Editor's note: The following is mirrored from its source at
with
hypertext link extensions and annotations assembled in References by David
Ratcliffe with permission of the author.
Educated in the classics, philosophy, literature, theology, and sociology, Ed
Curtin teaches sociology at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts. His writing
on varied topics has appeared widely over many years. He tries to write as a
public intellectual for the general public, not as a specialist for a narrow
readership.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Why I Don't Speak of 9/11 Anymore
By Edward Curtin
Journal of 9/11 Studies
Letters, September 2016
Tuesday, September 11, 2001, was a non-teaching day for me. I was home when
the phone rang at 9 A.M. It was my daughter, who was on a week's vacation with
her future husband. "Turn on the TV," she said. "Why?" I asked. "Haven't you
heard? A plane hit the World Trade Tower."
I turned the TV on and watched a plane crash into the Tower. I said, "They
just showed a replay." She quickly corrected me, "No, that's another plane."
And we talked as we watched in horror, learning that it was the South Tower
this time. Sitting next to my daughter was my future son-in-law; he had not
had a day off from work in a year. He had finally taken a week's vacation so
they could go to Cape Cod. He worked on the 100th floor of the South Tower. By
chance, he had escaped the death that claimed 176 of his co-workers.
That was my introduction to the attacks. Fifteen years have disappeared behind
us, yet it seems like yesterday. And yet again, it seems like long, long ago.
Over the next few days, as the government and the media accused Osama bin
Laden and 19 Arabs of being responsible for the attacks, I told a friend that
what I was hearing wasn't believable; the official story was full of holes. It
was a reaction that I couldn't fully explain, but it set me on a search for
the truth. I proceeded in fits and starts, but by the fall of 2004, with the
help of the extraordinary work of David Ray Griffin[1] and other early
skeptics, I could articulate the reasons for my initial intuition. I set about
creating a college course on what had come to be called 9/11.
But I no longer refer to the events of that day by those numbers. Let me
explain why.
By 2004 I was convinced that the U.S. government's claims (and The 9/11
Commission Report) were fictitious. They seemed so blatantly false that I
concluded the attacks were a deep-state intelligence operation whose purpose
was to initiate a national state of emergency to justify wars of aggression,
known euphemistically as "the war on terror." The sophistication of the
attacks, and the lack of any proffered evidence for the government's claims,
suggested that a great deal of planning had been involved.
Yet I was chagrined and amazed by so many people's insouciant lack of interest
in researching arguably the most important world event since the assassination
of President Kennedy. I understood the various psychological dimensions of
this denial, the fear, cognitive dissonance, etc., but I sensed something else
as well. For so many people their minds seemed to have been "made up" from the
start. I found that many young people were the exceptions, while most of their
elders dared not question the official narrative. This included many prominent
leftist critics of American foreign policy. Now that fifteen years have
elapsed, this seems truer than ever. So with the promptings of people like
Graeme MacQueen,[2] Lance deHaven-Smith,[3] T.H. Meyer,[4] et al., I have
concluded that a process of linguistic mind-control was in place before,
during, and after the attacks. As with all good propaganda, the language had
to be insinuated over time and introduced through intermediaries. It had to
seem "natural" and to flow out of events, not to precede them. And it had to
be repeated over and over again.
In summary form, I will list the terms I believe "made up the minds" of those
who have refused to examine the government's claims about the September 11th
attacks and the subsequent anthrax attacks.
1. Pearl Harbor. As pointed out by David Ray Griffin and others, this term
was used in September 2000 in The Project for the New American Century's
report, "Rebuilding America's Defenses"[5] (p.51). Its neo-con authors
argued that the U.S. wouldn't be able to attack Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.
"absent some catastrophic event - like a new Pearl Harbor." Coincidentally
or not, the film Pearl Harbor, made with Pentagon assistance and a massive
budget, was released on May 25, 2001 and was a box office hit. It was in
the theatres throughout the summer. The thought of the attack on Pearl
Harbor (not a surprise to the U.S. government, but presented as such) was
in the air despite the fact that the 60th anniversary of that attack was
not until December 7, 2001, a more likely release date. Once the September
11th attacks occurred, the Pearl Harbor comparison was "plucked out" of
the social atmosphere and used innumerable times, beginning immediately.
