Commencez à lire The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National... sur votre Kindle dans moins d'une minute. Vous n'avez pas encore de Kindle ? Achetez-le ici Ou commencez à lire dès maintenant avec l'une de nos applications de lecture Kindle gratuites.

Envoyer sur votre Kindle ou un autre appareil

 
 
 

Essai gratuit

Découvrez gratuitement un extrait de ce titre

Envoyer sur votre Kindle ou un autre appareil

Désolé, cet article n'est pas disponible en
Image non disponible pour la
couleur :
Image non disponible
 

The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (Authorized Edition) [Format Kindle]

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks
5.0 étoiles sur 5  Voir tous les commentaires (2 commentaires client)

Prix conseillé : EUR 7,91 De quoi s'agit-il ?
Prix éditeur - format imprimé : EUR 8,02
Prix Kindle : EUR 5,54 TTC & envoi gratuit via réseau sans fil par Amazon Whispernet
Économisez : EUR 2,48 (31%)

App de lecture Kindle gratuite Tout le monde peut lire les livres Kindle, même sans un appareil Kindle, grâce à l'appli Kindle GRATUITE pour les smartphones, les tablettes et les ordinateurs.

Pour obtenir l'appli gratuite, saisissez votre adresse e-mail ou numéro de téléphone mobile.

Formats

Prix Amazon Neuf à partir de Occasion à partir de
Format Kindle EUR 5,54  
Relié EUR 29,11  
Broché EUR 8,01  
Broché --  
CD, Version coupée, Livre audio EUR 37,35  





Descriptions du produit

Amazon.com

The result of months of intensive investigations and inquiries by a specially appointed bipartisan panel, The 9/11 Commission Report is one of the most important historical documents of the modern era. And while that fact alone makes it worth owning, it is also a chilling and valuable piece of nonfiction: a comprehensive and alarming look at one of the biggest intelligence failures in history and the events that led up to it. The commission traces the roots of al-Qaeda's strategies along with the emergence of the 19 hijackers and how they entered the United States and boarded airplanes. It details the missed opportunities of law enforcement officials to avert disaster. Using transcripts of cockpit voice recordings, the report describes events on board the planes along with the chaotic reaction on the ground from nearly every level of government. Going forward, the commission calls for a comprehensive overhaul of what it sees as a deeply flawed and disjointed intelligence-gathering operation. The creation of a post for a single National Security Director is recommended, along with the creation of a National Counterterrorism Center. The report finds fault with the approaches of both the Clinton and Bush administrations but, because they were a bipartisan panel and the problems described are so systemic and far-reaching, they stop short of assigning blame to any particular person or group. Credit must be given to how readable the report is. At more than 500 pages, the writing is clear and forceful and the information is made more accessible since it is fre from election politics and rancor. While the commission notes that future attacks are probably inevitable, a coordinated preventive effort along with a clear plan to respond with efficiency can offer Americans some hope in a post-9/11 world. --John Moe

From Publishers Weekly

With a grave resolve that perfectly balances the enormous stakes with the necessity of delving into minutiae, this historic book describes the mechanics of the horrific attacks on the United States and recommends measures for preventing further strikes. Without trivializing any of the events or diminishing the people involved, it reads like a Shakespearean drama. The authors, with grim but charged dispassion, unspool paragraph after paragraph dramatizing the arrival of "muscle hijackers" (as opposed to pilots), the thinking of CIA director George Tenet (regularly referred to, along with most other players here, simply by last name) and plot co-coordinator Khalid Sheikh Mohammad ("KSM") among thousands of others, and the other ways and means by which a "foreign" incursion caused catastrophic domestic damage. Distilling an enormous amount of information in plain language, with unerring pitch and a perfect feel for when to gloss ("Dubai, a modern city with easy access to a major airport..."), the book's implied narrator sticks as close as possible to how real people made real decisions, and, when stymied in considering a factor or set of factors, is willing to say so. In so doing, this multi-author document produces an absolutely compelling narrative intelligence, one with clarity, a sense of shared mission and an overriding desire to do something about the situation. At the same time, with quotational chapter headings like " 'We Have Some Planes' " and " 'The System Was Blinking Red,' " the authors never forget that they are communicating in a medium that has a lot of stylistic resources for holding one's attention; they draw liberally on the most tried and true. Given what hangs in the balance, it is not a stretch to compare this document to The Federalist Papers, in the sense that the book is designed to foster the debate by which the country will reimagine itself through its bureaucracy.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Détails sur le produit

