It's shocking to read the user reviews and realize that many of these individuals had not done a minute worth of research themselves. It's very easy to pick up a book, with no foreknowledge of any sort, and take all the "facts" for granted. An interesting thing occurs with this book and the reader, when you dissect the simplest of fragments of evidence, and put them in retrospect.

I'll admit, I may differ from an average reader of this book in the sense that I would not approach it casually, nor openly. At the very beginning, the book lists details of the "hijackers" check-ins into the airport. Very random details are given, indeed most of the information is superfluous. A fundamental point that the book fails to mention is that nearly half of the hijackers have been found in Saudi Arabia, or Pakistan, or Iran, and none have a spec of history in connection with any terrorist organization. But the most disgusting thing about the fact is, that if these hijackers were on those planes, and if the planes had collided and exploded upon impact with the towers, than, undeniably, they should all be deceased. How is it then, that these hijackers can be traced halfway across the world?

My last example for this review is the alleged stabbings of some passengers and attendants in the plane. An audio recording, released by the FBI to the families of the deceased, presents the voice of Betty Ong, explaining that she, and 2 other of fellow employees had been stabbed and could not enter the cockpit. What is my argument? A young women, and two of her friends had been stabbed. The situation in the plane is hostile, but she, is extremely, frighteningly, and observably casual, but stumbling with uncertainty. As tough as an individual may be, no one would sound as if he is reading off a script when making an emergency call about being stabbed, presumably bleeding to death. Search the recording for yourself.

We have a powerful search tool in our homes; the computer. Research is quick and simple. Even in the very beginning of the book, these and other important uncertainties surface. I suggest for any reader of this book to also buy "911 Commission Report: Omissions And Distortions." In this way, you will be able to judge between the truths and half truths.
2/5.

The report was censored & omits anything the government does not want you to know. Even the co-chair of the commission admits that it's full of lies.

If you want to read this fictional account of what happened on 9/11, why buy the book? You can download the entire report for free.

The formatting is incorrect for the Kindle Edition. Paragraph spacing is off and there are missing spaces between sentences on every single page.

Spaces are missing between sentances, sometimes appearing in the middle of words. Footnotes appear in the middle of sentances, and titles or chapter heading are placed ramdomly throughout the text. The formatting problems are indicative that quality is not an issue for this publisher (MobileReference.)

Being new to the whole "Conspiracy theory" possibility regarding 9/11, I thought I would disspell some of the myths regarding 9/11 by reading this book. I guess I was wrong for attempting to do so. First, and probably most blatant is that WTC7 isn't even mentioned in the book. Yeah, you heard right, the only steel framed structure in the history of the world to come down exclusively by "fire and debris falling from WTC1" wasn't even mentioned, which makes you think...why? Secondly, the hi-jackers of the flights are named with full knowledge that BBC and ABC both had articles on their websites showing 6 out of these 19 men alive. Thirdly and finally, it is assumed that a plane hit the Pentagon, however there is no video or other positive identification images available to the public to confirm such an act took place as described. 5 frames were released from a security cam in 2006. All I have to say is that if that is conclusive that a plane hit the Pentagon, then Americans are as dumb as everyone else says we are. I could go on and on with other examples, but I thought I would keep it brief.

2004's "The 9/11 Commission Report" is the product of an extensive and exhaustive bipartisan investigation into the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. It captures the facts, timelines, and backstory as it was known to that point in time, and does so in a remarkably readable fashion. It is a tremendous unclassified resource on both the events of 9/11 and the failure of the U.S. Government to detect and defeat an unprecented terrorist attack on the U.S. Homeland.

The book is divided into a series of chapters, detailing the events of 9/11 before backtracking to discuss at length the looming threat of militant Muslim terrorism as exemplified by al-Qaeda. The report discusses the evolution of U.S. counterterrorism policy in response to the building threat from al-Qaeda, and why it was ineffective in defeating the "Planes Plot." Finally, the report offers recommendations on how to do better next time.

Inevitably, the 9/11 Commission Report is now a little dated. Our better acquaintance with al-Qaeda, based on years of intelligence work and combat in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other locations, has filled in some of our missing knowledge on that organization, as have al-Qaeda's own media releases. The recommendations for fixes to the workings and interactions of the intelligence and law enforcement communities have been implemented in whole or part. Institutional inertia and the competing requirements of supporting the ongoing global war on terrorism have detracted from what the Commission may have envisioned as an endstate for the overall counterterrorism community.