Even George W. Bush was reported to have had the time to allegedly use it
in his diary that night. The examples of this comparison are manifold, but
I am summarizing, so I will skip giving them. Any casual researcher can
confirm this.
2. Homeland. This strange un-American term, another WWII word associated with
another enemy -- Nazi Germany -- was also used many times by the neo-con
authors of "Rebuilding America's Defenses."[6] I doubt any average
American referred to this country by that term before. Of course it became
the moniker for The Department of Homeland Security, marrying home with
security to form a comforting name that simultaneously and unconsciously
suggests a defense against Hitler-like evil coming from the outside. Not
coincidentally, Hitler introduced it into the Nazi propaganda vernacular
at the 1934 Nuremberg rally. Both usages conjured up images of a home
besieged by alien forces intent on its destruction; thus preemptive action
was in order.
3. Ground Zero. This is a third WWII ("the good war") term first used at
11:55 A.M. on September 11th by Mark Walsh (aka "the Harley Guy" because
he was wearing a Harley-Davidson tee shirt) in an interview on the street
by a Fox News reporter, Rick Leventhal. Identified as a Fox free-lancer,
Walsh also explained the Twin Towers collapse in a precise, well-rehearsed
manner that would be the same illogical explanation later given by the
government: "mostly due to structural failure because the fire was too
intense." Ground zero -- a nuclear bomb term first used by U.S. scientists
to refer to the spot where they exploded the first nuclear bomb in New
Mexico in 1945 -- became another meme adopted by the media that suggested
a nuclear attack had occurred or might in the future if the U.S. didn't
act. The nuclear scare was raised again and again by George W. Bush and
U.S. officials in the days and months following the attacks, although
nuclear weapons were beside the point. But the conjoining of "nuclear"
with "ground zero" served to raise the fear factor dramatically.
Ironically, the project to develop the nuclear bomb was called the
Manhattan Project and was headquartered at 270 Broadway, NYC, a few short
blocks north of the World Trade Center.
4. The Unthinkable. This is another nuclear term whose usage as linguistic
mind control and propaganda is analyzed by Graeme MacQueen in the
penultimate chapter of The 2001 Anthrax Deception.[7] He notes the
patterned use of this term before and after September 11th, while saying
"the pattern may not signify a grand plan ... It deserves investigation
and contemplation." He then presents a convincing case that the use of
this term couldn't be accidental. He notes how George W. Bush, in a major
foreign policy speech on May 1, 2001, "gave informal public notice that
the United States intended to withdraw unilaterally from the ABM Treaty";
Bush said the U.S. must be willing to "rethink the unthinkable". This was
necessary because of terrorism and rogue states with "weapons of mass
destruction." PNAC also argued that the U.S. should withdraw from the
treaty. A signatory to the treaty could only withdraw after giving six
months notice and because of "extraordinary events" that "jeopardized its
supreme interests." Once the September 11th attacks occurred, Bush
rethought the unthinkable and officially gave formal notice on December
13th to withdraw the U.S. from the ABM Treaty. MacQueen specifies the many
times different media used the term "unthinkable" in October 2001 in
reference to the anthrax attacks. He explicates its usage in one of the
anthrax letters -- "The Unthinkabel" [sic]. He explains how the media that
used the term so often were at the time unaware of its usage in the
anthrax letter since that letter's content had not yet been revealed, and
how the letter writer had mailed the letter before the media started using
the word. He makes a rock solid case showing the U.S. government's
complicity in the anthrax attacks and therefore in the Sept 11th attacks.
While calling the use of the term "unthinkable" in all its iterations
"problematic," he writes, "The truth is that the employment of `the
unthinkable' in this letter, when weight is given both to the meaning of
this term in U.S. strategic circles and to the other relevant uses of the
term in 2001, points us in the direction of the U.S. military and
intelligence communities." I am reminded of Orwell's point in 1984: "a
heretical thought -- that is, a thought diverging from the principles of
Ingsoc -- should be literally unthinkable, at least as far as thought is
dependent on words." Thus the government and media's use of "unthinkable"
becomes a classic case of "doublethink." The unthinkable is unthinkable.
