Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission

Overview

"In the words of the commission's co-chairmen, this is the inside story of how the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States - more commonly known as the 9/11 Commission - managed to succeed against all odds in producing a report that made clear what went wrong and why." "The mandate of the 9/11 Commission was daunting and all-encompassing. In its investigation of the events leading up to and including September 11, 2001, the commission had to examine U.S. diplomacy, military policy, intelligence agencies, law enforcement,
... See more details below
Available through our Marketplace sellers.
Other sellers (Hardcover)
  • All (39) from $1.99   
  • New (4) from $14.00   
  • Used (35) from $1.99   
Close
Sort by
Page 1 of 1
Showing All
Note: Marketplace items are not eligible for any BN.com coupons and promotions
$14.00
Seller since 2007

Feedback rating:

(329)

Condition:

New — never opened or used in original packaging.

Like New — packaging may have been opened. A "Like New" item is suitable to give as a gift.

Very Good — may have minor signs of wear on packaging but item works perfectly and has no damage.

Good — item is in good condition but packaging may have signs of shelf wear/aging or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Acceptable — item is in working order but may show signs of wear such as scratches or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Used — An item that has been opened and may show signs of wear. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Refurbished — A used item that has been renewed or updated and verified to be in proper working condition. Not necessarily completed by the original manufacturer.

New
1st Edition, Fine/Fine Clean, tight & bright. No ink names, tears, chips, foxing etc. Price unclipped. ISBN 0307263770

Ships from: Troy, NY

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
  • Express, 48 States
  • Express (AK, HI)
$20.00
Seller since 2005

Feedback rating:

(169)

Condition: New
NY 2006 Hard cover First edition. 1st Edition 2006 New in new dust jacket. Gift Quality. Pristine. Immaculate. Fast Arrival. Brand New. Carefully packed in bubblewrap. 1st ... Edition 2006. Glued binding. Paper over boards. With dust jacket. 370 p. Contains: Illustrations. Audience: General/trade. Gift Quality. Pristine. Immaculate. Fast Arrival. Brand New. Carefully packed in bubblewrap. 1st Edition 2006. Read more Show Less

Ships from: Derby, CT

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Canadian
  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
  • Express, 48 States
  • Express (AK, HI)
$30.00
Seller since 2015

Feedback rating:

(6)

Condition: New
New stated first edition, first printing partial cloth hardcover and dust jacket in mint condition. Protective mylar cover. 1.5 x 9.48 x 6.56 Inches 384 pages

Ships from: Arlington, TX

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Canadian
  • International
  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
  • Express, 48 States
  • Express (AK, HI)
$45.00
Seller since 2015

Feedback rating:

(217)

Condition: New
Brand new.

Ships from: acton, MA

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
Page 1 of 1
Showing All
Close
Sort by
Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission

Available on NOOK devices and apps  
  • NOOK Devices
  • Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 NOOK 7.0
  • Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 NOOK 10.1
  • NOOK HD Tablet
  • NOOK HD+ Tablet
  • NOOK eReaders
  • NOOK Color
  • NOOK Tablet
  • Tablet/Phone
  • NOOK for Windows 8 Tablet
  • NOOK for iOS
  • NOOK for Android
  • NOOK Kids for iPad
  • PC/Mac
  • NOOK for Windows 8
  • NOOK for PC
  • NOOK for Mac
  • NOOK for Web