Perhaps also inevitably, the intensely partisan nature of the political debate over the prosecution of the global war on terrorism has kept controversial the events of 9/11. "The 9/11 Commission Report" is highly recommended as a necessary addition to that debate, and as a tremendous tool for future historians.

2004's "The 9/11 Commission Report" is the product of an extensive and exhaustive bipartisan investigation into the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. It captures the facts, timelines, and backstory as it was known to that point in time, and does so in a remarkably readable fashion. It is a tremendous unclassified resource on both the events of 9/11 and the failure of the U.S. Government to detect and defeat an unprecented terrorist attack on the U.S. Homeland.

The book is divided into a series of chapters, detailing the events of 9/11 before backtracking to discuss at length the looming threat of militant Muslim terrorism as exemplified by al-Qaeda. The report discusses the evolution of U.S. counterterrorism policy in response to the building threat from al-Qaeda, and why it was ineffective in defeating the "Planes Plot." Finally, the report offers recommendations on how to do better next time.

Inevitably, the 9/11 Commission Report is now a little dated. Our better acquaintance with al-Qaeda, based on years of intelligence work and combat in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other locations, has filled in some of our missing knowledge on that organization, as have al-Qaeda's own media releases. The recommendations for fixes to the workings and interactions of the intelligence and law enforcement communities have been implemented in whole or part. Institutional inertia and the competing requirements of supporting the ongoing global war on terrorism have detracted from what the Commission may have envisioned as an endstate for the overall counterterrorism community.

Perhaps also inevitably, the intensely partisan nature of the political debate over the prosecution of the global war on terrorism, along with the fascination in some quarters with a variety of exotic conspiracy theories, have kept controversial the events of 9/11. "The 9/11 Commission Report" is highly recommended as a cure to some of that partisan debate and controversy, and as a tremendous tool for future historians.

Philip Zelikow often defends illegality in the quest of empire, so its no surprise that Philip Zelikow's 911 Commission report, which he authored, is a mythological masterpiece, a complete web of lies, based upon lies, with virtually all citations in the footnotes being nothing more than bare allegations made in top secret "interviews". I suppose that "interview" means "waterboarding", and as allah knows, you can get anybody to say anything when they think you're drowning them.

When I read the "9/11 Commission Report", I did something few people did. Every time I saw a footnote, I went to the back and read the footnote to see if it supported the facts claimed in the text. Sometimes the footnote was peripherally related - it was "sorta" relevant, but many times the footnote simply did not support the key "fact" being claimed in the text. This was done in many ways. One way it is done is by making a factual claim in the text, along with other statements irrelevant to the main fact, and when you look at the footnotes, the factual claims aren't referenced at all, instead the footnote relates only the irrelevant text. The second way Zelikow lies in his footnotes is by making one claim in the sentence or paragraph, and then the footnote says something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. For example, on page 86 - Zelikow (trying to revise history and ignore things like, well, the Iran Contra scandal) makes the statement that "The CIA's number one customer is the president of the United States, who also has the authority to direct it to conduct covert operations." It cites footnote 64. When you turn to page 477 and read footnote 64, the cite is to United States Code Section 413, WHICH IS ABOUT CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT TO FORCE THE PRESIDENT TO REVEAL ILLEGAL ACTIVITY. Whaa? It's a bald faced lie to claim Section 413 stands for presidential authority to conduct covert ops.

And on and on and on. Zelikow fills the footnotes with unverifiable references and irrelevant references, I suppose to make it "look scholarly". It's almost as if he had Ann Coulter making his footnotes. "Facts" in text are supported by footnotes which are anything but "facts", such as popular books (usually right wing) written after 9/11, top-secret "interviews" which can't be cross-checked, citations to non-public (uh, do I mean secret?) documents, or cites to documents that the average person cannot find without a lot of work. For example, my handwritten notes regarding the footnotes on page 477 of the 9/11 Commission Report shows that of the "facts" alleged on page 86: 9 are to "official reports"; 9 are to "pop literature"; 25 are from secret "interviews"; 5 are cites to "laws or statutes" (and I've already shown how Section 413 was falsely attributed); 5 are to "executive orders" (not law, in my opinion, but presidential "decrees" from King George), and only 3 were from "testimony" - which I suppose means sworn testimony, under penalty of perjury (but that might not be true - don't forget that King George and Dick Cheney refused to give sworn testimony and instead were interviewed together by the commission behind closed doors, and nobody from the commission was allowed to take notes or record the interview). That means that only 6 percent of the co-called "facts" referenced on page 477 were based on sworn testimony, and almost all would be inadmissible in court since it violates the "best evidence" rule. Perhaps a court would allow more in - but the point is made - the "facts" in the 9/11 Commission report are thinly supported - the book is a sham.

