What do you think?
Rate this book
The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation
In a work of history that will make headlines, New York Times reporter Philip Shenon investigates the investigation of 9/11 and tells the inside story of most important federal commission since the the Warren Commission. Shenon uncovers startling new information about the inner workings of the 9/11 commission and its relationship with the Bush White House. The Commission will change our understanding of the 9/11 investigation -- and of the attacks themselves.
464 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2008
30 people are currently reading
563 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 64 reviews
September 14, 2023
The 9/11 Commission has never received the sort of attention that was paid to the Warren Commission, but maybe it should have. Philip Shenon, a long time reporter with the New York Times, dig some digging, and what he found should come as no shock and awe to anyone who paid attention to the behavior of the administration in question. The details are significant, and telling.
There is much here that impeaches the 9/11 commission. Phillip Zelikow was a close associate and advisor to Condoleeza Rice. Who in their right mind could have believed that a dedicated partisan like Zelikow would not twist the work of the commission to protect his patrons? And so he did. Democratic co-chair Lee Hamilton was more Republican than some of the Republicans, unwilling to consider the possibility that his buddies, Cheney and Rummy, would ever tell a lie. Tom Kean was uninterested in challenging the White House, unwilling to ask for subpoenas, even after it became clear that the Bushies were stonewalling. Ashcroft is portrayed as a complete crank, praying theatrically in his office, unwilling to listen to reports about domestic terrorism concerns, creepy about keeping security people out of his home.
Philip Shenon - from NPR
It is particularly harsh about Condi, who did everything in her power to give the commission no useful information, covering the fact that she was probably the worst national security advisor in the nation’s history. It was she more than anyone else who kept terrorism on a low priority list, even demoting the head of the terrorism shop, Richard Clarke. The FBI managed to get extra cash from Congress but cynically used the money for other projects. It was a mess on several fronts. Clarke comes off relatively well. The FBI is shown to be a joke. Mueller single-handedly saved the Bureau by his persistent attention to the commission. In fact, it should have been completely reorganized. One relevant point made here was that the commission and staff may have been hesitant to criticize the Bureau out of intimidation, fearful that they might be subjected to official payback. Zelikow, after the commission made its report, took a job with Condi. And what does that say?
As a native New Yorker, I grieve in particular for those who lost their lives that day. I reserve a dark place in my heart for those who organized and carried out the outrage. And have enough rage left over to affix to those who not only ignored the warnings of growing and then imminent peril to our nation, but whose dishonesty, selfishness and lack of honor prevented them from owning up once the disaster occurred. The Commission names some names and those people should be ashamed.
Published - 2/4/2008
Review first posted - 9/15/08
Shenon's site
There is much here that impeaches the 9/11 commission. Phillip Zelikow was a close associate and advisor to Condoleeza Rice. Who in their right mind could have believed that a dedicated partisan like Zelikow would not twist the work of the commission to protect his patrons? And so he did. Democratic co-chair Lee Hamilton was more Republican than some of the Republicans, unwilling to consider the possibility that his buddies, Cheney and Rummy, would ever tell a lie. Tom Kean was uninterested in challenging the White House, unwilling to ask for subpoenas, even after it became clear that the Bushies were stonewalling. Ashcroft is portrayed as a complete crank, praying theatrically in his office, unwilling to listen to reports about domestic terrorism concerns, creepy about keeping security people out of his home.
Philip Shenon - from NPR
It is particularly harsh about Condi, who did everything in her power to give the commission no useful information, covering the fact that she was probably the worst national security advisor in the nation’s history. It was she more than anyone else who kept terrorism on a low priority list, even demoting the head of the terrorism shop, Richard Clarke. The FBI managed to get extra cash from Congress but cynically used the money for other projects. It was a mess on several fronts. Clarke comes off relatively well. The FBI is shown to be a joke. Mueller single-handedly saved the Bureau by his persistent attention to the commission. In fact, it should have been completely reorganized. One relevant point made here was that the commission and staff may have been hesitant to criticize the Bureau out of intimidation, fearful that they might be subjected to official payback. Zelikow, after the commission made its report, took a job with Condi. And what does that say?
As a native New Yorker, I grieve in particular for those who lost their lives that day. I reserve a dark place in my heart for those who organized and carried out the outrage. And have enough rage left over to affix to those who not only ignored the warnings of growing and then imminent peril to our nation, but whose dishonesty, selfishness and lack of honor prevented them from owning up once the disaster occurred. The Commission names some names and those people should be ashamed.
Published - 2/4/2008
Review first posted - 9/15/08
Shenon's site
April 26, 2016
Governmental inquiries are a gift for historians. They usually take place soon after an event, when memories are freshest and untainted; they are usually imbued with subpoena power, to compel witnesses and evidence; and, most importantly, they require witnesses to testify under oath, with the penalty of perjury hanging about their heads. Thanks to the internet, you can now download all the porn in the world read many of these reports online, for free. Thus, you get access to valuable compendiums of primary sources from events as varied as the 1866 Fetterman Massacre, the sinking of the Titanic, and the breakup of the shuttle Challenger.
A finished report, then, is sort of a beautiful thing. If you are a nerd.
The downside, of course, is that a governmental inquiry is almost by definition tainted by politics. Whether the inquiry comes from Congress itself, or is created by an act of Congress, the proceedings usually occur through contemporary political lenses. Thus, the report that you read, which seems so seamless and reliable, is actually the result of partisan viewpoints giving way to grudging compromises.