  • Format : Format Kindle
  • Taille du fichier : 2149 KB
  • Nombre de pages de l'édition imprimée : 589 pages
  • Pagination - ISBN de l'édition imprimée de référence : 0393326713
  • Editeur : W. W. Norton & Company; Édition : Authorized Edition (16 mai 2011)
  • Vendu par : Amazon Media EU S.à r.l.
  • Langue : Anglais
  • ASIN: B00514033Y
  • Synthèse vocale : Non activée
  • X-Ray :
  • Word Wise: Activé
  • Moyenne des commentaires client : 5.0 étoiles sur 5  Voir tous les commentaires (2 commentaires client)
  • Classement des meilleures ventes d'Amazon: n°238.569 dans la Boutique Kindle (Voir le Top 100 dans la Boutique Kindle)
  •  Souhaitez-vous faire modifier les images ?


En savoir plus sur les auteurs

Découvrez des livres, informez-vous sur les écrivains, lisez des blogs d'auteurs et bien plus encore.

Commentaires en ligne

4 étoiles
0
3 étoiles
0
2 étoiles
0
1 étoiles
0
5.0 étoiles sur 5
5.0 étoiles sur 5
Commentaires client les plus utiles
0 internautes sur 1 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 If ever there was a MUST READ, this is it... 17 février 2006
Par FrKurt Messick TOP 1000 COMMENTATEURS
Format:Relié
The attacks on the United States now collectively termed the 9/11 attacks was the most devastating attack by foreign nationals on American states since the War of 1812, with far greater loss of life than then. In many ways, it was a Pearl-Harbour event, in that the history of the United States was changed in ways that make pre-9/11 and post 9/11 common terminology. In the aftermath of the attacks came many things, and developments must continue; this particular book is one of the most significant outcomes.
Within a month, there were calls for an independent bipartisan group to look into the matters. Led by Republican Thomas Kean and Democrat Lee Hamilton (former Congressman from Indiana, the state where I live), the Commission as a whole presents this report as a unified document, without dissent and without addition. That makes it rare in the annals of political writing.
The Report itself contains many things: A preface, thirteen chapters of historical narrative, situational analysis, and recommendations for further action, notes, staff list -- 585 pages in all (there is an executive summary available also, but not incorporated in the body of the text). The historical narrative looks at previous Al-Qaeda terrorist activity, at home and abroad, as well as actions by the United States designed to counter this (embassy security, bombing in the Sudan, etc.). While many were aware of embassy bombings and the previous World Trade Centre attack in 1993, probably few people are aware of other foiled attempts -- Ramzi Yousef's plot (out of Manila) to blow up airliners flying over the Pacific.
The panel interviewed both the current President and the former President. They actually do address the Lewinsky affair in the text, but only briefly.
Lire la suite ›
Avez-vous trouvé ce commentaire utile ?
1 internautes sur 4 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 If ever there was a MUST READ, this is it... 17 février 2006
Par FrKurt Messick TOP 1000 COMMENTATEURS
Format:Broché
The attacks on the United States now collectively termed the 9/11 attacks was the most devastating attack by foreign nationals on American states since the War of 1812, with far greater loss of life than then. In many ways, it was a Pearl-Harbour event, in that the history of the United States was changed in ways that make pre-9/11 and post 9/11 common terminology. In the aftermath of the attacks came many things, and developments must continue; this particular book is one of the most significant outcomes.
Within a month, there were calls for an independent bipartisan group to look into the matters. Led by Republican Thomas Kean and Democrat Lee Hamilton (former Congressman from Indiana, the state where I live), the Commission as a whole presents this report as a unified document, without dissent and without addition. That makes it rare in the annals of political writing.
The Report itself contains many things: A preface, thirteen chapters of historical narrative, situational analysis, and recommendations for further action, notes, staff list -- 585 pages in all (there is an executive summary available also, but not incorporated in the body of the text). The historical narrative looks at previous Al-Qaeda terrorist activity, at home and abroad, as well as actions by the United States designed to counter this (embassy security, bombing in the Sudan, etc.). While many were aware of embassy bombings and the previous World Trade Centre attack in 1993, probably few people are aware of other foiled attempts -- Ramzi Yousef's plot (out of Manila) to blow up airliners flying over the Pacific.
The panel interviewed both the current President and the former President. They actually do address the Lewinsky affair in the text, but only briefly.
Lire la suite ›
Avez-vous trouvé ce commentaire utile ?
Commentaires client les plus utiles sur Amazon.com (beta)
Amazon.com: 3.2 étoiles sur 5  286 commentaires
16 internautes sur 19 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
1.0 étoiles sur 5 Lies, ommissions and ignored facts. 17 septembre 2013
Par Semper-Fi - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Broché|Achat vérifié