Philip Zelikow, as the director of the 9/11 Commission (or gatekeeper) was the actual author of almost all of the 9/11 Report. He is more likely a perp than a unbiased party, since, he was a security advisor to Condi Rice regarding Al Queada and as such, should have been INVESTIGATED for his failures, not put in charge of the investigation. Other oddities abound. Zelikow is a student and expert on "mythology" (his thesis in college was on creating public myths). Zelikow was an administration insider whose area of expertise is the creation and maintenance of "public myths" thought to be true, even if not actually true. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_D._Zelikow
We all know that he controlled what the Commission did and did not analyze, then limited the scope of the Commission's inquiry so that the overwhelming majority of questions about 9/11 remained unasked (see http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Philip_D._Zelikow
and http://911blogger.com/node/3418 ). Zelikow is arguably the single most responsible person in covering up the truth about 9/11. Zelikow is believed to be the principal author of the final drafts, and its his horribly crappy fiction that makes it "read like a thriller". Yah Zelikow, It can't be ignored: your fiction is abysmal, "it was a dark and stormy night" kind of crap. But that's what's so disturbing - somebody is putting a fictitious spin on what should be a "REPORT" - so it becomes a "STORY" - actually, the 9/11 Commission Report is more than a story - it's an attempt at modern myth building. From the spooky scary Islam guys to the bizarre physics lessons on tower collapse to the huge section which tells us "what to do in the future" (which should be called the "Project for a New Century Lite"), the entire book is crafted with the end in sight: the glorious heroic saga of a sleeping giant savagly blind sided, and the NYPD and FDNY heros who died so you and I can be free.

Now don't get me wrong - I don't know what happened on 9/11, but you won't find anything in this book but a bizarre fantasy-land story - which sounds a lot like a report a cop writes when he's trying to cover his tracks...

Zelikow, as a virtual a member of Bush's cabinet, was horribly conflicted and can't be trusted. Not only was he talking to Karl Rove throughout the Commission investigation, but he was also giving talks about catastrophic terrorism BEFORE the 9/11 attacks. Zelikow also wrote, in "Foreign Affairs", pub. Nov-Dec 1998, an article called "Catastrophic Terrorism: Imagining the Transformative Event" - One "Transformative event" he discussed therein was the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, which he went on to "imagine" what would have happened had it succeeded, which sounds suspiciously like what actually did happen. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that kind of premeditation typically seen as an important clue which prosecutors use to identify criminals? And this guy is the key man writing the 9/11 report? And people wonder why so many Americans believe in the 9/11 truth movement.
See, as well:
http://free71.wordpress.com/2007/10/09/self-inflicted-wound-911-attacks-and-zelikow/
And later, despite blockbuster sales for the 9/11 report, Zelikow later told the Washington Post he was alarmed by the concurrent spread of "conspiracy theories" about the attacks, which he described as pathogens which would destroy his carefully crafted myth:
"Our worry is when things become infectious, as happened with the [John F. Kennedy] assassination," Zelikow says. "Then this stuff can be deeply corrosive to public understanding. You can get where the bacteria can sicken the larger body." (1)
To "Dr." Zelikow, the truth is bacteria. And if you read the 9/11 Commission report, and then do some research, you'll see that the "bacteria" are winning. The "truthers" make some very good points regarding lies about time lines, and the bizarre fact that the ones who supposedly screwed up on 9/11 (if you believe the Report) all got promoted. Something very odd here.