In other words, the creation of history through governmental inquiries is just like the old saying about watching sausage get made. It’s not pretty.
Philip Shenon has started his own little cottage industry on detailing the sausage-making process. I just finished his second book A Cruel and Shocking Act, about the most (in)famous investigation of all time: The Warren Commission into President Kennedy’s assassination. Having enjoyed that entry, I circled back to his first book: The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation.
Taken strictly as a finished work, and as a work of literature, the 9/11 Commission Report is something of a masterpiece. The authorized print edition is nearly 600 pages long, but it reads as quickly as an expertly paced thriller. The transparent prose, the technical details, and the lack of character development actually mimic the techno-thrillers I loved so much in the 90s. In chapters titled “We Have Some Planes” and “The System Was Blinking Red”, the Commission traces the long road leading to disaster in a way that belies the usual just-the-facts bloodlessness of most governmental reports. Though never melodramatic, the 9/11 Report never loses sight of the human struggle to survive that marked September 11, 2001.
When you finish the report, you can’t help but feel its authoritativeness. Its prose is so confident, its conclusions so specific, that you have no other choice.
The Commission asks you to rethink that trust.
Shenon starts his book in December 2002, at the time when Henry Kissinger has been chosen to lead the 9/11 Commission. Prominent 9/11 families objected to Kissinger, due to possible undisclosed ties to the Saudis. Eventually, Kissinger resigned. In his place, the Bush administration asked former New Jersey Governor Thomas Kean to chair the commission. Democrat Lee Hamilton became his vice-chair. Commission members included such prominent politicians as Bob Kerrey (who, despite nominally being a Democrat, was out to get Bill Clinton), and Richard Ben-Veniste, who helped take down Nixon.
Shenon doesn’t spend much time with the Commission members. To be sure, he gives ample space to Kean and Hamilton, and especially to Kean, who comes off as thoroughly conscientious and bipartisan. But this is mainly a book about one villain – executive director Philip Zelikow – and many unknown heroes – the anonymous, dogged, truth-seeking investigators. As in A Cruel and Shocking Act, Shenon displays a clear bias in favor of the low-level staffer verses the big-name, previously established Commission member. Certainly, they did the grunt work; also, I suspect, they were more willing to give interviews.
The Commission is written in a novelistic style. Each section is given a dateline, just like you’d see in your garden-variety geopolitical potboiler. There is a lot of verbatim dialogue from distant conversations. The effect is quite readable, even propulsive. It’s never boring. At the same time, though, The Commission often feels catty, petty even, especially in relation to the momentous event that the 9/11 inquiry was supposed to investigate. Clearly, many individuals who participated in this project felt burned. The interviews they gave – and this book itself – is their revenge.
If there is a central narrative, it involves the aforementioned Philip Zelikow. He worked on the Bush transition team, and was a friend of Condoleeza Rice, before taking on the position of executive director of the 9/11 Commission. In this role, he ran the day-to-day operations. He directed the details of the investigation, and in many ways shaped the end result. His involvement is one of the most controversial aspects of the 9/11 Commission. His friendship with Rice presented a clear conflict of interest that should have led him to turn down the job. Throughout the investigation, he kept in communication with Karl Rove, which reeks of impropriety. He also backed Gulf War II, and subtly tried to use the 9/11 Commission to justify the invasion of Iraq. All in all, not an auspicious executive-directorship.
And yet, The Commission never gives you a smoking gun. There is never a moment when Zelikow is caught with his hand in the cookie jar, or his lips whispering sweet-nothings into Rove’s ear. Indeed, there are instances, faithfully recorded by Shenon, where Zelikow comes across just as determined as anyone to find the answers buried in the muck of political ass covering that exemplified post-9/11 Washington D.C.
Beyond Zelikow’s employment, The Commission diligently recounts the numerous other failings of the 9/11 Commission. Chief among them was the Commission’s failure to study the NSA files, which included a great deal of intelligence on al-Qaida. The NSA made this intelligence available; it’s just that no one from the Commission went to look at this stuff until it was too late. The Commission also did a botch job studying the Mayor Giuliani’s terrorist preparations. They were cowed by the press and popular opinion from interrogating “America’s Mayor.”
(Many of these failures come from a lack of time. With a congressionally-imposed deadline, the Commission had to rush, rush, rush. The consequences of this artificial endpoint were obvious: there wasn’t enough time to prepare for witnesses; there wasn’t enough time to question witnesses, and then re-question them; and there wasn’t enough time to go over all the available intelligence).
The Commission is not simply about the failings of the 9/11 Commission. It also traffics in anecdotes about all the people who tried to obstruct their work. All the usual suspects are here. John Ashcroft, perhaps the worst attorney general in history, mounted a smear campaign against the Commission in order to deflect inquisition into his utter lack of interest in terror-related matters. Vice President Cheney tried to get the Commission to reinterpret his actions on September 11, specifically, whether he usurped Constitutional authority by issuing a shoot-down order. FBI Director Robert Mueller wined-and-dined the Commission so well that he actually got them to drop a recommendation that would have removed domestic terrorism from the purview of the FBI.
When I finished reading this book, the conclusion was inescapable: the 9/11 Commission was flawed.