Want a NOOK? Explore Now

NOOK Book (eBook)
$11.99
BN.com price

Overview

"In the words of the commission's co-chairmen, this is the inside story of how the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States - more commonly known as the 9/11 Commission - managed to succeed against all odds in producing a report that made clear what went wrong and why." "The mandate of the 9/11 Commission was daunting and all-encompassing. In its investigation of the events leading up to and including September 11, 2001, the commission had to examine U.S. diplomacy, military policy, intelligence agencies, law enforcement, border and aviation security, and congressional oversight, as well as the immediate response to the terrorist attacks, while also investigating the lethal enemy al Qaeda." "The creation of the 9/11 Commission was blocked for months by the Bush administration, and after its inception in December 2002 the commission spent months mired in a series of controversies - the resignation of its first chairman, Henry Kissinger, and vice-chairman, George Mitchell; an inadequate budget; an extraordinarily polarized atmosphere leading up to the 2004 presidential election; the conflicting demands of various interest groups; the distrust of the victims' families; difficulties in obtaining access to highly classified documents and to al Qaeda detainees; and a media eager to record stumbles and gaffes. The obstacles were great, and the expectations for a blue-ribbon panel are never high - yet somehow the 9/11 Commission overcame everything that might have thwarted it and succeeded beyond anyone's greatest expectation, holding a series of hearings that riveted the nation, producing a unanimous and widely heralded report that became a national best seller, and issuing recommendations that led to the most significant reform of America's national security agencies in decades." The 9/11 Commission report slaked the national thirst for accountability. Here for the first time is the story of how the commission came together to produce its landm
Read More Show Less

Editorial Reviews

From Barnes & Noble
The September 11th Commission had a presidential mandate and congressional support, but it began its work under inauspicious conditions: resignations, heated political squabbles, an inadequate budget, and distrust from victims' families and the general public. From those troubling beginnings, co-chairs Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton worked hard to repair the damage; they presided over spirited hearings that riveted the nation's attention and crafted a report that won unanimous committee support and the nation's gratitude. In Without Precedent, these two veteran public servants reveal what went on behind closed doors.
James Bamford
Told in a dry, colorless style, like the report itself, the book offers little new information on the actual attacks, but provides a keyhole view of the commission’s bureaucratic war with a White House obsessed with secrecy and control.
— The New York Times
Bruce Hoffman
Without Precedent also reminds us why the 9/11 Commission set the gold standard for both transparency and impact: It overcame formidable odds and at times tremendous (though now mostly forgotten) invective and opprobrium from congressional leaders, media outlets such as the Wall Street Journal's editorial page and the New York Post's front page, New York City officials, members of less-prominent past national commissions on terrorism and even some of the same 9/11 family members who had lobbied so hard for the commission's creation in the first place. In this respect, Kean and Hamilton have written an essential guide for others who may someday find themselves appointed to serve on blue-ribbon panels and high-profile commissions.
— The Washington Post
Publishers Weekly
A re-creation of the inner workings of a government commission threatens to be a dry bureaucratic procedural, but the 9/11 Commission was so politically fraught that its story is compelling in its own right. Chairman Kean and vice-chair Hamilton detail the commission's fight with Congress for more money and time; its wranglings with the Bush administration to win access to witnesses and classified documents; its delicate relations with victims' families, who were its harshest critics and staunchest champions; its strategic use of public censure to wring concessions from recalcitrant officials; and the forging of a bipartisan consensus among fractious Republican and Democratic commissioners. Their tone is evenhanded and diplomatic, but some adversaries-NORAD, the FAA, House Republicans-get singled out as stumbling blocks to the investigation. The authors cogently defend the compromises they made and swat conspiracy theories about coverups, but critics unhappy with the commission's refusal to "point fingers" or its lukewarm resistance to White House claims of executive privilege may not be satisfied. The issues the commission wrestled with-official incapacity to prevent disaster, the government's use and misuse of intelligence, presidential accountability-are still in the headlines, which makes this lucid, absorbing account of its work very timely. Photos. (Aug. 15) Copyright 2006 Reed Business Information.
Library Journal
Former New Jersey governor Kean and former Indiana congressman Hamilton served as chair and vice chair, respectively, of the presidential commission investigating 9/11, which was reluctantly established by President Bush in 2004 and grudgingly funded by Congress. They now present an insiders' account of the commission and the many difficult obstacles it faced to meet its mandate. The military, diplomatic, and intelligence services were reluctant to provide needed materials. In addition, the news media followed the commission's every move, eager to report any misstep. Families of individuals killed in New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania pushed for a deeper investigation. And the commission worked during the highly partisan 2004 presidential elections. Despite these many difficulties, the ten-person group and its many staffers provided a fair, open investigation that highlighted flaws in American efforts to combat terrorism and made recommendations for reforms. The commission's report later became a best seller. Kean and Hamilton's account also includes the report card of the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, a private foundation dedicated to insuring that the commission's recommendations were implemented by Congress, as well as the commission's final recommendations for reform and a time line of its work. Rich in detail and well written, this book provides excellent insight into the operation of a high-profile governmental commission investigating a national tragedy. Recommended for all libraries. [See Prepub Alert, LJ 4/1/06.]-Stephen L. Hupp, West Virginia Univ., Parkersburg Copyright 2006 Reed Business Information.
Kirkus Reviews
A carefully nonpartisan examination of the events surrounding 9/11 and the government's response-or lack of response-to them. "The opportunity of the 9/11 Commission was to respond to a brutal attack on our democratic society with a demonstration of the value of democracy itself." So write onetime New Jersey governor Kean and Indiana congressman Hamilton, both of whom know the workings of high-level committee investigations and were appointed by President Bush after original heads Henry Kissinger and George Mitchell could not meet Senate ethics committee requirements. "We were set up to fail," Kean and Hamilton candidly remark; the 9/11 committee was given far too broad a mandate, too tight a deadline and too small a budget to do the job. It was also hampered by partisan politics from the start; the Republicans wanted the committee to disband well before the 2004 presidential election, and in all events, the committee was constituted in such a way to prevent subpoenas from reaching inside the White House. Still, built-in flaws and all, the committee set about doing its work as best it could, and it was surprised to discover the depth of detail that 9/11 families commanded ("Why was the CIPRIS system not used to track foreign students after it was recommended by the National Commission on Terrorism in 1998 and was so effective in trials?" one asked, referring to an interagency intelligence protocol). As is now well known, after examining a mountain of evidence, the committee found the intelligence community and government wanting. As readers will discover, the White House was unhappy with that result, constantly invoking executive privilege to evade still closer examination. Furthermore,Bush failed to act on most of the committee's carefully considered recommendations for averting another 9/11-which, Kean and Hamilton write in closing, is surely in the making. A valuable resource for those needing proof that the government machine could use a good overhaul. First printing of 150,000
From the Publisher
“Terrific. . . an incisive overview about how our country makes national security policy.”—Denver Post