5. 9/11. This is the key usage that has reverberated down the years around
which the others revolve. It is an anomalous numerical designation applied
to an historical event, and obviously also the emergency telephone number.
Try to think of another numerical appellation for an important event in
American history. The future editor of The New York Times and Iraq war
promoter, Bill Keller, introduced this connection the following morning in
a NY Times op-ed piece, "America's Emergency Line: 911". The linkage of
the attacks to a permanent national emergency was thus subliminally
introduced, as Keller mentioned Israel nine times and seven times compared
the U.S. situation to that of Israel as a target for terrorists. His first
sentence reads: "An Israeli response to America's aptly dated wake-up call
might well be, `Now you know.'" By referring to September 11th as 9/11, an
endless national emergency became wedded to an endless war on terror aimed
at preventing Hitler-like terrorists from obliterating us with nuclear
weapons that could create another ground zero or holocaust. It is a term
that pushes all the right buttons evoking unending social fear and
anxiety. It is language as sorcery; it is propaganda at its best. Even The
Journal of 9/11 Studies uses the term that has become a fixture of public
consciousness through endless repetition. As George W. Bush would later
put it as he connected Saddam Hussein to "9/11" and pushed for the Iraq
war, "...we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that
could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." All the ingredients for a
linguistic mind-control smoothie had been blended.
I have concluded -- and this is impossible to prove definitively at this time
because of the nature of such propagandistic techniques -- that the use of all
these words/numbers is part of a highly sophisticated linguistic mind-control
campaign waged to create a narrative that has lodged in the minds of hundreds
of millions of people and is very hard to dislodge. It is why I don't speak of
"9/11" any more. I refer to those events as the attacks of September 11, 2001.
But I am not sure how to undo the damage.
Lance deHaven-Smith puts it well in Conspiracy Theory in America.
The rapidity with which the new language of the war on terror appeared and
took hold; the synergy between terms and their mutual connections to WWII
nomenclatures; and above all the connections between many terms and the
emergency motif of "9/11" and "9-1-1" -- any one of these factors alone,
but certainly all of them together - raise the possibility that work on
this linguistic construct began long before 9/11.... It turns out that
elite political crime, even treason, may actually be official policy.
Needless to say, his use of the words "possibility" and "may" are in order
when one sticks to strict empiricism. However, when one reads his full text,
it is apparent to me that he considers these "coincidences" part of a
conspiracy. I have also reached that conclusion. As Thoreau put in his
underappreciated humorous way, "Some circumstantial evidence is very strong,
as when you find a trout in the milk."
The evidence for linguistic mind control, while the subject of this essay,
does not stand alone, of course. It underpins the actual attacks of September
11 and the subsequent anthrax attacks that are linked. The official
explanations for these events by themselves do not stand up to elementary
logic and are patently false, as proven by thousands of well-respected
professional researchers from all walks of life -- i.e. engineers, pilots,
architects, and scholars from many disciplines.[8] To paraphrase the prescient
Vince Salandria, who said it long ago concerning the assassination of
President Kennedy, the attacks of 2001 are "a false mystery concealing state
crimes."[9] If one objectively studies the 2001 attacks together with the
language adopted to explain and preserve them in social memory, the "mystery"
emerges from the realm of the unthinkable and becomes utterable. "There is no
mystery." How to communicate this when the corporate mainstream media serve
the function of the government's mockingbird (as in Operation Mockingbird)
repeating and repeating the same narrative in the same language; that is the
difficult task we are faced with.
Words have a power to enchant and mesmerize. Linguistic mind-control,
especially when linked to traumatic events such as the September 11th and
anthrax attacks, can strike people dumb and blind. It often makes some
subjects "unthinkable" and "unspeakable" (to quote Jim Douglass quoting Thomas
Merton in JFK and the Unspeakable[10]: the unspeakable "is the void that
contradicts everything that is spoken even before the words are said.").
We need a new vocabulary to speak of these terrible things.
