500 Days: Decisions and Deceptions in the Shadow of 9/11 by Kurt Eichenwald

Mar 25, 2013 Owen rated it 4 of 5 stars

This is a spectacular piece of writing. Eichenwald blends a dozen or so storylines into a taut thriller that actually happened. A warning, though- this book will hurt you. Having lived through these events, and even been privileged to be a part of a late chapter in some, I had to put this book down more than a few times and just breathe. You know most of these stories: terrorists in the US, having been tracked by the CIA into the country, then left to wander as they pleased. You know about FBI a...more

like · see review

Dec 09, 2012 Andrew rated it 4 of 5 stars

The first 500 days after 9/11/2001 could have gone in multiple directions. We could have leveraged the tragedy to reconsider how we engage with the Arab world. We could have used 9/11 as an opportunity to re-evaluate how we monitor and take on threats. We could have used it as an opening to engage deeply into a mideast peace process.

This book is about the path that was was taken instead, a path that was very different from the options above. Instead, we invaded Iraq and instituted torture in int...more The first 500 days after 9/11/2001 could have gone in multiple directions. We could have leveraged the tragedy to reconsider how we engage with the Arab world. We could have used 9/11 as an opportunity to re-evaluate how we monitor and take on threats. We could have used it as an opening to engage deeply into a mideast peace process.

This book is about the path that was was taken instead, a path that was very different from the options above. Instead, we invaded Iraq and instituted torture in interrogration practices. These two dark decisions become part of the lasting legacy of 9/11.

500 Days by Kurt Eichenwald describes how these misguided approaches came to fruition. Both with torture and with the Iraq invasion, government officials approach the new reality of 9/11 with preconceptions that didn't align to any current reality.

Regarding torture: FBI officials were participating in humane interrogations of detainees with CIA officers. The CIA officers had received approval to use torture, to the continued astonishment of the FBI. Again and again, the FBI team would gain valuable information by treating the detainees humanely and with respect. The CIA team would leverage torture to gain lies, or worthless information.

In the CIA, and eventually in the Pentagon, officials were conviced that torture would work. They felt that a new type of enemy required a new type of technique. Decades of recognized interrogation techniques could be tossed. And amazingly, the CIA started believing that torture scenes from TV shows like 24 could be adopted in real practice.

The result was a "toxic stew at Guantanomo: poorly trained interrogators, told to mistreat prisoners, with no limitations and no exposure to the law."

In the case of Iraq, Bush and Cheney were looking for any reason to invade Iraq. September 11 was an opportune event in that it gave them an excuse to move forward. Time and again, Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld provide reasons that were false: linkages to al-Queada, WMD.

The team had a pre-conception that Iraq was an imminent threat, despite any evidence.

Unfortunately, no one in the government was able to objectively discern the situation and the facts. No one was able to put aside pre-conceptions and approach the problems with a fact-based approach.

The book is a challenge for the Obama administration to discern the world based on reality, not on preconceptions.

(less)

3 likes · like · see review

Oct 09, 2012 Brian rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I'm halfway through this book and it is a page turner. It is definitely on my list of books that I will read twice. Only a very few books get that rating from me.

I will read it twice because in my first reading, done in record time, I am sure to have missed some nuances. This is a great book for any reader that wants to understand how the top level leadership and mid level leadership got us to where we are today.

There are heroes and incompetents that formed the response to 9/11, but they are n...more

2 likes · like · see review

May 04, 2013 Jason rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: al-qaeda-bin-laden, the-war-on-terror

As crazy and/or sick as this may sound, I wish I could go back to the late summer/early fall of 2001. I want to experience it now - again knowing what time and history has shown us. Since time travel is impossible this book is the closest we'll ever get to re-experiencing the entire panorama of it all from that fateful sunny, clear Tuesday morn in September through the Anthrax attacks of that fall up to the Guantanamo Bay scandals - even up to the precursor to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, a war th...more

like · see review

Mar 05, 2013 Mikey B. rated it 5 of 5 stars

Page 342 (my book) Robert Douman (judge)

“We must protect the freedoms of even those who hate us and that we may find objectionable. The warlords of Afghanistan may have been in the business of pillage and plunder. We cannot descend to their standards without debasing ourselves.”

I have read a few books on the Bush presidency and the aftermath of 9/11. This is quite possibly the best one. It gives a broad view of events in the U.S., Europe, and to a lesser extent Afghanistan and Pakistan. It also...more Page 342 (my book) Robert Douman (judge)

“We must protect the freedoms of even those who hate us and that we may find objectionable. The warlords of Afghanistan may have been in the business of pillage and plunder. We cannot descend to their standards without debasing ourselves.”

I have read a few books on the Bush presidency and the aftermath of 9/11. This is quite possibly the best one. It gives a broad view of events in the U.S., Europe, and to a lesser extent Afghanistan and Pakistan. It also provides us with striking portraits of the many personalities involved along with their conversations.