But that’s not a surprise. Of course it’s flawed! When you put five Democrats and five Republicans in a room you’re lucky that you don’t get a report that consists of a trash can full of shredded paper that someone has urinated on. The nature of such a “bipartisan” inquiry necessitates compromises and elisions. Things that shouldn’t go in, go in. Things that shouldn’t be left out, get left out. Hard conclusions become vague recommendations. Sharp criticisms become soft bromides.
It would be disheartening if the 9/11 Commission was the first and last word on this subject. Fortunately, it is not. There is no law that carved the 9/11 Report into granite and forbid any further study on the matter. This book is proof of that.
The Good Book tells us that time discloses all things. Helped immensely by snooping journalists and historical researchers. Sure, the 9/11 Commission dropped the ball on Giuliani. But Dwyer & Flynn exposed him in 102 Minutes. Sure, the 9/11 Commission smudged the years-long lead-up to the attacks, but Lawrence Wright lays it out in his prize-winning The Looming Tower. Sure, there are 28 pages missing from the Report, likely concerning the Saudis, but writers Anthony Summers & Robbyn Swan did some serious pulling on that thread in The Eleventh Day.
In the end, I respect the 9/11 Commission Report as a solid first draft of history. The Commission makes clear just how ugly that process can be.
A finished report, then, is sort of a beautiful thing. If you are a nerd.
The downside, of course, is that a governmental inquiry is almost by definition tainted by politics. Whether the inquiry comes from Congress itself, or is created by an act of Congress, the proceedings usually occur through contemporary political lenses. Thus, the report that you read, which seems so seamless and reliable, is actually the result of partisan viewpoints giving way to grudging compromises.
In other words, the creation of history through governmental inquiries is just like the old saying about watching sausage get made. It’s not pretty.
Philip Shenon has started his own little cottage industry on detailing the sausage-making process. I just finished his second book A Cruel and Shocking Act, about the most (in)famous investigation of all time: The Warren Commission into President Kennedy’s assassination. Having enjoyed that entry, I circled back to his first book: The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation.
Taken strictly as a finished work, and as a work of literature, the 9/11 Commission Report is something of a masterpiece. The authorized print edition is nearly 600 pages long, but it reads as quickly as an expertly paced thriller. The transparent prose, the technical details, and the lack of character development actually mimic the techno-thrillers I loved so much in the 90s. In chapters titled “We Have Some Planes” and “The System Was Blinking Red”, the Commission traces the long road leading to disaster in a way that belies the usual just-the-facts bloodlessness of most governmental reports. Though never melodramatic, the 9/11 Report never loses sight of the human struggle to survive that marked September 11, 2001.
When you finish the report, you can’t help but feel its authoritativeness. Its prose is so confident, its conclusions so specific, that you have no other choice.
The Commission asks you to rethink that trust.
Shenon starts his book in December 2002, at the time when Henry Kissinger has been chosen to lead the 9/11 Commission. Prominent 9/11 families objected to Kissinger, due to possible undisclosed ties to the Saudis. Eventually, Kissinger resigned. In his place, the Bush administration asked former New Jersey Governor Thomas Kean to chair the commission. Democrat Lee Hamilton became his vice-chair. Commission members included such prominent politicians as Bob Kerrey (who, despite nominally being a Democrat, was out to get Bill Clinton), and Richard Ben-Veniste, who helped take down Nixon.
Shenon doesn’t spend much time with the Commission members. To be sure, he gives ample space to Kean and Hamilton, and especially to Kean, who comes off as thoroughly conscientious and bipartisan. But this is mainly a book about one villain – executive director Philip Zelikow – and many unknown heroes – the anonymous, dogged, truth-seeking investigators. As in A Cruel and Shocking Act, Shenon displays a clear bias in favor of the low-level staffer verses the big-name, previously established Commission member. Certainly, they did the grunt work; also, I suspect, they were more willing to give interviews.
The Commission is written in a novelistic style. Each section is given a dateline, just like you’d see in your garden-variety geopolitical potboiler. There is a lot of verbatim dialogue from distant conversations. The effect is quite readable, even propulsive. It’s never boring. At the same time, though, The Commission often feels catty, petty even, especially in relation to the momentous event that the 9/11 inquiry was supposed to investigate. Clearly, many individuals who participated in this project felt burned. The interviews they gave – and this book itself – is their revenge.
If there is a central narrative, it involves the aforementioned Philip Zelikow. He worked on the Bush transition team, and was a friend of Condoleeza Rice, before taking on the position of executive director of the 9/11 Commission. In this role, he ran the day-to-day operations. He directed the details of the investigation, and in many ways shaped the end result. His involvement is one of the most controversial aspects of the 9/11 Commission. His friendship with Rice presented a clear conflict of interest that should have led him to turn down the job. Throughout the investigation, he kept in communication with Karl Rove, which reeks of impropriety. He also backed Gulf War II, and subtly tried to use the 9/11 Commission to justify the invasion of Iraq. All in all, not an auspicious executive-directorship.
And yet, The Commission never gives you a smoking gun. There is never a moment when Zelikow is caught with his hand in the cookie jar, or his lips whispering sweet-nothings into Rove’s ear. Indeed, there are instances, faithfully recorded by Shenon, where Zelikow comes across just as determined as anyone to find the answers buried in the muck of political ass covering that exemplified post-9/11 Washington D.C.