The fruit from this poisonous tree has spread far. The "War on Terror," er, I mean on Afghanistan, oh, I meant Iraq...or is it now Iran? Pentagon black ops budgets and 3.1 trillion missing, Space commands move to encircle the world with killer satellites, the Patriot Act gutting the constitution, contracts awarded to Halliburton to build detention campss, surveillance society and the Telecom Scandal, SPP and Nafta, Cafta, etc. It all answers the question about who would have done it, and what they had to gain. It's empire boys and girls. Corporatist empire. That's who benefitted from 9/11 by billions and billions of dollars. My guess? Al quaeda is a false front enemy created by the CIA to fill the "global enemy gap" created after the Berlin wall fell down. A nameless, faceless, endless global boogy man army. And you kids fell for it.

As David R. Griffin said this was meant to be a thorough report, but now seeing it is a 568 page 'book' that starts with..

"TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, dawned temperate and nearly cloudless in the eastern United States..."

and going through the Table of Contents that reads like a university assignment done the night before, I don't need to read it to know it is a blatant coverup.

I mean that opening sentence they are kidding right? They have got to be kidding - "The night was sultry"

If this was indeed a serious investigation it would have started on September 12th, been given an unlimited budget and access to people (under oath) & information (uncensored), and produced a ~20,000 page report covering in minute detail what went wrong and why, and what is changing to ensure it never happens again. Not a coffee table book for a bit of bed-time reading. Geez even Lewinksy got a budget of $40 million dollars to determine if she blew the president. This investigation of the most monumental and devastating attack on the heart of America which finally started 441 days afterwards was originally budgeted a paltry $3 million dollars.

I don't need to read this 'book' to remind me of this quote by Bill Hicks..

"Go back to bed, America, your government has figured out how it all transpired. Go back to bed America, your government is in control. Here, here's American Gladiators. Watch this, shut up, go back to bed America, here is American Gladiators, here is 56 channels of it! Watch these pituitary retards bang their ____ing skulls together and congratulate you on the living in the land of freedom. Here you go America - you are free to do what we tell you! You are free to do what we tell you!"

This is the definitive summary account of the attacks on 9/11, Al Qaeda's activities prior to 9/11, the U.S. government's response to Al Qaeda and recommendations moving forward.

First, echoing many reviewers--this is one of the most well written and readable government reports in history. The mass of facts are presented logically and flow smoothly. Secondly, the report is written fairly and in a bipartisan way (as opposed to the televised portions of the 9/11 Commission which seemed bitterly partisan and grandstanding). If you want to know the facts about 9/11 to the best of our knowledge, this is a must read (along with "The Looming Tower" by Lawrence Wright). Reading the account of the events of September 11, 2001, even over 6 years later, still sent chills down my spine. After reading this, I also recommend seeing the movie "United 93," about the flight that fought back.

A very interesting read indeed. Forget the conspiracy theorists, they would actually want you to believe that everyone in Washington is in on the coverup. Do you realize how hard it would be to coverup something of this magnitude if 20 people knew about it much less the number the conspiracy theorists would have you believe? So what happened? Bush call all the committee members into the oval office and ask them "Can you guys keep a secret?" Get real. Interesting book, the timelines add substance to it. The breakdown of communication and lack of preperation that day are mind numbing and this book helps fill in the why? factor. Read it for yourself then decide. It is definitely worth the [...] pricetag.

The purpose of the 9-11 report is to "investigate the 'facts and circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001'." In pursuing this objective, the 9-11 Commission sought to be "independent, impartial, thorough, and nonpartisan." The Commission states that its
purpose is not to assign individual blame, and indeed, it doesn't. It is a unique piece of literature, historical yet not far enough removed from the actual events to really call it history in the traditional sense. It's not written for entertainment, yet it is fascinating nonetheless: the report almost reads like a spy novel as it traces the movement of the 9-11 conspirators, where they traveled, how they slipped in and out of the country, and how close some of them got to being captured. It gives you insights on how our government does, and doesn't, work, and describes how the numerous government agencies interact and, more often than not, fail to interact. It seeks to find the reasons why the attack succeeded, blaming everyone and no one, it seems, in the process. The 9-11 report leaves no doubt that it was written by a bi-partisan commission that refuses to lay the blame on individuals but instead lays it on institutions and processes.

