Deletion of The CIA and September 11 (book)(2nd)

Comment: This is currently the best article on the ''9/11 books for deletion list''.  Arguments about not meeting  policy are not applicable, as there currently is no such policy.  Most of the The CIA and September 11 (book)#Response|Response section seems to be very critical of the book, rather than promoting or advertising it.  As for the references not being about the book or being a pov fork, I was only able to check six of them.  All of the references were about the book, some fully, others partially.  One of them just listed its position on the best-seller list, which is what it was cited for.  All of the references I checked, with exception to the best-seller reference, were critical of the views expressed in the book.  While the references seem to push the pov that 9/11 conspiracy theories are part of a "Panoply of the Absurd", the article does not seem to follow either that pov or a pov promoting the contents of the book
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)

Comment: The press coverage passes , establishing notability
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)

Comment: Nobody seems to be disputing the fact that this book is notable, verifiable, and passes .  If you think the article is POV, the appropriate reaction is to edit it - not to nominate it for deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)

Comment: the article has multiple references to show notability and plenty of press coverage so it passes  and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:V)

Comment: per nomination, and as not meeting terms of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)