Beyond Zelikow’s employment, The Commission diligently recounts the numerous other failings of the 9/11 Commission. Chief among them was the Commission’s failure to study the NSA files, which included a great deal of intelligence on al-Qaida. The NSA made this intelligence available; it’s just that no one from the Commission went to look at this stuff until it was too late. The Commission also did a botch job studying the Mayor Giuliani’s terrorist preparations. They were cowed by the press and popular opinion from interrogating “America’s Mayor.”
(Many of these failures come from a lack of time. With a congressionally-imposed deadline, the Commission had to rush, rush, rush. The consequences of this artificial endpoint were obvious: there wasn’t enough time to prepare for witnesses; there wasn’t enough time to question witnesses, and then re-question them; and there wasn’t enough time to go over all the available intelligence).
The Commission is not simply about the failings of the 9/11 Commission. It also traffics in anecdotes about all the people who tried to obstruct their work. All the usual suspects are here. John Ashcroft, perhaps the worst attorney general in history, mounted a smear campaign against the Commission in order to deflect inquisition into his utter lack of interest in terror-related matters. Vice President Cheney tried to get the Commission to reinterpret his actions on September 11, specifically, whether he usurped Constitutional authority by issuing a shoot-down order. FBI Director Robert Mueller wined-and-dined the Commission so well that he actually got them to drop a recommendation that would have removed domestic terrorism from the purview of the FBI.
When I finished reading this book, the conclusion was inescapable: the 9/11 Commission was flawed.
But that’s not a surprise. Of course it’s flawed! When you put five Democrats and five Republicans in a room you’re lucky that you don’t get a report that consists of a trash can full of shredded paper that someone has urinated on. The nature of such a “bipartisan” inquiry necessitates compromises and elisions. Things that shouldn’t go in, go in. Things that shouldn’t be left out, get left out. Hard conclusions become vague recommendations. Sharp criticisms become soft bromides.
It would be disheartening if the 9/11 Commission was the first and last word on this subject. Fortunately, it is not. There is no law that carved the 9/11 Report into granite and forbid any further study on the matter. This book is proof of that.
The Good Book tells us that time discloses all things. Helped immensely by snooping journalists and historical researchers. Sure, the 9/11 Commission dropped the ball on Giuliani. But Dwyer & Flynn exposed him in 102 Minutes. Sure, the 9/11 Commission smudged the years-long lead-up to the attacks, but Lawrence Wright lays it out in his prize-winning The Looming Tower. Sure, there are 28 pages missing from the Report, likely concerning the Saudis, but writers Anthony Summers & Robbyn Swan did some serious pulling on that thread in The Eleventh Day.
In the end, I respect the 9/11 Commission Report as a solid first draft of history. The Commission makes clear just how ugly that process can be.
November 26, 2009
Enjoyable, though frustrating. The man who was in charge of the real work of the Commission was a good friend of one of the primary malfeasants, Condoleeza Rice. It was he who worked with her during the Bush transition to demote the cabinet-level Clinton terrorism czar, Richard Clarke. He nudged the new administration away from al Qaeda and toward the doctrine of preemptive war that landed us in Iraq before disappearing back into academia. He was autocratic and biased, and took every opportunity to shape the findings in a pro=Bush fashion. The mayor and governor of NYC were completely hostile ( they had a lot to cover up), And on top of all that, the commissioners wanted to avoid pointing fingers at anybody and finally, they wanted a unanimous report, and took virtually all the sting out of it to satisfy the partisans. Aside from that, it's a fine job.
So now we know that the FBI was, and remains, completely unable to deal with terrorism or 21st Century technology. The CIA, having worked hard to learn about al Qaeda, made a huge error not informing anybody when two of the 9/11 hijackers entered the US, though the FBI should have known independently as they were both living with an FBI informant. John Ashcroft refused to be briefed on al Qaeda. The NSC was asleep at the switch, and NORAD and the FAA lied --and not even convincingly--to every authority investigating their part in the tragedy. Ashcroft made up a bunch of lies about Jamie Gorelick that almost sunk the whole deal, and 9/11 should have been prevented. And that's the whole enchilada. With a slightest bit of competence, 9/11 wouldn't ever have happened.
So now we know that the FBI was, and remains, completely unable to deal with terrorism or 21st Century technology. The CIA, having worked hard to learn about al Qaeda, made a huge error not informing anybody when two of the 9/11 hijackers entered the US, though the FBI should have known independently as they were both living with an FBI informant. John Ashcroft refused to be briefed on al Qaeda. The NSC was asleep at the switch, and NORAD and the FAA lied --and not even convincingly--to every authority investigating their part in the tragedy. Ashcroft made up a bunch of lies about Jamie Gorelick that almost sunk the whole deal, and 9/11 should have been prevented. And that's the whole enchilada. With a slightest bit of competence, 9/11 wouldn't ever have happened.
April 16, 2008
Ok I admit it, he's preaching to the choir. And this REALLY reinforced the negative feelings I have for our current administration (or maybe I should say "the current administration" as I don't want to claim them in any way).
Condi should be mortified. My God, this is appalling. This book, along with the recent news that she was among those who approved each separate method of torture that we have practiced, just makes me incredibly disgusted and ashamed.
I admit I have always wanted there to be a full investigation. I am not necessarily convinced of what happened on 9/11, but (or AND) I think the fact that we have not truly had a full investigation is such a slap in the face to the American public, esp. the families of everyone associated w/WTC (victims, first responders,etc.).
I still don't believe the explanations for either the WTC collapse or the Pentagon (where the hell did the TITANIUM-clad jet engines go? They were vaporized? not bloody likely).