“Compelling.... The issues the commission wrestled with–official incapacity to prevent disaster, the government's use and misuse of intelligence, presidential accountability–are still in the headlines, which makes this lucid, absorbing account of its work very timely.” —Publishers Weekly

“Captivating.... Candid... Kean and Hamilton disclose disturbing information about breakdowns at the FBI, CIA, FAA, military commands and the White House that made it easier for terrorists to mount their attacks.” —Philadelphia Star-Telegram

Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9780307263773
  • Publisher: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group
  • Publication date: 8/15/2006
  • Pages: 384
  • Product dimensions: 6.20 (w) x 9.30 (h) x 1.60 (d)

Meet the Author

Thomas H. Kean is a former governor of New Jersey (1982-1990) and from 1990 until last year the president of Drew University. He has served on numerous national committees and commissions and has worked tirelessly for over a quarter-century on behalf of a wide array of environmental and educational organizations. He lives in Bedminister, New Jersey. Lee H. Hamilton is president and director of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. From 1965 through 1999 he was a congressman representing Indiana's Ninth District. During his tenure, he was chairman and ranking member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs as well as the chair of the Joint Economic Committee and served on the Hart-Rudman Commission, whose 2001 report on national security first raised and examined the prospect of acts of terrorism against the U.S. prior to 9/11. He currently resides in Alexandria, Virginia.
Read More Show Less

Read an Excerpt

Without Precedent

The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission
By Thomas H. Kean

Knopf

Copyright © 2006 Thomas H. Kean
All right reserved.

ISBN: 0307263770

1

SET UP TO FAIL


[E]xamine and report upon the facts and causes relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, occurring at the World Trade Center in New York, New York, in Somerset County, Pennsylvania, and at the Pentagon in Virginia.

-- From Public Law 107-306, signed by President George W. Bush, November 27, 2002


We were set up to fail. The thought occurred to both of us as we prepared to meet for the first time on a cold day just before the Christmas season of 2002. The full 9/11 Commission would not meet for another month; this meeting would be just the two of us.

A thicket of political controversy lay ahead. The legislation creating the commission had been signed into law by President George W. Bush, after extended wrangling between Congress and the White House through the heated and often bitter midterm elections of 2002. We were scheduled to issue our final report in May 2004, just as the presidential election would be approaching full boil.