The structure is chronological which I initially found confusing, particularly as there are constant shifts throughout (sometimes on the same page) to diverse topics and characters. But this also gives us a feeling of how several events during that time were intersecting and colliding with each other simultaneously. In a sense it makes the book a real page turner as we experience this progression and constant movement.

Obviously there are many disturbing situations throughout the first 500 days after 9/11. We vividly see the downgrading of the Bush administration where human rights are trodden over. Several actions stand out. I will provide just one – why did Dick Cheney have so much power in influencing and making decisions – he was a vice-president who traditionally has no authority. By contrast, Truman, when he took over after Roosevelt’s’ death, did not even know of the developments on the atomic bomb.

While the author does give Bush and his entourage latitude in that they were trying to protect their country from further attacks. We also are provided with the details of a grab for power where the U.S. constitution was over-looked. It was like in order to protect ourselves – let’s go it alone, overrule government regulations and international law... and by the way we will do torture too. The author shows how both the CIA and the U.S. military took this slippery slope where torture became a “modus operandi”. Its’ devastating when something unacceptable becomes acceptable.

The author never lets us lose site of the enemies we are dealing with – Islamic fundamentalists who are bent on destroying Western liberal democracy. In their own country they blew apart the Bamiyan statues that were made in the sixth century because they were deemed an affront to Islam. In Bali (an awful event that we tend to forget) they meticulously planned and bombed a nightclub area in 2002 that killed over 200 people and injured over 200. Obviously these terrorist groups must be stopped.

The prelude to the Iraq war is brought up. It is clear this had nothing to do with pursuing terrorism. We are given a good view of the Orwellian doublespeak that led to this invasion. In the U.S. administration the war build-up for Iraq was brought up within hours after 9/11.

This book gives us a perspective on how the United States, Canadian and British governments coped after 9/11. Sadly, it is not ennobling. The personalities and what they said and did, speak for themselves.

Page 156
Bush proclaimed that he could set up a trial system on his own, then determine what constituted a crime and what rights would be afforded the defendants...Had anyone in the White House even read the Constitution?
(less)

3 likes · like · see review

Oct 26, 2012 Wanda rated it 5 of 5 stars

A NYT review prompted me to read this fascinating and depressing book. There were no specific jaw dropping revelations for me, as I have carefully read most of the legitimate news media accounts on the Bush administration and its near declaration of martial law in the post 9-11 years. To say that this bunch used the Constitution as toilet paper is to be generous.
The NYT reviewer opined that these were the years that an inexorable psychosis took hold of the Bush administration and he is right. T...more A NYT review prompted me to read this fascinating and depressing book. There were no specific jaw dropping revelations for me, as I have carefully read most of the legitimate news media accounts on the Bush administration and its near declaration of martial law in the post 9-11 years. To say that this bunch used the Constitution as toilet paper is to be generous.
The NYT reviewer opined that these were the years that an inexorable psychosis took hold of the Bush administration and he is right. This book details that descent into panic, paranoia and madness. Lies and unsubstantiated rumors fed a White House that was only too willing to act on them, much to the chagrin of the rest of the world. But the administration's hubris and arrogance completely blocked out the sanity that other world powers tried to bring to the rush to war and torture, and the relinquishment of any vestige of a U.S. moral compass.
The administrations lack of self control resulted in their making baseless assertions to the American people about a purported plot to blow up the U.S. Embassy in Bosnia and the presence of WMD in Iraq. Their stupidity resulted in their looking foolish vis a vis other world leaders, in addition to the long suffering Tony Blair. Apparently Bush told Jacques Chirac that biblical prophecies were being fulfilled and that “Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East.” Oh my. I could not believe my eyes when I read that. Chirac, a sane person, decided that his country was not going to be dragged into a war on the basis of Bush's interpretation of the Bible. The French paid for this economically when the administration sought revenge for their "betrayal." I could go on, but it truly is depressing to think that we have gone to war, squandered our resources, both human and capital, and wasted a decade making ourselves hated more than we already were because of this bozo administration.
The book is well researched and well written -- almost too well written for non-fiction. Bravo. It is very detailed and some might find it overly detailed. But it is must reading for those who are deluded and ignorant of what happened to this country and the danger of government run amok that were the Bush years. But, I doubt that those who need to read this eye opener ever will.
(less)

2 likes · like · see review

Nov 24, 2012 Christopher Rex rated it 2 of 5 stars

This book's subtitle should NOT be called "Secrets and Lies in the Terror Wars" (not sure why Goodreads says it is "Decisions & Deceptions in the Shadow of 9-11"). It should be "Stuff that Happened After 9-11....stuff you probably already knew if you're interested in this book in the first place."

I like Eichenwald. "Conspiracy of Fools" and "The Informant" were both good. This one is not so good. In fact, it's downright boring and dry in parts. Where "Informant" and "Conspiracy" moved with...more This book's subtitle should NOT be called "Secrets and Lies in the Terror Wars" (not sure why Goodreads says it is "Decisions & Deceptions in the Shadow of 9-11"). It should be "Stuff that Happened After 9-11....stuff you probably already knew if you're interested in this book in the first place."