And to think we allocated a whole $3M to "investigate" this worst tragedy on US soil, and we allocated FORTY MILLION to investigate the Challenger explosion? What is WRONG with us that we just let this stuff be poured onto us and we just keep nodding and saying "Ok, whatever you say, and what did Britney do today?" AAARRRGGGHHH.
Not sure why I keep reading things that make me want to throw the book across the room. Kind of like the Peter Lance book "Triple Cross" - now THERE is a scary tale (same subject, 9/11).
Condi should be mortified. My God, this is appalling. This book, along with the recent news that she was among those who approved each separate method of torture that we have practiced, just makes me incredibly disgusted and ashamed.
I admit I have always wanted there to be a full investigation. I am not necessarily convinced of what happened on 9/11, but (or AND) I think the fact that we have not truly had a full investigation is such a slap in the face to the American public, esp. the families of everyone associated w/WTC (victims, first responders,etc.).
I still don't believe the explanations for either the WTC collapse or the Pentagon (where the hell did the TITANIUM-clad jet engines go? They were vaporized? not bloody likely).
And to think we allocated a whole $3M to "investigate" this worst tragedy on US soil, and we allocated FORTY MILLION to investigate the Challenger explosion? What is WRONG with us that we just let this stuff be poured onto us and we just keep nodding and saying "Ok, whatever you say, and what did Britney do today?" AAARRRGGGHHH.
Not sure why I keep reading things that make me want to throw the book across the room. Kind of like the Peter Lance book "Triple Cross" - now THERE is a scary tale (same subject, 9/11).
July 31, 2016
All I can say is wow. This book further reinforces my belief that one cannot get to the truth in anything that is political. Each side won't allow the other to politicize or people tread softly in order to not ruffle feathers so that they continue to have a viable career. Sure there are some people that are 'damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead,' but by and large they get muzzled or labeled as kooks. Which when you are dealing with 9/11 you seriously have your share of kooks i.e. 'truthers' out there.
I have to say that I have somewhat avoided this subject just because of so many wild stories, but I had read Philip Shenon's book on the JFK assassination and came away with a good impression of his investigation skills. I was not disappointed here. I had forgotten that Henry Kissinger and George Mitchell had been first choices for leading the commission, but both had resigned.
Another surprise was Philip Zelikow, whom I had previously respected for an excellent book on German reunification that he wrote with Condoleeza Rice, was somehow chose and executive director of the Commission. If I knew that he potentially had a conflict of interest it blows me away that Governor Thomas Kean and Congressman Lee Hamilton were not aware of this and/or simply ignored the fact even when pointed out to them. Zelikow, as author Shenon portrays him was well known for being thin-skinned and controlling of anything he touched. Meanwhile, Zelikow was receiving phone calls from Karl Rove. Unfortunately this did not become public knowledge until late in the timeline and rather than publicly taint the findings of the commission, Kean and Hamilton decided to ride that wave out.
Mayors Bloomberg and Giuliani, as well as VP Cheney would attempt to blow past being interviewed and Condi Rice would have to request a public interview after she was embarrassed by the interview with Richard A. Clarke, who as counterterrorism czar under Bush I, Clinton, and now Bush II had been relegated to the sidelines before 9/11 as Rice was more focused on Russia and missiles. She was about ten years behind the times and many believe unfit to be National Security Advisor.
The FBI and CIA are also in for a rough time, but the NSA is almost completely neglected and only had their records studied just when the commission was running out of time to make their report. I'm sure that could be another book on its own.
The story of the commission in this book begins with Sandy Berger, Clinton's National Security Advisor going to the National Archives to go over historical records before his testimony on 9/11. He found a memo by Clarke that Berger worried might point fingers at Clinton and himself and attempted to steal in his clothing five copies of the memo before he was caught and exposed.
If you have interest in what may have led to 9/11 or what failures both then and with the commission this is definitely a book for you. It is leading me to read Clarke's book 'Against All Enemies' and I'm going to read the 562 page report and compare notes.
I have to say that I have somewhat avoided this subject just because of so many wild stories, but I had read Philip Shenon's book on the JFK assassination and came away with a good impression of his investigation skills. I was not disappointed here. I had forgotten that Henry Kissinger and George Mitchell had been first choices for leading the commission, but both had resigned.
Another surprise was Philip Zelikow, whom I had previously respected for an excellent book on German reunification that he wrote with Condoleeza Rice, was somehow chose and executive director of the Commission. If I knew that he potentially had a conflict of interest it blows me away that Governor Thomas Kean and Congressman Lee Hamilton were not aware of this and/or simply ignored the fact even when pointed out to them. Zelikow, as author Shenon portrays him was well known for being thin-skinned and controlling of anything he touched. Meanwhile, Zelikow was receiving phone calls from Karl Rove. Unfortunately this did not become public knowledge until late in the timeline and rather than publicly taint the findings of the commission, Kean and Hamilton decided to ride that wave out.
Mayors Bloomberg and Giuliani, as well as VP Cheney would attempt to blow past being interviewed and Condi Rice would have to request a public interview after she was embarrassed by the interview with Richard A. Clarke, who as counterterrorism czar under Bush I, Clinton, and now Bush II had been relegated to the sidelines before 9/11 as Rice was more focused on Russia and missiles. She was about ten years behind the times and many believe unfit to be National Security Advisor.