We had an exceedingly broad mandate. The legislation creating the commission instructed us to examine

(i) intelligence agencies; (ii) law enforcement agencies; (iii) diplomacy; (iv)immigration, nonimmigrant visas, and border control; (v) the flow of assets to terrorist organizations; (vi) commercial aviation; (vii) the role of congressional oversight and resources allocation; and (viii) other areas of the public and private sectors determined relevant by the Commission for its inquiry.

In other words, our inquiry would stretch across the entire U.S. government, and even into the private sector, in an attempt to understand an event that was unprecedented in the destruction it had wrought on the American homeland, and appalling even within the catalogue of human brutality.

The breadth of the mandate was exceeded by the emotional weight of 9/11: a singularly shocking, painful, and transformative event in American history that was, in many ways, ongoing. We stepped into moving streams: a congressional inquiry into the attacks was winding down; family members of victims were demanding answers to tough questions; the wounds of regions such as the New York and Washington areas were still fresh; and the nation was fighting a war against terrorism around the world, preparing to go to war in Iraq, and receiving periodic terror alerts at home.

In front of us, we knew, were provocative questions: Was 9/11 preventable? Who was the enemy who had perpetrated this attack? Why did they hate us? What had our government done to fight terrorism before 9/11? How did one assign accountability for 9/11? Were we safer than we were on September 11, 2001? What could we do to make the American people safer and more secure?

To answer those questions, we would have to review the most sensitive information in the United States government, talk to top officials in two administrations--one Republican, one Democratic--and conduct an exhaustive review of the facts. We would have to revisit painful events. And when we met for the first time, we were approaching this task with no infrastructure: no offices, no staff, no government security clearances that would allow us to view the necessary information, and a dramatically insufficient budget of $3 million.

Both of us were aware of grumbling around Washington that the 9/11 Commission was doomed--if not designed--to fail: the commission would splinter down partisan lines; lose its credibility by leaking classified information; be denied the necessary access to do its job; or alienate the 9/11 families who had fought on behalf of its creation. Indeed, the scenarios for failure far outnumbered the chances of success. What we could not have anticipated were the remarkable people and circumstances that would coalesce within and around the 9/11 Commission over the coming twenty months to enable our success.

But on December 18, 2002, we were starting without any blueprint for how to go forward. The clock had started ticking almost a month earlier, when President Bush signed the bill creating a 9/11 Commission. So we were, in fact, already running behind.


FALSE STARTS

The story of how the 9/11 commission was created and began its work is one of false starts.

The idea of forming an independent commission to look into the 9/11 attacks was first voiced in the Senate by Senators Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), and Robert Torricelli (D-N.J.) in October of 2001. Strong support emerged in the House, led by Representative Tim Roemer (D-Ind.), who was joined by Representatives Chris Shays (R-Conn.) and Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). But it would be more than a year before legislation creating the commission was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bush.

Part of the reason for this lapse in time was the work of a congressional inquiry into the 9/11 attacks that was conducted jointly by the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, and led by Senator Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and Congressman Porter Goss (R-Fla.). From February to December 2002--and particularly in public hearings in September and October--the Joint Inquiry of the Intelligence Committees shed light on some of the intelligence lapses that had preceded 9/11. Americans learned about how the FBI and CIA were hampered by an inability and a reluctance to share information; how two 9/11 hijackers known to the CIA had lived openly under their own names for a period of months in Southern California; how a memo originating from the FBI's Phoenix field office had suggested that the issue of Arab men receiving training at flight schools needed to be looked into; and how Zacarias Moussaoui had been arrested in Minnesota weeks before September 11 and described as a terrorist suspect with an interest in flight training.

The Joint Inquiry did excellent work, but it was clear that the 9/11 story went well beyond the performance of the intelligence agencies under the jurisdiction of the Intelligence Committees. How do you tell the story of 9/11 without assessing the borders that the hijackers penetrated, the aviation security that they foiled, the military and diplomatic policies that the United States used to pursue Usama Bin Ladin and al Qaeda in the months and years preceding September 11, 2001, or the emergency response in New York and northern Virginia on that horrible day? Revelations of disturbing problems in our intelligence agencies also suggested the need for further investigation. The clock was set to run out on the Joint Inquiry at the end of 2002, and the inquiry was uncovering more leads than it had the time to track down. If there were such systemic problems, then there clearly needed to be further inquiry into what went wrong and how to protect the American people better.