I like Eichenwald. "Conspiracy of Fools" and "The Informant" were both good. This one is not so good. In fact, it's downright boring and dry in parts. Where "Informant" and "Conspiracy" moved with a swift-pace and were intriguing/interesting throughout, this book dragged in many, many places. The discussions over legal minutea (spell) was about as interesting as chewing aluminum foil.

I honestly thought Eichenwald would take the Bush administration to task and/or present some "new" information to the discussion - he didn't. Basically, it is simply a review of what happened in the 500 days after 9-11 (though, he curiously completely overlooked the Patriot Act - a fact I found disturbing and baffling - Bagram is also brushed over only lightly). I already knew 90% of what was in this book and it never revealed a single thing I would call a "Secret" at all. No challenges are really presented and the book doesn't open the informed-reader's eyes to anything they couldn't have found by reading the newspaper during those same 500 days. OK, he re-creates some inner-office discussions and brings some "inside" accounts of people who were tortured in Syria (and elsewhere), but otherwise this is not any sort of an "eye-opening" account in any way.

In the end, Eichenwald tows the Official Line far too much. He doesn't even address the many, many "alternative" perspectives out there, all of which are documented with a wealth of evidence. I think he anticipates this criticism by providing something like 50 pages of footnotes. Perusing these footnotes and referencing them reveals an overt reliance on "official" sources and "mainstream sources" (example - using Bush's book about Bush as a source? Really? What "secrets" are you going to uncover there?). I guess this comes from Eichenwald being a former NY Times columist and, presumably, he doesn't want to lose his many contacts in gov't (and other areas) by contradicting them or making them look like liars. I couldn't really tell you.

His "epilogue" talks about the (supposed) killing of Osama bin Laden, but completely fails to address a single one of the many continuations of the "secrets and lies" by the Obama Administration - kill lists, targeting assassination, NDAA, Patriot Act etc. etc. Granted this wasn't the point of the book, but neither was the (supposed) killing of OBL.

In the end, the book is a disappointing slog through a mundane account of the 500 days after 9-11 which offers little to nothing new (or "secret" or a "lie"). If you asked me name one "lie" he revealed that I didn't already know, I couldn't tell you.

If you want a review of this era, the book is fine. Is it worth reading over 500 pages? No way.

Not 1-star, b/c only total rags like Austerlitz and Krakatoa deserve that. But, if there was Zero Stars available, this would get 1 star. Disappointing.

By the way, he spells John Yoo incorrect twice, calling him John You (sic). Disappointing editing errors. And, when I noticed he was a Goodreads Author, I clicked on his page....only to find out that he "liked" his own photograph. Who does that?

(less)

1 like · like · see review

Sep 08, 2012 Neal rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: amazon, bestbooks

My Amazon Best Books of the Month review: Initially, Eichenwald (The Informant) planned to write a post-9/11 analysis of the second Bush presidency, until he realized that most of the events that set the stage for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the War on Terror--the "decisions, deceptions, and delusions"--happened in the first 18 months after the attacks. This fast-paced narrative of those 553 days takes readers inside CIA headquarters, 10 Downing Street, al-Qaeda training camps, Egyptian tor...more

like · see review

Feb 25, 2013 Kimberly rated it 3 of 5 stars

Good review of the counter-terrorism efforts after 9/11 and decisions by the administration. Excellent behind the scenes look at Gitmo, the CIA, the Pentagon, and the White House and decisions they had to make. While the author is objective in his narrative of the events, I found his selection of the events to be biased and his initial surmise in the introduction to be somewhat incorrect...he seemed to believe that the terrorists held at Gitmo and the administration's dealings with them set the...more

like · see review

Sep 12, 2012 Ray rated it 5 of 5 stars

It's been 10+ years since 9/11 and this book documents our government's responses in the first 500 days after. I applaud Eichenwald's non-partisan presentation of the behind-the-scenes story.

"Secrets and Lies in the Terror Wars" is the sub-title, although I might suggest a couple others: "Politics and Power under Pressure", "Ditching Diplomacy for Deceptive Decisions", or, "How the U.S. threw the Constitution, Geneva Conventions, diplomacy, human rights, basic decency and respect for foreign-na...more

like · see review

Feb 24, 2013 Uwe Hook rated it 5 of 5 stars

This book does a beautiful job of taking a very dark period of our history and laying bare the truth of how our leadership lost their way. It does a wonderful job of switching from key player to key player, world leader to world leader, as a group of misguided appointees hurtles the country towards a war we never needed and a war based on lies and faulty intelligence sculpted into something we wanted to believe. Mr Eichenwald is a masterful storyteller and has a unique way of taking fairly dry c...more

like · see review

Feb 06, 2013 Rose Be rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Politics geeks, the curious, Americans

Recommended to Rose by: The Daily Show

Shelves: international-politics, horror, history, dystopia, contemporary-author, global-development, non-fiction, world, government, war