The FBI and CIA are also in for a rough time, but the NSA is almost completely neglected and only had their records studied just when the commission was running out of time to make their report. I'm sure that could be another book on its own.
The story of the commission in this book begins with Sandy Berger, Clinton's National Security Advisor going to the National Archives to go over historical records before his testimony on 9/11. He found a memo by Clarke that Berger worried might point fingers at Clinton and himself and attempted to steal in his clothing five copies of the memo before he was caught and exposed.
If you have interest in what may have led to 9/11 or what failures both then and with the commission this is definitely a book for you. It is leading me to read Clarke's book 'Against All Enemies' and I'm going to read the 562 page report and compare notes.
September 9, 2013
There were two governmental commissions which researched and delivered reports about the events of 9/11. The first was congressional. The second was supposedly 'independent', but mandated by congress, albeit with a pitifully small budget. This book is by a NY Times reporter who covered the latter. Based on very many interviews, The Commission reveals the inner workings of the research staff and some of what was left out of their final report.
Though mildly expressed, clear rosters of good and bad guys emerge from a reading of the text. The good guy par excellance is Richard Clarke, author of Against All Enemies, the counterterrorism expert demoted by the Bush White House. The primary bad guys, their 'badness' being a function of their obstructions of the process of determining the facts, include President Bush, Vice-president Cheney, Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, CIA's George Tenet and Commission Director Philip Zelikow.
The biggest revelations from the book, most of which I read as clarifying rather than revelatory, were as regards the (suppressed) involvement of Saudi officials--most notably on the part of the wife of the Saudi ambassador--in sponsoring some of the Saudi hijackers, the possibility of some collusion from the Iranian government, and the gross negligence and incapacity of the FBI in 2001. Others who didn't follow 9/11 as closely as I did may be equally surprised at all the indications agencies of the U.S. governments, particularly the FBI, had shortly beforehand of imminent terrorist plans within national boundaries.
This book does little to support the 9/11 Truth groups in their allegations of conspiracies within the U.S. government to allow the hijackings. It does offer convincing evidence, however, of the coverups of the incompetence and downright dishonesty of specifically named officials.
Though mildly expressed, clear rosters of good and bad guys emerge from a reading of the text. The good guy par excellance is Richard Clarke, author of Against All Enemies, the counterterrorism expert demoted by the Bush White House. The primary bad guys, their 'badness' being a function of their obstructions of the process of determining the facts, include President Bush, Vice-president Cheney, Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, CIA's George Tenet and Commission Director Philip Zelikow.
The biggest revelations from the book, most of which I read as clarifying rather than revelatory, were as regards the (suppressed) involvement of Saudi officials--most notably on the part of the wife of the Saudi ambassador--in sponsoring some of the Saudi hijackers, the possibility of some collusion from the Iranian government, and the gross negligence and incapacity of the FBI in 2001. Others who didn't follow 9/11 as closely as I did may be equally surprised at all the indications agencies of the U.S. governments, particularly the FBI, had shortly beforehand of imminent terrorist plans within national boundaries.
This book does little to support the 9/11 Truth groups in their allegations of conspiracies within the U.S. government to allow the hijackings. It does offer convincing evidence, however, of the coverups of the incompetence and downright dishonesty of specifically named officials.
March 7, 2011
This book will leave you angry. There are two kinds of conspiracy theories on 9/11- the first posits that the US government, or the Isrealis or some combination of them and others or aliens flew the planes or set charges underneath or used space rays or whatever. People who espouse these theories should wear tinfoil hats.
The second type of conspiracy theory is the kind that believes that 9/11 was the result of terrorists who hate us, who flew planes into buidlings. These people believe that this was a preventable tragedy, and that people at various levels in the US government failed to do their jobs correctly, then attempted to cover up their incompetence as best as possible later. To give examples from both sides of the aisle, the 9/11 commission itself was run by a close personal friend of Condaleeza Rice, who was a member of the Bush II transition team, then wrote large protions of their pre-emptive war doctrine. Sandy Berger (Clinton National Security Advisor) admitted to stealing classified documents (lots of them) from the archives, by stuffing them in his socks and underwear. The former National Security Advisor stole documents! And pled guilty to it!
This book will describe why the second type of conspiracy theory is less of a theory and more of a fact. Everyone who was touched by 9/11 should know what this book says.
The second type of conspiracy theory is the kind that believes that 9/11 was the result of terrorists who hate us, who flew planes into buidlings. These people believe that this was a preventable tragedy, and that people at various levels in the US government failed to do their jobs correctly, then attempted to cover up their incompetence as best as possible later. To give examples from both sides of the aisle, the 9/11 commission itself was run by a close personal friend of Condaleeza Rice, who was a member of the Bush II transition team, then wrote large protions of their pre-emptive war doctrine. Sandy Berger (Clinton National Security Advisor) admitted to stealing classified documents (lots of them) from the archives, by stuffing them in his socks and underwear. The former National Security Advisor stole documents! And pled guilty to it!
This book will describe why the second type of conspiracy theory is less of a theory and more of a fact. Everyone who was touched by 9/11 should know what this book says.
November 3, 2023
I make a habit, each September, to read a book on the subject of 9/11. This was my choice this year and it was a good one.
I wanted to learn more, about what went on before and after the attack on the USA. The information in this book covered both. Philip Shenon is a investigative reporter for The New York Times and the text of this book proves his worth to the paper. The text is written similar to a news article, so it is easy to read and follow. It is not dense and hard to follow and it kept me reading and interested.