These two shortcomings--the need for a more comprehensive telling of the 9/11 story, and the need to contemplate further how to keep the American people safer--were complemented by other thorny issues. One was access. Because the Joint Inquiry was a congressional committee, the White House cited the constitutional separation of powers, and refused to turn over a slew of documents sought by the Intelligence Committees--for instance, records from the National Security Council, which coordinates counterterrorism policy for the government, and the president's daily intelligence briefings. For similar reasons, key White House officials such as then National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice did not testify before the Joint Inquiry.

Another problem was partisanship. If an inquiry were to be broadened from examining the performance of intelligence agencies to include an examination of the wider policy choices of the Bush and Clinton administrations, then it would be far more difficult for Republican and Democratic members of Congress to work in a nonpartisan manner as the 2004 elections loomed.

All of these factors pointed toward the need for an independent, bipartisan commission with complete access to government documents and officials. Senator Lieberman introduced legislation on this in the spring of 2002, while the Joint Inquiry was still at work, and there was extended debate through the summer about the need for an independent commission. The chief obstacle was the White House, which argued that the congressional inquiry was continuing, and that an independent investigation would distract the government from waging the ongoing war on terrorism. At several points, it appeared that the proposal to create a 9/11 Commission was dead.

This is when the 9/11 families made their voices heard. In the aftermath of the attacks, many of the families who had lost loved ones found themselves alone in their grief, and at the same time presented with baffling and heartbreaking responsibilities. Imagine having to fill out detailed forms for 9/11 charity funds only weeks after you have lost a husband or wife; or attending meetings for one of the many memorials being built in the middle of Pennsylvania, northern Virginia, and New York, and in the smaller communities so hard hit in the greater New York area. In confronting these new and unique responsibilities, many families formed strong bonds. Some founded support groups, which connected them with other survivors or with family members of victims, and served as clearinghouses for information.

Take the experience of just one family member, Mary Fetchet. Mary is a social worker from New Canaan, Connecticut, who lost her twenty-four-year-old son, Brad, in World Trade Center 2. Through the initial excruciating days of checking hospitals for Brad, Mary and her husband started opening their house to other families, sometimes hosting hundreds of people. Mary then received a 600-page booklet from her congressman, Chris Shays, about how to navigate the various scholarship funds and other compensation vehicles that were being put together for survivors and the families of victims. Congressman Shays and other members of Congress from the region helped the families through the process of understanding these issues--including the heartbreaking task of recounting on dry, impersonal forms the details about a deceased loved one, ranging from how much money that person earned to his or her day-to-day expenses.

Soon Mary found herself traveling to New York with a handful of other families for a meeting at Senator Hillary Clinton's (D-N.Y.) office, at which they discussed the calculation of "economic and non-economic damages." Attending this meeting qualified Mary as an expert, and before she knew it she found herself behind a microphone explaining economic and noneconomic damages to an auditorium full of 9/11 families and reporters, even though she had avoided public speaking for much of her life. Her attendance at these meetings landed her on a Family Advisory Board, whose job was to sort through issues for a 9/11 memorial.

Like many other family members, Mary was moving from one issue to the next, all the while dealing with the grief of losing a loved one and the horror of waiting for his remains to be found in the rubble of New York City's Ground Zero. Some of these families began to ask questions: What was the government doing to protect my loved one before 9/11? Why weren't there better evacuation procedures at the World Trade Center? What happened on those four flights? Why wasn't the memo from the FBI's field office about Arab men training in flight schools acted upon?

Soon these families turned their grief--and the connections they had made with one another and their members of Congress--into advocacy. Learning about the proposal for an independent 9/11 Commission, they used their unique standing to push for a commission that could provide answers to some of their questions and issue recommendations to help ensure that others would not perish in future terrorist attacks. In June 2002, the families held a large rally in Washington, D.C.--where their interest in a commission converged with the efforts of certain members of Congress. Immediately, the issue of the 9/11 Commission gained prominence.