"Every aspect of the terror wars flowed from judgements made in little more than 500 days after 9/11-- 554 to be exact. Everything-- the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, warrantless wiretapping, detainee treatment, CIA tactics, and more-- could be traced to those eighteen months. What followed in the nearly six years afterward was little more than reactions to those early decisions." -xiii

What the hell happened after 9/11? How did we go from chasing terrorists to being bogged down in two countries...more "Every aspect of the terror wars flowed from judgements made in little more than 500 days after 9/11-- 554 to be exact. Everything-- the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, warrantless wiretapping, detainee treatment, CIA tactics, and more-- could be traced to those eighteen months. What followed in the nearly six years afterward was little more than reactions to those early decisions." -xiii

What the hell happened after 9/11? How did we go from chasing terrorists to being bogged down in two countries that never had WMDs, never aided terrorists in the first place? Why didn't we pursue police action, extradition, any of the options other countries pursue after terrorist attacks? Why does everyone hate us?

Before reading this, I would've just answered "Bush." I mean, he was president at the time and now he's wanted as a war criminal, so must've been his fault, right? Eh. Somewhat his and somewhat his administration's-- one of the strengths of this book is that it doesn't play politics, it delivers straight facts. It has the pacing of a thriller and a hundred pages of footnotes.

The book does have a few drawbacks, and I admit that I don't know enough about the years immediately following 9/11 to know if it falls prey to framing bias (i.e. making things that look true by omitting half the story). Bush gets a fair shake here, coming off as an affable, smart guy who never reads his memos-- even if the memo is, say, on using military spying tactics against US civilians for the first time in our history. He had a plane to catch, yanno?

You can see the complexity of the issues by the book's portrayal of his administration, and how issues got muddled in the quest for immediate results... and the total incompetence of one CIA "psychologist." I know my stance on many of the issues, and I can't say the book changed my thinking-- just enraged me-- but I can see better how the US got into the mess it's in in, for example, Guantanamo. If the CIA says that torture is the only way to avoid another terrorist attack, another attack this week, and you have a couple high-ranking government officials with a hard-on for vengeance and conviction to spare, well... You get very different actions than if you heed the volumes of FBI literature that says gentle relationship-building techniques are the most effective means of interrogation.

As a perk, you also get impressive arm muscles from chucking this 650-page lump across the room so many times.

This book is very US- and UK-centric, since the Iraq War was in fact a US and UK initiative. It makes sense, although it means the international scope of the book is limited; first and foremost, it is a book US policy, foreign and domestic. I would also add that the pace of this book slows considerably in the second half, as it moves from chasing terrorists and "terrorists" across the globe and starts to focus more on the legal disputes brewing inside the US. And while it is fun to see the Department of Justice slap the Bush administration around for completely ignoring, I dunno, the entire legal history and structure of the US, it does get repetitive about 200-300 pages. So there's that.

This book also come with an epilogue, so that you too can see exactly how much we've screwed up. Yeah, I went right from this book to The Chocolate War, which is about a kid who doesn't want to fundraise and not quite as rage-inducing. As an alternative, you could try getting drunk. (less)

like · see review

Jan 11, 2013 Bartb1 rated it 4 of 5 stars

While I found the treatment of the legal issues surrounding the detainee interrogations at times laborious, I thoroughly enjoyed this book. The writing style is lively, employing rapidly changing scenes that flow with the chronology.
I took away a very good sense of the ruthless nature of some of our government decision makers, especially John Yoo, but also gained respect for some who tried to bring sense and decency to decisions about the treatment of detainees. Dick Cheney is more sick and evil...more

like · see review

Apr 30, 2013 Jerome rated it 5 of 5 stars

The title made me think this would be just another political rant, but this book is admirably balanced and never gets polemic. Eichenwald shows how the Bush administration struggled to find a proper balance between national security and legal rights. While it is all too easy to portray the Bush team as evil dictators hellbent on breaking laws, it is important to consider the context of the time period. After 9/11 NOBODY wanted to see another such terrorist attack happen without having done somet...more The title made me think this would be just another political rant, but this book is admirably balanced and never gets polemic. Eichenwald shows how the Bush administration struggled to find a proper balance between national security and legal rights. While it is all too easy to portray the Bush team as evil dictators hellbent on breaking laws, it is important to consider the context of the time period. After 9/11 NOBODY wanted to see another such terrorist attack happen without having done something about it. All this talk of conspiracies and curbing of civil liberties has nothing to do with some evil conspiracy. Rather, it has everything to do with preventing another catastrophe like 9/11 from happening again. We as citizens can, and should, debate whether these methods' benefits outweighed their drawbacks. But portraying it as some evil conspiracy completely misses the point. In an ideal, perfect world, the Bush team would never have considered the things they considered after 9/11. But after 9/11, it was a different world, and the Bush team, or anyone in their position, for that matter, did what they felt was necessary. If the typical pundit who criticizes the Bush team's decisions was in their place during and after 9/11, I find it hard to imagine how THEY would have steered policy into some sort of perfect, rosy, fantasyland where there is no human cost,no paranoia, no hard decisions and an abundance of perfect solutions.