References
1. David Ray Griffin Books
* The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush
Administration & 9/11 (Northhampton, MA: Interlink Publishing, 2004),
view all editions in libraries
* The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, A Critique of
the Kean-Zelikow Report (Northhampton, MA: Interlink Publishing,
2004), view all editions in libraries
See Also: The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-Page Lie
* Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics & Other
Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory (Northhampton, MA:
Interlink Publishing, 2004), view all editions in libraries
* 9/11 and American Empire, Volume 1: Intellectuals Speak Out, D.R.
Griffin & P.D. Scott editors (Northhampton, MA: Interlink Publishing,
2006), view all editions in libraries
* Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11: A Call to Reflection and
Action (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006), view all
editions in libraries
* 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter To congress And The Press
(Northhampton, MA: Interlink Publishing, 2008), view all editions in
libraries
* The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-up & the Expose
(Northhampton, MA: Interlink Publishing, 2008), view all editions in
libraries
* The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why The Final
Official Report About 9/11 is Unscientific and False (Northhampton,
MA: Interlink Publishing, 2010), view all editions in libraries
* 9/11 Ten Years Later -- When State Crimes against Democracy Succeed
(Northhampton, MA: Interlink Publishing, 2011), view all editions in
libraries
* Cognitive Infiltration - An Obama Appointee's Plan to Undermine the
9/11 Conspiracy Theory (Northhampton, MA: Interlink Publishing, 2011),
view all editions in libraries
* Bush & Cheney -- How They Ruined America and the World (Northhampton,
MA: Olive Branch Press / Interlink Publishing, December 2016), and
DRG: Why I Wrote Another 9/11 Book, Journal of 9/11 Studies, September
2016
David Ray Griffin Articles
* 9/11 and the American Empire: How Should Religious People Respond?,
lecture at Univ. Of Wisconsin, Madison, April 18, 2005.
* 9/11, American Empire, and Christian Faith, lecture at Trinity
Episcopal Church, Santa Barbara, CA, March 25, 2006
* 9/11: The Myth and the Reality, lecture at Grand Lake Theater in
Oakland, CA, March 30, 2006
* 9/11 and Nationalist Faith: How Faith Can Be Illuminating or Blinding,
lecture at Iliff School of Theology in Denver, CO, October 19, 2007
* What Really Happened on September 11?, DRG interview by Sam Vaknin,
September 7, 2008
* Was America Attacked by Muslims on 9/11?, OpEdNews.com, 2008
2. Graeme MacQueen received his Ph.D. in Buddhist Studies from Harvard
University and taught in the Religious Studies Department of McMaster
University for 30 years. While at McMaster he became founding Director of
its Centre for Peace Studies, after which he helped develop the B.A.
program in Peace Studies and oversaw the development of peace-building
projects in Sri Lanka, Gaza, Croatia and Afghanistan. Graeme MacQueen was
a member of the organizing committee of the "Toronto Hearings" held on the
10th anniversary of 9/11 and is co-editor of "The Journal of 9/11 Studies"
-- a peer-reviewed, electronic-only journal covering research related to
the events of September 11, 2001.
See Also by Graeme MacQueen:
* Attorneys Hear Eyewitness Evidence of 9/11 Explosive Destruction from
Dr. Graeme MacQueen (44:04), presented at Justice in Focus: 9/11 |
2016, A Weekend Symposium, The Cooper Union, NYC, September 11, 2016.
Note: The youbube film of this presentation was still available in
Ocotber 2016. As of March 2017 it has been taken down. The above link
is to a mp3 recording of that film. Sound quality is intermittently
very poor in the first 3:10 min:secs and is fine from then on.
* War On Terror Or War On Democracy? The Physical Intimidation Of
Legislatures, text of talk at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario,
Truth and Shadows, November 18, 2015
* The October 22, 2014, Ottawa Shootings: Why Canadians Need A Public
Inquiry, A Report for Democracy Probe International, October 3, 2015;
and follow-up: "We need a public inquiry into the 2014 Ottawa
shootings," Hamilton Spectator, October 21, 2016
* The 2001 Anthrax Deception, The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy,
Clarity Press, 2014.