Shenon takes you into the political cliques of Washington and exposes the partisanship (on both sides) and the scheming that occurred after the attacks, to hide the true story of why this devastating event took place. Unlike a lot of the other books I have read on this subject, there are not stories from survivors, or families. However, they do play an important role trying to uncover why this happened and how it could have been avoided.
An enlightening read and recommended to anyone who is interested in history
I wanted to learn more, about what went on before and after the attack on the USA. The information in this book covered both. Philip Shenon is a investigative reporter for The New York Times and the text of this book proves his worth to the paper. The text is written similar to a news article, so it is easy to read and follow. It is not dense and hard to follow and it kept me reading and interested.
Shenon takes you into the political cliques of Washington and exposes the partisanship (on both sides) and the scheming that occurred after the attacks, to hide the true story of why this devastating event took place. Unlike a lot of the other books I have read on this subject, there are not stories from survivors, or families. However, they do play an important role trying to uncover why this happened and how it could have been avoided.
An enlightening read and recommended to anyone who is interested in history
March 16, 2023
It’s been over 21 years since 9/11. In recent years GW Bush has had his highest popularity rating ever, obviously including the years when he was president. This book is a reminder of how inept he was, in my view controlled by Cheney, Condy Rice etc. in the end the commission’s report was watered down to focus on what needed to be done to the various spy agencies so that they better coordinated information and threats.
Attorney general John Ashcroft was revealed as manipulative if not downright lying in his testimony. Rice played politics to protect the Bush administration for a second term. A pretty interesting read. Damning as it relates to the reasons for invading Iraq as well.
Attorney general John Ashcroft was revealed as manipulative if not downright lying in his testimony. Rice played politics to protect the Bush administration for a second term. A pretty interesting read. Damning as it relates to the reasons for invading Iraq as well.
November 12, 2023
A stunning look at the lies and deceit surrounding the 9/11 attacks.
May 12, 2008
Gripping expose reads like a Robert Ludlum novel, chipping away at all the gritty details behind the 9/11 Commission's search for answers behind the terrorist attacks. Unfortunately, it's not a novel and reveals the full extent of the Bush White House's refusal to cooperate, the unbelievable disinterest of Condoleeza Rice to fulfill her duties as Security Advisor, and the politicking and bitterness among members of the commission and the 9/11 victims' families. A fascinating read and a must for anyone who's read the full 9/11 Commission Report and Richard Clarke's Against All Enemies.
November 3, 2024
The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation by Philip Shenon is a revealing behind-the-scenes account of the selection, investigations, and final report production by the members of the 9/11 Commission. It is not a narration of the events of 9/11, but a history of the 9/11 Commission and its investigation of the government agencies and other organizations involved with those events.
Similar to Philip Shenon's findings regarding the Warren Commission that he documents in A Cruel and Shocking Act: The Secret History of the Kennedy Assassination, The Commission is filled with the inadequacies of the 9/11 Commission to get to the complete truth of the circumstances surrounding 9/11. Starting with the appointment of Philip Zelikow as executive director of the commission, and ending with a final report watered down by the motivation to produce a unanimous consensus of the commissioners, the investigation was plagued with problems that in the end resulted in very little accountability for the people and organizations that contributed to allowing 9/11 to occur and in mishandling the response to it.
Reading this book and Shenon's later book on the Warren Commission makes one wonder why the government ever bothers to conduct these investigations. They are so fraught with politics and bureaucratic coverups and infighting that little additional information or recommendations not already apparent ever result from these commissions. They just check the box so the government can say it investigated itself and we can all move on now.
Similar to Philip Shenon's findings regarding the Warren Commission that he documents in A Cruel and Shocking Act: The Secret History of the Kennedy Assassination, The Commission is filled with the inadequacies of the 9/11 Commission to get to the complete truth of the circumstances surrounding 9/11. Starting with the appointment of Philip Zelikow as executive director of the commission, and ending with a final report watered down by the motivation to produce a unanimous consensus of the commissioners, the investigation was plagued with problems that in the end resulted in very little accountability for the people and organizations that contributed to allowing 9/11 to occur and in mishandling the response to it.
Reading this book and Shenon's later book on the Warren Commission makes one wonder why the government ever bothers to conduct these investigations. They are so fraught with politics and bureaucratic coverups and infighting that little additional information or recommendations not already apparent ever result from these commissions. They just check the box so the government can say it investigated itself and we can all move on now.
September 28, 2017
Philip Shenon is a great writer. His book on the Warren Commission (he wrote it after this) is amazing. This is emphatically not conspiracy theory, but clear and thorough reporting. In both cases Shenon looks methodically in the creation of the Commission, the choices and compromises made to set up and the choice of personnel at all levels. Then the details of how the staff pursued their gathering of information, the different players at the FBI, CIA, NSA and above the White House. Shenon certainly leads you, but also provides the space to draw your own conclusions. Clearly an investigation that was compromised from the off and facing a deadline that it should be out of the way by early 2004 to avoid impinging on George W Bush's re-election campaign. Far from a search for the truth (that many of the staff were seeking) the final report becomes a contortion designed to satisfy Republicans, Democrats and the White House. At the centre is Philip Zelikow as Executive Director of the Commission who should never have been appointed in the first place - a friend of the White House and part of the Bush transition team. The signals were there, the culprits were on the radar of the intelligence agencies, but the powers that be were too busy to look.