Eichenwald's book moves along at a crisp, smooth pace and never bogs down. However, a big limitation of the fast-paced style is that it precludes analysis and insights into why something happened. For example, an extended analysis of the misconceptions about the "Manchester Manual" is consigned to the "Notes and Sources" appendix (pp 545-552). Advice: Read it -- it is a critical part of the story. One of my biggest frustrations with the accounts -- this and others -- is that I haven't seen a remotely satisfying explanation of why the CIA didn't have qualified, experienced interrogators as part of its normal course-of-business. Or why the military did not use experienced interrogators from the Reserves -- predominantly from civilian law enforcement -- despite the Reserves being explicitly structured to preserve and provide that capability.

There are several themes that are developed in 500 Days. One of the most important themes is how United States conducted the War on Terror. The War on Terror was multifaceted. It involves the military, the CIA, the FBI, the Justice Department, the State Department, the border patrol and the Department of the Treasury just to name a few of the departments that were involved. This book discusses the decisions that were made in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 in order to try to prevent a second attack. George Tenet, director of central intelligence, was convinced the 9/11 was the first in a series of attacks. The FBI and the CIA were convinced that there were sleeper cells here in the United States and abroad. These cells were ready to act. Because of this, the Bush administration always felt like they were behind the eight ball. The Bush administration felt that they needed to catch up in order to prevent the next attack.

One of the sub themes in 500 Days was what to do with detainees and how to interrogate detainees. An outsider, like me or you, would probably figure that there was a big meeting in the White House with the president, vice president and other principles sitting around then discussing how to take care of detainees and how to interrogate detainees, that never happened. Instead, a series of lower-level meetings occurred on the fly. The complexity of this issue is well demonstrated in this book. The central role of John Yoo, Alberto Gonzales, Dr. Jim Mitchell, psychologist for the SERE program, David Addington and William "Jim" Haynes is painstakingly described. The amount of detail on who did what, in my mind, is unprecedented. And enhanced interrogation techniques were not "illegal." They were approved all the way up the line at the Justice Department. The problem was no their legality but their ineffectiveness. FBI rapport-building techniques had been successful time and time again. Harsh tactics simply caused weaker detainees to fabricate lies in order to get the torture to stop and tougher detainees (who came from countries that employed torture on a regular basis) to harden up. As if this isn't stupid enough, when Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded, he had already spilled the beans on what he knew. Before he was waterboarded. How odd.

One of the simplistic arguments that has been perpetuated in the mainstream media was the decision to torture or not torture a particular detainee. The mainstream media has told us that "no actionable intelligence" has come from torturing detainees. Kurt Eichenwald was thrown a wrench in this simplistic view of the world. He has shown us that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who was tortured under US custody gave us a ton of actionable intelligence. (Al Qaeda in Southeast Asia was almost completely wrapped up, disabled, because of the information that came from KSM.) On the other hand, Abu Zubaydah who was initially interviewed by the FBI, gave them excellent intelligence before he was subjected to harsh interrogation (torture). The issue is not black or white. The problem is extremely complex. I tip my hat to Kurt Eichenwald for letting us see that these decisions aren't so black and white.

The most glaring error is stating that each plane had four hijackers, except United 93, which had three. Since there were 19 hijackers the math doesn't add up. Of course there were five on the three; four on United 93 to get to 19.

Other than that,a great read.(less)

like · see review

Jan 27, 2013 H Wesselius rated it 4 of 5 stars

There are problems with this book and one can waver between three and four stars halves not being an option here. Writing a day at a time results in several parallel stories with very few connections interrupting each other; a result which is initially irritating but once the reader becomes acclimatized it becomes manageable.

The two main strands of the story is the legalization of torture and the road to Iraq with rendition and strangely the anthrax attacks providing minor distractions. The boo...more

like · see review

Dec 27, 2012 Matt rated it 3 of 5 stars

Back in September 2001, I was still in college, and my societal consciousness was – to put it kindly – undeveloped. Like most college students, I was most interested in my own existence. And in getting drunk. On September 11, and on the following days, I was glued to CNN along with the rest of humanity. After awhile, though, I stopped paying attention, and went on about my life. This is the luxury of tragedy’s spectators. Certainly, I often heard the news droning in the background, but I never s...more

10 likes · like · see review

Jan 02, 2013 Jaclyn Day rated it 4 of 5 stars

The name of this book is a little misleading. It’s not so much a dissection of secrets and lies, so much as it is a seemingly full account of the 500 days after 9/11. According to the publisher description, Eichenwald had originally intended on writing a complete post-9/11 analysis of Bush’s presidency, but realized that many of the critical decisions and events that led to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were clustered in the first 500 days after 9/11.

It’s an extremely compelling nonfiction f...more The name of this book is a little misleading. It’s not so much a dissection of secrets and lies, so much as it is a seemingly full account of the 500 days after 9/11. According to the publisher description, Eichenwald had originally intended on writing a complete post-9/11 analysis of Bush’s presidency, but realized that many of the critical decisions and events that led to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were clustered in the first 500 days after 9/11.

