  I have to start by admitting that I haven't quite finished it off -- I've skimmed key areas and have read in detail the first chapter as well as the two "next steps" chapters. While the coverage and analysis by the news organizations is right on, I still think the report is something that every American should read for themselves. There are a few things already that are new to me, and I'd followed this story as closely as any story I've been around for before or since. One that really caught me was the timing of the president's appearance with the schoolkids and his hearing of the attacks. I didn't know that he was notified of the WTC being hit (though it was first thought to be a private pilot and accidental) before his going out to speak to the kids.
I have always supported his decision to remain calm and complete his appearance after hearing of the second plane into the WTC so as not to frighten the kids, but I now think (as a Monday morning QB does) that perhaps he could have held for a couple of minutes before going out into that room to get the facts. Even if it wasn't believed to be an attack at first blush, it's still a potential tragedy with casualties in the symbols of American trade.
One thing that hit me as well was what I had known in the earliest moments of that day nearly three years ago -- That the world had changed dramatically. I wrote in a journal for a negotiations class I was taking at the time, after having said the same to people during the course of that day, that until that moment, being hijacked was not the worst thing that could have happened to you. Statistically, you weren't likely to die, and worst case, you end up in Cuba for a couple of days, shucks golly gee darn. As well, the military was still facing a consolidated Russian threat instead of a disparate fundamentalist threat. One of the CAPS pilots from that day said they saw the Pentagon and thought "cruise missile" not suicide hijacking. Never was it expected that al-Qaeda could pull off something of a magnitude of a military attack on the U.S., and for that gross misunderstanding of the real threat and underestimation of their organization, we paid with over 3,000 lives. And that lack of understanding of the terrorist threat to the U.S. Homeland glares even after the events of 9/11.
I saw Bush's speech on the 20th (I was at a dinner party, of all things, for work at a partner's house and we insisted on eating in front of the TV to see the address), and I remember commenting that initiating a "War on Terrorism" and a zero-tolerance policy was inane. There's no way they'd talk about going after the Real IRA like they'd go after al-Qaeda, so why speak in such broad tones? As well, who in Israel are the terrorists? One could argue that the Israeli government is as terroristic as any organized Palestinian group. So a lack of complete understanding of the extent of the terrorist problem and the portions that apply to the U.S., I would argue, are still hindering our efforts worldwide.
But the committee's recommendations to focus the scope of the war on terrorism will hopefully better concentrate our efforts, and the efforts of our allies, on areas where we can impact those intent on killing innocent Americans. All told, it is as non-partisan as reported, a report of which I was skeptical at first because I'd heard it from the more liberal media outlets. In line with my cynical nature, however, I read some of it as being equal opportunity to both parties and both the Clinton and Bush administrations to cover their respective asses. I have to admit that it is done very well within the report, however, and not heavy-handed at all. From a technical perspective, breaking off that last point, it is a very well-written report. It is well-organized and very readable, unlike other reports I've read, and is supported with copious footnotes, illustrating the depth and breadth of their research (and trying desperately to avoid the Warren trap by showing its comprehensive coverage).
The one thing it's lacking, in my opinion, is a detailed timeline. The stories of each aircraft and agency/organization is told, but I found myself flipping back and forth to try to maintain a timeline in my head. I also think that great care was taken in presenting the individual impact to the events of 9/11 wherever possible. People are mentioned by name where appropriate (and if not in the text, are notated in detail), and there's a whole section devoted to heroic efforts made in the Towers that day.
And that is why I think every American should read this report for themselves. We each need to remember that the landscape has changed and that we are now direct targets of terrorism every waking moment. There are numerous moments during the 9/11 timeline where the acts of individuals changed (or should have changed) the outcome of that day for countless others. We need to move forward with our lives understanding that we stand on the front line of the war on terror and that we can prevent further tragedies as well or even better than the governmental agencies responsible for our security. 26 July 2004 -- Ask and you shall receive. Found a great urlLink interactive timeline on MSNBC urlLink Read more! 