The families refused to take no for an answer. Some would come down to Washington to be told that Congress and the White House were trying to work something out on creating a 9/11 Commission, and to please be patient. Then, when these family members returned home, they would be notified that some remains of their loved ones had just been found--perhaps only a body part. This injected more than a little urgency into the process. And there were thousands of stories like this, many of which all ten commissioners would hear in the months ahead.

Over the summer of 2002, 9/11 families met with members of Congress and White House officials. Senators Lieberman and McCain, and Congressmen Roemer, Shays, and Chris Smith (R-N.J.) worked hard on Capitol Hill. Meanwhile, the American people showed a powerful interest in the information about the 9/11 attacks coming out in the Joint Inquiry and in press reports. In September, the White House ended its opposition and announced that it would back the creation of a commission--with Press Secretary Ari Fleischer directly crediting the 9/11 families by saying, "The administration has met with some of the families of the 9/11 groups, who have talked about the need for a commission to look into a host of issues, and they have made compelling arguments."

There was much to be done, though. Over the next two months, detailed negotiations were undertaken about how to set up a ten-member commission. The main questions were about whether the president--or the congressional leadership--would appoint the chairman; what the breadth of the commission's mandate would be; how long the commission would have to complete its investigation; what the commission would be permitted to see; and what kind of subpoena power the commission would have. These may seem like highly technical issues, but each ended up having an enormous impact on how we did our work.

The issue of subpoena power was hugely important. Having the power to issue a subpoena would give the commission greater leverage in negotiations for access to people and sensitive government documents, and could--if need be--compel access to something when it was denied or slow in coming. The question was whether it would take five or six votes to issue a subpoena. On a commission with five Republicans and five Democrats, this slight mathematical difference was crucial. Ultimately, the commission did get subpoena power, and it was determined that the issuing of a subpoena would require either the concurrence of both the chair and vice-chair, or at least six votes in favor--meaning that bipartisan agreement would be needed. The question of whether or not to subpoena documents, particularly from the White House, became one of the most vigorously debated issues within the commission, almost causing us to split apart at certain junctures.

Another issue that would affect our work was the time allotted for the commission's investigation. Republicans wanted the inquiry to last one year--placing the reporting date sometime in late 2003; Democrats wanted the inquiry to last two years--placing the reporting date shortly after the 2004 presidential election. The two sides decided to split the difference, allowing eighteen months for the inquiry--a period of time that proved insufficient.

Continues...

Excerpted from Without Precedent by Thomas H. Kean Copyright © 2006 by Thomas H. Kean. Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

Read More Show Less

Table of Contents

Prologue : Kean - September 11, 2001 3
Prologue : Hamilton - September 11, 2001 9
1 Set up to fail : approaching an impossible task 14
2 A start-up : setting up on a shoestring 34
3 Cooperate or confront? : what to ask for and how to get it 57
4 Finding the facts : negotiations, subpoenas, and more negotiations 80
5 Getting the story : from field offices to cabinet offices, distant lands to detainees 103
6 Finding a voice : public hearings and time pressure 126
7 The perfect storm : a book, a charge, and an apology 150
8 A remarkable day : Condoleezza Rice in public, Bill Clinton in private 171
9 Becoming a target : the commission comes together 189
10 The trauma of New York : treading delicately in a wounded city 212
11 The enemy : Al Qaeda, the 9/11 plot, and the question of Iraq 232
12 The story in the sky : conspiracy theories and correcting a record 252
13 Many voices : drafting a report, debating recommendations 269
14 Unanimous : rolling out a report 290
Epilogue : looking back to look forward 310
The report card
9/11 Commission timeline
Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Be the first to write a review
( 0 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star

(0)

4 Star

(0)

3 Star

(0)

2 Star

(0)

1 Star

(0)

Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Noble.com Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & Noble.com that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & Noble.com does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at BN.com or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation

Reminder:

  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & Noble.com and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Noble.com Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & Noble.com reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & Noble.com also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on BN.com. It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

 
Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously

    If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
    Why is this product inappropriate?
    Comments (optional)