It’s an extremely compelling nonfiction first because of the very fiction-like narrative that Eichenwald has created. Some other reviewers have noted how it reads like a spy or suspense novel and that’s pretty accurate. The downside of trying to pull in dozens of people and events into one narrative is that there is bound to be some reader confusion. Eichenwald skips across the world in a paragraph’s time, bouncing from the Oval Office, to Guantanamo, to Canada, to Egypt, to Great Britain. There are dozens of names to keep straight throughout the book. I was concerned at the beginning of the book that I might need to check back to the long list of “characters” Eichenwald provided as a handy reference in the preface, but for the most part, his repeated descriptions of people each time they were reintroduced kept the book moving.

The biggest overtone to this book, and something that Eichenwald doesn’t directly address because he doesn’t need to, is that the quick decision-making that was key post-9/11 was a dangerous game. Eichenwald emphasizes the throw everything and see what sticks mentality that was driven by post-9/11 fear and paranoia. While this sometimes resulted in positive outcomes like foiled terror plots (some of which the public doesn’t have general knowledge of), Eichenwald doesn’t hold back in also documenting the negatives. There’s a great deal of attention paid to the near-flippancy with which the White House decided to begin torturing prisoners at Guantanamo. The most harrowing accounts are of two men of Syrian descent shipped off to Egyptian torture chambers (from Canada!) simply because the authorities think they must have had al-Qaeda connections. They didn’t. (They were imprisoned and tortured for over a year and once finally released, one of them was awarded a large monetary settlement from the government of Canada for his wrongful deportation and imprisonment. The other also received a non-disclosed settlement.)

In the vein of Bob Woodward’s books, Eichenwald has reconstructed a lot of dialogue that took place at high-level, closed door meetings. Despite whether or not these meetings took place exactly as Eichenwald described, it’s easy to take him at his word. We’re all familiar with the big picture consequences of some of these meetings and this book fills in the gaps with a valuable insider perspective on what set this country on the path to two wars. You may not usually read nonfiction, but this is a thought-provoking, fascinating book that’s worth your time.(less)

like · see review

Oct 11, 2012 Virginia Strukel rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: read-2012

Very interesting factual based book written by same author as The Informant. Some surprises such as Jose Padilla stopped at O'Hare for customs declaration form filled out improperly, then questioned by agents from NY who already had a material witness subpoena signed by future US Attorney General Michael Mukasey, then a federal judge in NY, for grand jury testimony in NY in case he did not cooperate as a witness. Padilla requested to talk to his mother, then a lawyer, and told the agent he would...more Very interesting factual based book written by same author as The Informant. Some surprises such as Jose Padilla stopped at O'Hare for customs declaration form filled out improperly, then questioned by agents from NY who already had a material witness subpoena signed by future US Attorney General Michael Mukasey, then a federal judge in NY, for grand jury testimony in NY in case he did not cooperate as a witness. Padilla requested to talk to his mother, then a lawyer, and told the agent he would have to arrest him for him to do any talking, which they did. He had a lawyer, and before going before Mukasey, was classified as an enemy combatant and whisked to Guantanomo Bay.

The involvement of White House lawyers (staff lawyers Addington & Gonzalez, Miers), military lawyers, DOJ lawyers and CIA lawyers in determining what was to be done with detainees is also very informative, showing that the US government had to literally bounce around ideas and then individual department or staff lawyers had to come up with supporting prior case law to reinforce what their opinions were as to how things should be handled. US military was against torture techniques, as well as suspending Geneva Convention protocols for the detainees. However, they got overruled by White House lawyer Addington & Gonzalez, with Ashcroft pushing for input, with Gonzalez pushing for the President making the decisions. When Bush confronted, his request was is it legal, trusting possibly a little too much his staff and that of Cheney; Mr. Addington extremely versed in tactics and logic, however, maybe a little overboard in what was the way things should be done. Military commissions were his idea, bypassing federal courts however the issue of US citizens caught overseas & transferred to Gitmo were not getting initially their right to a lawyer under the US Constitution because of the suspension of those rights under the declaration of enemy combatants done by John Yoo, OLG of DoJ. I personally am glad to see numerous lawyers, upon hearing of individuals plight under the circumstances, immediately recognized the overreach of power & the Constitution and took up various cases to ensure the Gitmo detainees had rights to be heard on several subject matters, including living conditions, forced detention, how long they could be held without being charged, as well as the release of numerous persons who were detained improperly, ie Al-Qaeda Claus (elderly man with no connections to Al-Qaeda).

Torture tactics employed by the CIA, with the full backing of the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel via John Yoo who rewrote the "book" on what was deemed necessary, allowable, AND LAWFUL in interrogations of detainees, with the cooperation and backing of one of the Gitmo commanders, as well as a few unthinking lawyers. Fortunately, the US DoD establishment kept fighting to have these matters reviewed, and the tactics were later reversed.