* Graeme MacQueen: A Brief Overview of Some of the Eyewitness
Statements, The Toronto Hearings on 9/11: Uncovering Ten Years of
Deception, September 2011
3. Lance deHaven-Smith is a Professor Emeritus in the Reubin O'D. Askew
School of Public Administration and Policy at Florida State University. He
received his B.A. degree from the University of Georgia, summa cum laude,
and his M.A. and Ph.D. from The Ohio State University. A former President
of the Florida Political Science Association, Dr. deHaven-Smith is the
author of over a dozen books on topics ranging from religion and political
philosophy to Florida government and politics. His books on Florida
include: Government in the Sunshine State (co-authored with David
Colburn); Florida's Megatrends (also co-authored with David Colburn); The
Florida Voter; Environmental Concern in Florida and the Nation; The 1998
Almanac of Florida Politics (with Tom Fiedler); The 2000 Almanac of
Florida Politics (also with Tom Fiedler); and The Atlas of Florida Voting
and Public Opinion. Published in 2005, The Battle for Florida: An
Annotated Compendium of Materials from the 2000 Presidential Election
analyzes the disputed 2000 presidential election. His most recent book is
Conspiracy Theory in America, published in hardback by the University of
Texas Press in 2013 and paperback in 2014.
See Also:
* Conspiracy Theory in America extract from the book, OffGuardian.org,
Sp 4, 2016
* Conspiracy Denial in the U.S. Media, Journal of 9/11 Studies, Letters,
March 2013
* Beyond Conspiracy Theory / SCADs - Patterns of High Crime in American
Government, explores the conceptual, methodological, and practical
implications of research on 'state crimes against democracy' (SCADs),
American Behavioral Scientist, February 2010
* State Crimes Against Democracy
* The Toronto Hearings on 9/11 Uncut - Day 1 Lance DeHaven-Smith,
PressForTruth.ca, 2011
4. Thomas ("T.H.") Meyer was born and resides in Basel Switzerland, where he
is the founder and publisher of Perseus Verlag, and editor of the monthly
journals Der Europäer and The Present Age. He is involved in
Anthroposophical work as a free lance writer, publisher, lecturer and
teacher of Rudolf Steiner"s legacy of Spiritual Science. Anthroposophy is
a discipline of research as well as a path of knowledge, service, personal
growth and social engagement. Introduced and developed by Rudolf Steiner,
it is concerned with all aspects of human life, spirit and humanity's
future evolution and well-being. "The world seems to be standing within a
demonic storm that threatens to overwhelm it", states Meyer at the outset
of In The Sign Of Five: 1879-1899-1933-1998-Today, The Five Spiritual
Events, Tasks and Beings of the First Half of the Age of Michael (East
Sussex, United Kingdom: Temple Lodge Press: 2015). Building on Rudolf
Steiner's anthroposophy, Meyer's career as a writer and researcher has
dealt with this question from a variety of standpoints. By illuminating,
for his contemporaries, the spiritual struggles of key individuals in the
anthroposophical movement who might otherwise have fallen into complete
obscurity, and by shining a clear light on the unfolding events of our
time, Meyer's life's work has been an effort to continually remind us of
the central task of our epoch: the epistemological struggle with evil. The
conscious recognition of this task is the crucial first step in meeting
this challenge of our time.
See Also:
* Reality, Truth And Evil - Facts, Questions and Perspectives on
September 11, 2001 (East Sussex, United Kingdom: Temple Lodge
Publishing, 2005); see book review at Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance
for 9/11 Truth.
5. REBUILDING AMERICA'S DEFENSES
Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century, September 2000
by Donald Kagan & Gary Schmidtt, Project Co-Chairmen, and Thomas Donnelly,
Principle Author (Available in and formats). As stated in the
paper's Introduction,
The Project for the New American Century was established in the spring
of 1997. From its inception, the Project has been concerned with the
decline in the strength of America's defenses, and in the problems
this would create for the exercise of American leadership around the
globe and, ultimately, for the preservation of peace.... At present
the United States faces no global rival. America's grand strategy
should aim to preserve and extend this advantageous position as far
into the future as possible. There are, however, potentially powerful
states dissatisfied with the current situation and eager to change it,
if they can, in directions that endanger the relatively peaceful,
prosperous and free condition the world enjoys today. Up to now, they
have been deterred from doing so by the capability and global presence
of American military power. But, as that power declines, relatively
and absolutely, the happy conditions that follow from it will be
inevitably undermined.