The first chapter describes what happened in the air that morning, and from there, the report discusses the rise of Bin-Laden and Al Qaeda, the rise of counterterrorism activities in the US (touching on several departments, including the CIA and FBI), and on to how the 9-11 commission believes the attacks were planned and carried out. It then covers the actual events of September 11, 2001, describing in some detail how the first-responders handled this crisis and some of the shortcomings they had to deal with. Finally, the book addresses the ensuing war in Afghanistan (briefly) and makes recommendations on global strategy and reorganization within the US Government, esp. in the intelligence community. Throughout the report, the commission shoots down a number of rumors that were popular during the writing of the book, such as members of the Saudi family leaving the country while all flights were grounded, and one of the terrorists (Mohamed Atta) meeting with an Iraqi diplomat in Prague.

What I found particularly disturbing in this book was how easy the 9-11 terrorists entered and exited the country, and how easy it was for them to find people to assist them in finding a place to live, worship, etc.. I was also amazed at how easily money flowed from Al Qaeda to the 9-11 conspirators, and even more amazed at how easily they could have been caught yet weren't.

One of the biggest assets within the 9-11 report is also its biggest drawback: the book has hundreds of footnotes, and while most of these simply identify a source (say, a book or a person interviewed), many provide additional information about the topic discussed in the text. Many of these latter types of footnotes, I felt, needed to be in the body of
the main text and not hidden in the back of the book.

Recommendation: Highly recommended if you have any interest at all in knowing what happened before, during, and after September 11, 2001.

As it is non fiction catagory it would be hard to comment though after reading the report I now would reclassify it as fictional account on how kerosene can weaken 200,000 tons of construction steel to the point that the buildings collapsed! Also totally missing is any explanation why WTC7 came down.

Or any explanation where are the engines in the Pentagon attack?

Unfortunately, I am not sure how else to describe the report other than... well... garbage. I hate to say it but there are too many holes and it does not hold up to scrutiny.

Although it had a good story to tell and made popular by the government and media, it is just that- a story that does not hold up to the facts. I was hoping that it would provide more insight into the events on 9/11 but it left me asking all kinds of questions especially about WTC7, evidence of thermite, omitted testimony of eyewitnesses, and the testimony discrepancies between Cheney and Mieta.

I am deeply disappointed that I wasted my money on this. I gave it 2 stars because it did a least grab my attention and provided some good references in the back.

I'd better declare first that I'm not a conspiracy theorist (I favour cock-up theory any day) and I work in the airline business.

I also have a friend who works for United who lost colleagues that day.
Or maybe she's another part of the Neo-Con-Judo-Zionist conspiracy and she's lying to me. A tad unlikely methinks - she's a Buddhist from Taiwan.

50 tonnes of fuel + 70 tonnes of aircraft travelling at ca.450mph.
You don't need a degree in Engineering to work out what will happen:

From the first chapter reading the accounts of what happened to each individual flight and seeing the total confusion between ATC, the FAA, NORAD etc is frightening. They didn't know what to do, they didn't know what was happening. With transponders turned off, it was impossible to track those aircraft accurately. Personally I've flown enough jumpseat trips that it still fills me with dread to think what was happening up front.

Later chapters on Bin-Laden and the rise of Al-Qaeda and Muslim extremism (mainly due to their corrupt self-serving leaders) are well presented.
Richard A. Clark's efforts to thwart Al-Qaeada are also explained.

Buy the book, it's a good read. Though I still can't believe they didn't put an Index in it.

Sadly, to digress a little, the unjustified invasion of Iraq subsequently has been a complete disaster. Saddam ran a secular society - you could drink alcohol and socialise with women. He was the Arab Caligula, only interested in himself and his personal empire. But Saddam had nothing to do with the 9-11 attacks. Nothing. So much goodwill towards the US has been lost due to Iraq and the Neo-Con (not my Taiwanese friend .-)) led invasion.

As for the Conspiracy theorists on this page, to be honest I'm quite shocked when I found this review page. I've honestly never read so many self-serving attempts to cling to straws in my life, like this "Loose-Change" stuff. It's an insult to those who died that day. And I'm not American!

Listen, do you really really think a government could pull off a stunt like this?
Have you ever been to the Middle East? Have you ever listened to the hatred there is towards the USA? Albeit very often from the same people who tell you next sentence they have a relative in New York and want to go and join them!

The seeds of 9-11 were sown years ago. Yes, of course there are inaccuracies (there always are in disaster reporting) but there is no conspiracy.

I know no conspiracy theorists in Air Traffic Control or the airline business. Get real - it happened.

And sadly many of us in Europe thought "no surprise it was US Domestic flights, US Airport security is a total farce".

[...]
Over and out