Ashcroft appears inept in his press conferences, with the egomaniac side poking through. Soufan definitely proved the FBI right in interrogation techniques employed did produce info. It is visibly demonstrated that torture techniques that were the preferred method did provide false information as suspects were used to or were familiar with other countries' forms of interrogation and what to expect, not always what the so-called Manchester Manual prepared them for according to US interpretation of the Manual; plenty of wrong assumptions there. Some of the detainees had heard stories of interrogation methods employed throughout the Middle East intelligence agencies, and some were actual subjects of it. The descriptions are horrific if you realize that the CIA employed techniques that were shortly thereafter deemed unproductive by CIA lawyers, and were blinded to the fact that the intelligence being produced was in most cases not true. The author's notes at the end are a must-read regarding the suspected true origin of the Manchester Manual, as it is not suspected Al-Qaeda material but it interpreted by others as that of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which is currently "taking over" in Egypt's revolution currently, as was predicted by, I believe it was, Mubarak (I could be wrong on this, however, I am reasonably certain Mubarak's administration was predicting this if Mubarak was removed from power.)

The book also points out the different terrorist groups that comprise the world's "war on terror" that are not always true Al-Qaeda groups. Lumping together all groups under one umbrella that was originally done with these groups is an incredible intelligence failure in and of itself, and numerous others are documented in the book dealing with Iraq's lack of WMD and the overriding executive office opinion that the US needed to move quickly to remove Hussein from power even though inspectors were finding no current usable WMD. Hussein's later questioning about why none were found by an FBI agent - there wasn't any as his response wasn't surprising to this reader as the prior military actions against Iraq (Desert Storm) as well as prior weapons inspections were part of the proper intelligence already in hand. It is a shame the US had the improper information regarding numerous issues, or that intelligence was blown out of proportion by a few, including the Joe and Valerie Plame incident (a whole other subject), to the point that US military is still involved in Iraq, as well as the continued "uprisings" occuring within that country amongst its own leadership and political groups.

The discussion of the overall 500 days and what occurred, as well as the insight into how the US wound up with its numerous policies regarding how to handle the "terrorist" including Military Commission Act passed by Congress, the handling of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), the mastermind of 9/11, and his admission that he was responsible, not Osama Bin Laden, for the attacks, the behind the scenes movements of numerous lawyers in Washington provides a very good book on what occurred, who made decisions, the bad intelligence, and who later backtracked on their opinions.

A must-read as far as I'm concerned for every American History class at the high school and collegiate levels, as well as great material for the Political Science class to learn the going's on in the government sector known as Washington, DC. It should be a must-read for ever person who has ever been affected by 9/11, or any other terrorist attack, as well as every government official from the President down. It is a very good reflection of some of the absurdity in making assumptions based on someone else's opinion not necessarily fact, and then enacting policies that unfortunately put the US on the same level as those governments that the US and world's human rights communities have been trying to change due to interrogation tactics and mistreatment of citizens and prisoners. A reminder of the Geneva Conventions enacted following WWII is included for those who debate the subject of enemy combatant versus prisoner of war status.

The surprise for this reader - the viewpoint held by a few that the American Red Cross is a pain in the butt regarding Guantanomo Bay. Maybe it's a good thing they were around, as well as a few of the defense lawyers who took one look, took a stance and started filing a few of those cases asserting rights for the US citizens at Gitmo, as well as some of those who weren't citizens, in order for the military establishment to further look within itself and say, no, we're not going to do this before things got any further out of hand. The premise of classified information so that US prisoners of war being held are treated well is still a good one and should still be in effect, however, in the interest of future policy, my opinion is one of someone should be responsible enough to put their foot down, keep it down, and others to stop and review things before policies are agreed upon that are detrimental to the military as well as law enforcement agencies.

It is a shame the DoJ is in such a shambles, with more than just interrogation going on in the present day. Interrogation under the law enforcement practices was shown to be extremely effective in getting background information, military satellites for actual photo and video footage of movements as well as electronic intercepts, and the foreign intelligence community for providing additional important information regarding potential planning and other cell members involved in their respective countries.
(less)

like · see review

Oct 10, 2012 Dan rated it 5 of 5 stars

This is an incredible read that will allow the reader to understand why we should always question authority before granting them more power than they already have. It details how otherwise good people can be scared into fighting evil with evil, which is what evil wants. It raises more questions than it answers, but for those on a quest to understand the how, why, and who of 9/11 it is a great starting point. In order to intelligently decide where we should go from here this book is a must read.

like · see review

Feb 28, 2013 Geraldine rated it 5 of 5 stars

I always believed America was a moral country, that we were the best of the best and that we did not engage in horrific torture and that our government was incredibly open. This book has changed my mind.

I am appalled at the behavior of the leaders of our government after 9/11, particularly President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and those who served under them. I do understand the great need to protect Americans, but the United States did some dastardly things in order to save us.