I purchased a copy of this report back when it first came out and read it cover to cover. Over the years, as more information has surfaced and documentation has become available it is more than obvious that this commission was a sham. I recently purchased a new copy of the rerport that I use as a reference point to what is currently known or available. Though this report is full of holes and half truthes I still urge anyone interested in the topic of 9/11 to own a copy. I have read several other books by authors that are very succesful at picking this report apart or offering information that was ommited or downplayed. So having a copy of this report is an excellent way to reference new information, comparing facts in books and reports that have been published since. It does not matter if you believe in the conspiracy theories that are out there, if you believe it was a flase flag attack or are just looking for the truth about what happened. This report, at the very least, will prove to you that our government simply does not care about knowing what the truth really is. I would reccommend pairing this report with the Jim Marrs book "The Terror Conspiracy Revisited" or another well respected author. You can compare side by side the information being offered to you.
15 internautes sur 18 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
1.0 étoiles sur 5 Blatant Propaganda 5 février 2013
Par William Evans - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Relié
I have placed this book in the fiction section of my personal library. It reads as if the case is closed on the events of 9/11. It doesn't touch the tough questions, like requiring a scientific explaination for the physical destruction of the twin towers. It does not question the fact that ground zero was not treated as a crime scene. It does not give a reasonable explaination for the fact that no video of an airplane hitting the Pentagon has ever been producded for the public. It was proabably written in 2000, just insert names and dates.
16 internautes sur 20 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
1.0 étoiles sur 5 9/11 The Myth and The Reality 6 février 2013
Par N. Delaney - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Broché|Achat vérifié
Reference to the following link provides one the most comprehensive reviews of the events revolving around 9/11. A novice may well be overwhelmed by the complexity of conflicting data, but such is the learning process. It forces the reader/listener to disassociate and open one's mind so that the learning process may begin. 9/11 looms as one of the greatest tragedies this nation has ever experienced and there is every indication that it was self inflicted. Sadly, those institutions established to protect this nation from such events were not only impotent at the time but have failed to initiate concise investigations following, barring the establishment of a Homeland Security in lieu of a preconceived Patriot Act which continues to undermine the Constitution on which this nation was founded. But a precedent has been established, for no public prosecutions have been forth coming, no one has been held accountable, and the policy now bleeds into the financial and corporate sector of society where blatant mismanagement is now rampant. The 9/11 Commission Report, therefore, represents a blatant white wash of the facts and no remarks by participants that the Commission was set up to fail exonerates their failure to address key issues and their omission of relevant testimony. 9/11 The Myth and The Reality - David Ray Griffin - Full [...]
110 internautes sur 150 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
1.0 étoiles sur 5 I wish I could give 0 stars 7 décembre 2004
Par Roger F. Peters - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Broché
This book is by no means a report from an 'independent' investigation. Members on the panel have relations throughout the government, [...]

The entire investigation into 9/11 was hampered from the very beginning. The editor in chief of Fire Engineering Magazine, William Manning, called the investigation a 'half baked farce' in describing the coverup and destruction of evidence which commenced immediately after 9/11.

This book reads like a novel, and to the average person probably makes them feel like they have gained an understanding of 9/11, but in fact this book directly avoided hundreds of questions asked by the 9/11 family steering committee, and failed to answer any of the unknown questions, only to repeat the official story and to attempt to come up with yet another timeline which could cover the differences in the FAA and NORAD timelines.

DO NOT PAY MONEY FOR THIS BOOK. If you want to read it, read it online, do not support such a shoddy 'independent investigation'. If it were a real investigation it would contain a decent index and it would mention WTC7, which it doesn't.
23 internautes sur 31 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
3.0 étoiles sur 5 Does not meet expectations 3 septembre 2004
Par K. Dunlap - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Broché
After reading the first 50 pages or so I began to wonder if I had purchased the wrong book. I wanted the well-written, bi-partisan report I had heard so much about.

