My brain kind of just gave up at the end. I understand it's a report, but it got a bit repetitive and long-winded. A lot of info regarding the terrorists and what to do about terrorism. I wish there would have been more information surrounding the attacks themselves. It would be nice to have maybe an updated version of sorts to what has actually been done now, as you can tell that America kind of dropped the ball before 9/11.

I really don't know how to review this as a book. It's more of a record of proceedings, compiled into a report form. And yet it's a pivotal document in the history of the US over the last couple of decades, and it felt wrong not to read it.

As a result, it's dry as dust. I won't lie about that. What it does do is explain what was going on with the CIA, the FBI, and everyone else. I know conspiracy theorists think they're poking holes in it, but I believe it a lot more than I do the report on Kennedy's assassination. This was a much smaller reported group of conspirators, and even then if the right people had gotten the right information it might have gone very differently.

I don't think that it makes any sense to disregard the findings of the Commission as far as the events leading up to 9/11 go. I became more convinced of this rather than less as I read through the pages and pages of documents and appendices. And I hope that others read this with a really open mind as well, taking the actual findings of the commission into account instead of assuming that conspiracy theorists know everything.

My wife bought this for me shortly after it came out--I believe in 2004. I put off reading it for various reasons, one being that I thought it might be like the Warren Commission Report on the JFK assassination, which I found comprehensive but one of the driest, longest, and most challenging reads ever. Another is the emotional impact. Although I live on the West Coast, and don't know anyone directly that perished in the attacks I remember that day so well. Irony that I started reading this the same year as our country's withdrawal from Afghanistan. I don't think how that was accomplished will bode well for either our country, or theirs.

The report is actually well written, and structured. Starting with a history of base of Islamic terrorism that is as informative as any books I've read on the subject. Counterterrorism efforts in the US preceding 911 is the next section, including threats and attacks by Al Qaeda and their affiliates on American targets throughout the world.

What is now known about the terrorist's planning and preparations are laid out, their actions on the day of attack, and our first responders, military and FAA response. All presented in an easy to understand, and unemotional way. Another section deals with immediate US military response to the attack. Finally the report finishes with analysis of our countries failings in preventing the attacks, and recommendations for changes.

Most of it I found highly readable and interesting. When it came to the final sections, I tended to lose interest. Some issues that need change were related to technologic communications improvements regarding first responders equipment--which seemed pretty obvious. Other changes regarding shifts in management and bureaucracy--some of those seemed like what people today have been calling 'word salad'. Granted legal rules prohibited some members from various US intelligence agencies from sharing information prior to 9/11, however creating new levels of bureaucracy to deal with anything doesn't ever seem like an effective way of handling problems.

Overall a great summary of what led to 9/11, and the actual events. You might want to skip the last two or three sections unless you like diving into the weeds. The one major improvement would be more schematics and drawings regarding the WTC. There are a few in the report, but more would have helped create a better understanding of events.

Self contradictory and over dramatic. I felt I knew less on the topic after reading it. It reads more like pulp fiction than an official account.

I know there were a couple of one stars on this book but I thought this was a masterpiece, and I thought it was very interesting and everyone should be able to read it at least once in their life because it’s important to read about the mistakes of humanity! That being said, I still enjoy the story about flight 93 and how they kicked the terrorist butts! Shows the courage and cowardice of the human race

From Follett: In November 2002 the United States Congress and President George W. Bush established by law the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, also known as the 9/11 Commission. This independent, bipartisan panel was directed to examine the facts and circumstances surrounding the September 11 attacks, identify lessons learned, and provide recommendations to safeguard against future acts of terrorism.This volume is the authorized edition of the Commission's final report.

That was some dry listening. Not like a mouthful of saltines dry, more like a nice pretzel with the occasional dab of garlic dill dip dry.

Thorough and detailed review of 9/11 and essential reading for understanding that slice of history. It certainly didn't cover everything it could have and many of the recommended policies either didn't happen, failed, or fizzled. It is what it is though, and it's a fantastic information dump with some genuinely engaging portions considering it's a government report.

This is an exceptional piece of investigative journalism. Whichever government pages actually wrote this thing for the committee should all be doing articles for The New Yorker. There isn’t a single element of the 9/11 story which isn’t covered here. And if it’s not in the text it’s for sure in the 116 pages of notes post-text. Just an incredibly impressive collection of information thoroughly detailing an incredible tragedy we never saw coming.