July 13, 2023
I took a long time to finish this book, but that was not the author’s fault. I got distracted reading other things and, consequently, neglected this book.
I LOVED THIS BOOK! It reads like a mystery. Shenon is a terrific writer who makes you feel that you are in the same room with the “characters”. He writes insightfully and sympathetically about most of the people involved, and when he concludes a chapter, you just want to continue to the next chapter to see how things turn out.
I seldom read every word in a nonfiction book. I will often skim and skip and read what interests me. But I read every word of this book!
Even though I lived through and remember many of the events recounted in this book, Shenon kept me turning the pages. The book is extremely informative, superbly written, and insightful. I highly recommend it!
I LOVED THIS BOOK! It reads like a mystery. Shenon is a terrific writer who makes you feel that you are in the same room with the “characters”. He writes insightfully and sympathetically about most of the people involved, and when he concludes a chapter, you just want to continue to the next chapter to see how things turn out.
I seldom read every word in a nonfiction book. I will often skim and skip and read what interests me. But I read every word of this book!
Even though I lived through and remember many of the events recounted in this book, Shenon kept me turning the pages. The book is extremely informative, superbly written, and insightful. I highly recommend it!
November 29, 2017
This book reminds me a lot of Edward J. Epstein's INQUEST (1966), about the Warren Commission investigation into the JFK assassination. It too revealed, through interviews with insiders, many troubling aspects of an investigation that was compromised and politicized. An investigation where the outcome was predetermined to preserve the political establishment and not shake up the system, or cause the public (and overseas allies) to have doubts about US institutions. But Epstein didn't fundamentally question the conclusion that Oswald shot JFK. Shenon also deserves a lot of credit for his research, but can't bring himself to question the basic narrative of 9/11: that 19 Al Qaeda hijackers and a few co-conspirators in caves in Afghanistan were entirely responsible for the attacks.
March 1, 2022
This book makes a moment of history really come alive, and it shows us that disfunction in Washington is not a recent phenomenon. The story moves along like movie thriller, and the characters really come alive in all their humanity - for better or for worse.
The Commission is exhaustively researched and beautifully written. The events of 9/11 are seared into our memories, but the behind-the-scenes work of the Commission happened behind closed doors. Philip Shenon brings this all into the light.
It is a work that will read for decades to come.
The Commission is exhaustively researched and beautifully written. The events of 9/11 are seared into our memories, but the behind-the-scenes work of the Commission happened behind closed doors. Philip Shenon brings this all into the light.
It is a work that will read for decades to come.
March 2, 2021
When reading some material I find the last few paragraphs revealing. This project seems thoroughly researched however the bottom line is that reasonable doubt about the integrity of this investigation is evident. Read the last two paragraphs first. This investigation was flawed from the outset. It may or may not reflect what really occurred with respect to the Bush Administration’s actions prior to 9/11/01. The author did an excellent job of presenting this material.
April 2, 2019
Interesting writing style. Sometimes academic and dense and other times conversational. At one point used “love fest” to describe a deposition. However, lots of information and I found reading a lot in one setting made it so much easier to digest. I really enjoyed it.
Read
November 19, 2020It turns out that everything is politicized and history is rapidly forgotten. We are a long way from 9/11, but the PR spin cycle remains in full effect. As always, history is created by those who are relentless in telling their stories.
September 15, 2021
No huge revelations here, but it is seriously partisan and left sympathetic, FYI. I don’t love Bush so I am not super offended by this author, but in principle I hate liberal politicians, media, and the ilk.
February 4, 2022
Hard book to read. If you had any doubts about the authenticity of any government politician, this book will solve that problem. They are all out for themselves and no one else. I have chosen to not believe any politician or news person!
September 3, 2018
Very engaging. The chapters were short enticing me to read just one more.
December 2, 2019
Well, that was depressing. Particularly prescient given the US’s current politics and players.
Read
April 27, 2020another book for school haha
September 20, 2020
Couldn't put it down.
February 6, 2023
Livro 6 de 2023
Tremendamente prolixo e expositivo sobre fatos que, honestamente, não me despertaram muita atenção. Uma pena. Deve ter seu valor histórico.
Tremendamente prolixo e expositivo sobre fatos que, honestamente, não me despertaram muita atenção. Uma pena. Deve ter seu valor histórico.
March 12, 2024
Zelikow and Condi definitely don't come out of this looking great.
January 4, 2025
Eye opening, left me speechless page to page realizing how much corruption can do, what people can hide and how the state works
February 11, 2025
Shocking. Read it.
September 30, 2010
This is a pretty good book about the "back story" for the 9/11 Commission. It focuses particularly on the role of Philip Zelikow, the chief staff member of the Commission, as a former friend and colleague of Condoleezza Rice, in blunting criticisms of members of the Bush administration. But it also give Zelikow credit for his writing skills and general management of the Commission's work. I learned a lot about a number of side stories, such as the theft of classified documents by Samuel Berger, the ability of Robert Mueller to successfully defend the FBI despite that agency's poor performance on terrorism, and the attempts by John Ashcroft as Attorney General to use bullying tactics to head off criticism of his supervision of the FBI prior to the attack. The author makes a credible case for the fact that this was a particularly partisan set of commissioners (with the exceptions of the two leaders, Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton). Partisanship resulted, oddly enough, in a watering down of criticism of the both the Clinto and Bush adminstration anti-terrorism efforts.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 64 reviews