under review at another philosophy journal. In addition, I have written a review of DRGs book, Cognitive Infiltration, that will be published this summer in Florida Philosophical Review (this one will be freely available on-line).
However, despite pleas for fair consideration, both “Is Infiltration of ‘Extremist Groups’ Justified?” and my second critique were refused peer review at the Journal of Political Philosophy, the journal in which the Sunstein article appeared.