There are many books now on 9/11, but I would recommend this as thee starting place for anyone interested in really understanding the immense scope of the attack, from inception to execution, from the origin of Al-Qaeda to the start of the war in Afghanistan, from the financing of 20 terrorists traveling in and out and all around this country to their final movements into motels the night before the attacks.

For sure the account is dense and some of the information appears in a seesaw sequence which feels disjointed. There’s probably too much detail about the radios emergency personnel had the day of and who heard what transmission when; and, there’s probably not enough detail about the individual experiences of ordinary Americans whose whole way of living was suddenly, permanently incinerated (for that I highly recommend Garrett Graff’s “The Only Plane in the Sky”). But really is there any truly perfect way to capture a story which defies imagination, a cruelty which saw our bravest men and women go up into burning towers as they were preparing to come down, and a sinister plot five years in the making which evaded detection or exposure at the dawn of the new age of information? In my opinion, the 9/11 Commission Report is about as well constructed as we could ask or expect. And it is a searing reminder/warning of what can happen when our security agencies don’t work together and when the hubris of our leadership doesn’t measure up against the imagination and determination of our foes.

AN ANALYSIS OF THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT

Asked and answered is the central insight of The 9/11 Commission Report. Richard Holbrooke posed the question: “How can a man in a cave outcommunicate the world’s leading communications society?” (Pp. 377.) [This is the most vital of all the components of the attack and this war we find ourselves in. It is a war about ideas, the future, and hope. And these are uniquely human properties best understood via the framework of language and communication.] The Commission answered: “…four kinds of failures: in imagination, policy, capabilities, and management. (pp.339) The latter three spill down from the first. And in reading the step-by-step account of the attack reported in the Commission’s book—the salient Imagination, or lack of, belongs to the 43rd President of the United States, George W. Bush.

Contrary to what the administration has repeatedly said in framing its defense--
the terrorists don’t, or in this case didn’t, have to be right just once. In fact, they have to have so many contingencies break in their favor to be successful in an attack of the magnitude of 9/11-- that it seems nearly impossible that they did succeed! In other words, that attack was a sort of “perfect storm.” The report specifies what is necessary in order for terrorists to succeed: leadership; communication; personnel; training; security; intelligence; travel; money; coordination; timing and time itself. Any misstep or bad luck and the spectacular attack of 9/11 would not have happened. That it did happen is not so much a case of the systems and capabilities not being sufficient—they were; but rather the mindset (imagination) of the President.

The report details just how remarkable the intelligence information and its significance must be in order to reach the status of headlining the PDB (presidents daily brief). On August 6th, 2001 the terrorist threat had crossed that threshold and screamed: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US.” This followed intelligence reports with these declarations: Qaeda activity “had reached a crescendo”; something “very,very,very,very” big was about to happen; “Bin Ladin Planning High-Profile Attacks.” [the threat] could not “get any worse”. The President pooh-poohed it as “historical.”

I am familiar enough with Bush’s mannerisms that I can picture him reading that PDB, looking up from his desk and saying “Yeah” and then proceed to tell anyone and everyone just how it "really” is—and get ready for his vacation back at the ranch. Historical in his mind was likely defined as anything left over from the previous president. He had his own ideas (or the ideas of his advisors) about what was, or was not, a threat; and that’s the way it is! I cannot help but think that in all likelihood, had Clinton still been President—the attack would have been foiled. Clinton took al Qaeda as real and the most menacing foreign threat facing America. He would have responded differently to “The System Blinking Red”. [I have no idea how Al Gore would have responded.]

The point is this: the attack of 9/11 succeeded because the ability to respond to a “system blinking red” was not inherent in President Bush. He did not take the threat seriously. He lacked the imagination to see it and to take any additional steps to counter it. Period. And now—the threat has changed and he can’t see that.

All that has been done since September of 01 has done two things. First, made the repeat of that attack impossible, (Yes, in that regard we are safer. Steps have been taken that have undoubtedly sufficiently disrupted the necessary components that made it possible for domestic jet airliners to be hijacked and used as missiles to attack targets in America.) That won’t happen again. And second, America’s foreign policy has significantly increased the hatred towards America throughout the world. That hatred spawns individuals willing to wage an unconventional war against America. The number of such individuals has greatly increased. In that regard, we are much less safe.