Before I get into my criticisms I will point out that the report contains a lot of information and, to a great extent, puts it in a way that reads almost like a novel. It is a long read I fear few will see through to the end. If I am correct, it is a shame because even with its shortcomings it provides a generally good view into many of the significant events of the past quarter-century which led up to the 9/11 tragedy.

Having said that, I will turn my attention to the shortcomings. I listened to most of the televised portion of the hearings and found many discrepancies between what I heard and what I read. I assume that was the result of compromises to achieve unanimity. Unanimity is good, but not at the cost of accuracy. Also, having written many technical reports, I believe I know what to look for when I read one. The attempt to make the report readable results in the use of conversational language which, of course, is not really adequate for describing events and their causes in a truly precise way. Thus, in far too many instances the reader must interpret statements that should be more specific. For example, the report states that a particular document "was read by a tiny number of people." I have no idea how many people make up a "tiny number" in this context.

Most of the book, as one might expect, is a history of the intelligence organizations, their successes and (mostly) failures, and the events leading up to 9/11. It tends to be chronological, which would have been a good idea, but frequently jumps ahead (in time) in order to make a related point and then stays ahead for several other points. Sometimes it returns to its original chronology, but often it does not. Since the reader must keep track of many different aspects of a major event, this annoying practice makes it difficult to maintain a coherent mental image. I would have much preferred either of two approaches: a strictly chronological approach that discusses the various aspects within the time frame or else have separate chronologies for different aspects of the report. What we have is a combination of the two. Perhaps there are other formats that would have worked, but the one chosen can be quite confusing; e.g., it has the reader thinking that the writers have skipped from the Carter administration to the first Bush administration, totally ignoring the Reagan administration during which an awful lot happened. Never fear, fifty pages or so later, the report turns its attention to the Iran-Contra affair for two or three pages but fails to connect it to 9/11 or, for that matter, intelligence issues in general.

The reader who is familiar with the events that actually occurred will have no difficulty spotting the significant events that either received only a slight mention or were ignored altogether. For example, Reagan's bombing of Libya (which shows up in another section) is reported with the comment that it seemed important "at the time". I was not aware that it had ceased to be considered important. Two or three sentences are devoted to the incident. By comparison, several pages are devoted to the cruise missile attacks in 1998 that destroyed an aspirin factory in Sudan and training camps in Afghanistan. It is reported as a very significant event and includes a full discussion of the intelligence that convinced the Clinton administration that the aspirin factory was actually a chemical weapons plant as well as many reasons to believe the attacks were justified. The questions about the true motivation for the attacks are said to have resulted from the movie "Wag the Dog" with only one sentence vaguely referring to "the Lewinsky scandal."

The famous "wall" which was discussed at great length during the hearings for its significance in preventing information sharing is briefly discussed. The report implies that the wall and its problems were evidence of the Clinton administration's determination to arrest and convict potential terrorists. The fact that the wall had a political purpose of intentionally interfering with internal intelligence is barely mentioned.

The worst thing about the report is the recommendations. After all the discussion of intelligence failure at the lower levels because of such things as a shortage of agents and intrusive rules (the wall) as well as failure to act because of political (domestic and international) considerations, the recommendations are mostly bureaucratic changes along with some platitudes about doing things better. For example, it recommends that a better balance between sharing of information (for intelligence purposes) and secrecy (for security purposes) should be established.

The fact that Senator Kerry seems ready to accept the recommendations just as they were presented concerns me. I am only slightly less disappointed in President Bush's apparent acquiescence to the bureaucratic changes. No matter how good the committee's recommendations are found to be, policy must be made by the president and Congress.

Primarily, I am disappointed that the committee was willing to release a report that became bi-partisan (as opposed to non-partisan) through some very obvious compromises that left many criticisms go unstated while others were given more importance than they deserve.
Ces commentaires ont-ils été utiles ?   Dites-le-nous
Rechercher des commentaires
Rechercher uniquement parmi les commentaires portant sur ce produit

Discussions entre clients

Le forum concernant ce produit
Discussion Réponses Message le plus récent
Pas de discussions pour l'instant

Posez des questions, partagez votre opinion, gagnez en compréhension
Démarrer une nouvelle discussion
Thème:
Première publication:
Aller s'identifier
 

Rechercher parmi les discussions des clients
Rechercher dans toutes les discussions Amazon
   


Rechercher des articles similaires par rubrique