Preserving the desirable strategic situation in which the United
States now finds itself requires a globally preeminent military
capability both today and in the future. But years of cuts in defense
spending have eroded the American military's combat readiness, and put
in jeopardy the Pentagon's plans for maintaining military superiority
in the years ahead. Increasingly, the U.S. military has found itself
undermanned, inadequately equipped and trained, straining to handle
contingency operations, and ill-prepared to adapt itself to the
revolution in military affairs. Without a well-conceived defense
policy and an appropriate increase in defense spending, the United
States has been letting its ability to take full advantage of the
remarkable strategic opportunity at hand slip away.
With this in mind, we began a project in the spring of 1998 to examine
the country's defense plans and resource requirements. We started from
the premise that U.S. military capabilities should be sufficient to
support an American grand strategy committed to building upon this
unprecedented opportunity. We did not accept pre-ordained constraints
that followed from assumptions about what the country might or might
not be willing to expend on its defenses.
In broad terms, we saw the project as building upon the defense
strategy outlined by the Cheney Defense Department in the waning days
of the [George Herbert Walker] Bush Administration. The Defense Policy
Guidance (DPG) drafted in the early months of 1992 provided a
blueprint for maintaining U.S. preeminence, precluding the rise of a
great power rival, and shaping the international security order in
line with American principles and interests. Leaked before it had been
formally approved, the document was criticized as an effort by "cold
warriors" to keep defense spending high and cuts in forces small
despite the collapse of the Soviet Union; not surprisingly, it was
subsequently buried by the new administration.
6. 13 occurrences of the word "homeland" can be found in "REBUILDING
AMERICA'S DEFENSES" by performing a search inside the version.
7. THE 2001 ANTHRAX DECEPTION, The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy
by Graeme MacQueen, Clarity Press, 2014.
In the author's words, the book sets out to prove five key points:
1. The anthrax attacks were carried out by a group of perpetrators, not
by a lone wolf;
2. The group that perpetrated this crime included deep insiders within
the US executive branch;
3. This group of perpetrators was linked to or identical with, the
perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks;
4. The anthrax attacks were the result of a conspiracy meant to help
redefine the enemy of the West, revising the global conflict framework
from the Cold War to the Global War on Terror;
5. The establishment of the Global War on Terror, to which the anthrax
attacks contributed, enabled the US executive branch to reduce the
civil liberties of people in the US and to attack other nations.
Domestically and externally, these events were also used to weaken the
rule of law.
See Also:
* Book Review by Ed Curtin, Global Research, December 2014
* Book Review by Tom Easton, Lobster Magazine, Issue 69 - Summer 2015
* The Perpetrators of the 2001 Anthrax Attacks Are Still At Large, text
of Graeme MacQueen interview by Lars Schall, LarsSchall.com, Feb 4,
2015
8. Along with the Journal of 911 Studies, see Architects & Engineers for 9/11
Truth, History Commons compilation of the Complete 911 Timeline, Peter
Dale Scott's The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, And The Future Of America,
and books by David Ray Griffin, especially:
* The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-up & the Expose
(Northhampton, MA: Interlink Publishing, 2008), view all editions in
libraries
* 9/11 Ten Years Later -- When State Crimes against Democracy Succeed
(Northhampton, MA: Interlink Publishing, 2011), view all editions in
libraries
9. See annotated transcript of Vincent Salandria's The JFK Assassination: A
False Mystery Concealing State Crimes talk at the Coalition on Political
Assassinations Conference, 20 November 1998, in Dallas, Texas.
10. An activist and leading theologian of the nuclear age, James Douglass
wrote a unique exposition in his book, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He
Died and Why It Matters. For an incisive review of the book see John
Schuchardt's The Karma of Untruthfulness -- JFK and the Unspeakable,
published April 2016 in The Present Age.
https://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/Sep11attacks-Curtin-2016.html (hypertext)
https://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/Sep11attacks-Curtin-2016.txt (text only)
https://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/Sep11attacks-Curtin-2016.pdf (print ready)