We have been outcommunicated again. I can think of nothing that provokes seething hatred more than the violation of a person or country’s “personal space.” President Bush failed to communicate to the world that the invasion of Iraq was justified. That has been subsequently verified by the facts on the ground. He is trying to will reality to fit a clear distortion of it. Put simply – you cannot kill people and tell them it is for their own good. He is Osama bin Ladin’s best recruiter.

Imagination is necessary for two reasons. Firstly, to be able to see what a peaceful world would look like and just how to get there from here. And secondly, to be able to see the possibilities of the next threat.

A peaceful world cannot exist with a superpower that imposes its will on others. Compelling others into obedience, whether through force or manipulation cannot sustain peace. Human beings must come to their actions via self-determination, or sooner or later they will fight. That is the essence of freedom. President Bush sees himself as freedom’s champion, but does not even understand it – having had his world unfold before him without any impediments save himself. The accidental President quite simply isn’t capable of understanding a complex world. He can’t even imagine what it would be like to go hungry, much less … to use your imagination.

The next successful attack against America will be even more primitive than the last. It won’t be “weapons of mass destruction” attached to a missile or packed in a suitcase. It’ll be something simple that can’t be seen. Maybe just a few men with matches, or germs. All the reconfiguration of counterterrorism agencies won’t help. All the latest high-tech spy devices won’t detect it. No new fighter-jet or missile will be able to shoot it out of the sky. The only chance of stopping it is to change the world. Something that The 9/11 Commission Report seems to understand.

The accusation has been made that this Administration has used the threat of terrorist attacks to manipulate public opinion in its favor—to get your vote. [You need not look any farther than the Republican Convention.] After reading The 9/11 Commission Report there can be no other logical conclusion. The report states that the threat of attack is historical and omnipresent and specifically unknowable. In other words, Osama bin Ladin and others who now agree with him have been planning, will continue to plan, and will strike with what ever means they can, when and where they can, at targets that they believe will have the most impact. They are, and will always be, looking for opportunity. They declared war on America and mean it. UBL declared just that in his Fatwahs. The rationale that we can be safer because of announced threat level variations is fallacious because, as the report states—the threat is always there. It is both fluid and dynamic! What is needed to inhibit that threat is a constancy of people doing their jobs—always. I think 9/11 made that clear.

It is frustrating, but not surprising—that the Commission could understand how and why we were attacked, and speak to it so precisely—and then fail to name and hold accountable, the very person most responsible for the failure of imagination. It wasn’t Richard Clarke’s fault, or George Tenet’s. It wasn’t “the CIA’s” or the FBI’s. We don’t need a new National Intelligence Director and a National Counterterrorism Center. We need a new President, a new foreign policy, and new managers. Sufficient capabilities will flow from those.

MARK JABBOUR
September 2, 2004

This how to make propaganda when you have means to do so:
* Publish a report, alongside an encyclopedia of terrorism (Facts on File, 2002, 2007)
* No mention of Guantanamo Bay throughout the book.
* No mention of Abu Ghraib throughout the book.
* No mention of previous brutal interventions by the United States in the area that lead to an anti-west mentality throughout the region.

Some part of the report is about Islam, and the history of religion in the middle east, radicalization and Islamic thought. As an attempt to create/manufacture knowledge (aka Ideology) and open a way for Islamophobia. Overall this is a one-sided and racist view of the situation, published by "United State government national commission on terrorist attacks" and signed by a bunch of white men.

One of the chapters seems to try to answer an absorbed but typical question of "why do they hate us?" - The nature of the chapter and question is wrong. It's so unfortunate that some Americans get their cultural education about other parts of the world through crap like this. No wonder we have to deal with racism, Xenophobia, and Islamophobia.

Now if you feel bad that you looked at this book, don't immediately go and pick up "Messages to the World" by Bin Laden. I suggest you start with looking at works of Mark Lombardi, and maybe read "Interlock: Art, Conspiracy, and the Shadow Worlds of Mark Lombardi" that is influenced by "Interlock: The untold story of American banks, oil interests, the Shah's money, debts, and the astounding connections between them" by Mark Hulbert.

Mostly bureaucratic navel gazing and hand wringing, contains shockingly little analysis or explanation of the events that occurred on September 11, 2001.

What was left to read after it was hollowed-out to store my throwing-stars was substandard investigating, political jargon, and black flag waving.