Comment by stephc_int13

I've read both this paper and the original Seymour Hersh article.

I found the abundance of details a bit weird, to be honest, but not enough to discount the credibility of the thesis.

On the other hand, this paper is poorly constructed, mostly using straw man techniques and sleight of hands to discredit the original paper.

I think it's doing the opposite of what it is trying to achieve, adding free publicity on top.