To be plucked o...more

like · see review

Oct 20, 2012 Tony rated it 4 of 5 stars

A well written, fast moving and detailed history of the 500 days immediately following the events of 9/11. Kurt Eichenwald traveled the globe doing exhaustive reporting and interviews with hundreds of individuals who were part of the global events during this time. His narrative is gripping as he outlines the decision making and reasoning behind the U.S. response to the events of 9/11 leading up to the start of the war in Iraq. Fascinating history and well worth the time.

like · see review

Oct 06, 2012 Diane Kistner rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

About 60% of this substantial book is the story of what our government did in the roughly 500 days after 9/11; the rest is comprehensive notes. The former, written at about an eighth-grade reading level in an easy-to-read chunked style, is fast-paced and reads like a novel. Rather than spending excessive time on Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld (although we do get strong characterizations of these men), the author takes us behind the scenes to see what the lawyers, FBI, CIA, and others were doing duri...more

like · see review

Mar 15, 2013 Lee rated it 5 of 5 stars

Terrific book. Took one of the seminal events in world history/politics in last half century and managed to make it read like a novel. While most of the information would be already known to someone who has kept on news there were a few nuggets in there. The book's strength really is to tie all the moving themes after 9/11 into a cohesive story that gives the reader a great sense of the country's mindset and actions following 9/11. Even though you know how the book ends, its a story worth readin...more

like · see review

Jan 02, 2013 Jennifer rated it 5 of 5 stars

This book should be required reading for all Americans...it is a meticulously researched history of the 500 days following 9/11. To say that the policy and legal choices made by our government in those days have had horrifying and long-lasting consequences may not really do justice to the situation created, but it should give all of us pause when we consider what was done in our name. The author did a masterful job of research and writing here.

1 like · like · see review

Oct 06, 2012 John Reas rated it 4 of 5 stars

If anyone wants a firm understanding of how the decisions made by the Bush administration during the first year and half shaped our country's view in pursuing the War On Terror and how our nation came to sanction the use of torture and the justification of the invasion of Iraq as an outcome of this war, please read Eichenwald's work. It makes all of us stop to think how quickly our Republic can fall into a moral abyss in times of crisis.

like · see review

Jun 24, 2012 Jean-Paul Adriaansen rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: history

I wish this was fiction, so that I did not have to believe what I read. The account of what happened in the 500 days after 09/11 is mind blowing, harrowing, even surreal, and so not according to what the USA stands for. In spite of the honest, decent work of thousands of Americans in the war on terror, this is a story about incompetence, arrogance, and jealousy on the highest levels in American politics. When the USA rejects universal agreements, when American jurists are searching for the legal...more

3 likes · like · see review

Oct 13, 2012 Stan rated it 4 of 5 stars

This book was a very interesting approach to the question of the balance between security and liberty in post 9/11 America. While much emphasis was placed on Mr. Yoo and his opinions while in the Office of Legal Counsel, I would like to have seen some more ideas on how the law - and international treaties - could and should be changed to adapt to a world where terrorism can be stateless and conflicts can last for many years.

like · see review

May 05, 2013 Ben Dummitt rated it 3 of 5 stars

I'm not a fan of Kurt Eichenwald as a writer. The three star review is more about the writing style than the content. This book is primarily composed of very small segments, often less than one page. Combined with jumping from topic to topic and a rather large cast of characters and names to remember, it makes for a rather disjointed read.
Writing style aside, the book is a good source of information and provided a lot of behind the scenes information on events that I remember. I thought those ev...more

like · see review

Apr 22, 2013 Katherine rated it 4 of 5 stars

This narrative non-fiction reads much like a fictional suspense/thriller novel! Author Kurt Eichenwald provides key insights into the behind-the-scenes wrangling between the U.S. Administration, Intelligence Officials, Military Units, and Foreign Affairs Officials in the wake of 9/11. There were moments where Eichenwald's writing verged more on the "narrative" portion of this non-fiction read--especially when it came to some of Bush's thoughts/musings that weren't really noted in the Sources sec...more

like · see review

Dec 07, 2012 Delena Spencer rated it 5 of 5 stars

Kurt Eichenwald is one of my favorite authors and this book certainly did not disappoint. The book, just like Conspiracy of Fools, reads like a novel. And, though I think of myself as well-read and up to date on the news, there is so much that I learned about the 500 days after 9/11. Some parts of the book were hard to read and horrifying, but it was deeply researched and well-balanced. In some cases, I was more confident in our government, in many others, I was shocked and disappointed.

Thanks s...more

like · see review

title link	preview: 500 Days: Decisions and Deceptions in the Shadow of 9/11
avg rating	preview: 500 Days: Decisions and Deceptions in the Shadow of 9/11 Goodreads rating: 4.10 (319 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13260156-500-days?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1339798858l/13260156.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13260156-500-days?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]500 Days: Decisions and Deceptions in the Shadow of 9/11 by Kurt Eichenwald[/url]

500 Days: Decisions and Deceptions in the Shadow of 9/11

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (6)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

Books by Kurt Eichenwald

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About 500 Days: Decisio...

500 Days: Decisions and Deceptions in the Shadow of 9/11

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topicDiscuss This Book

combineOther Editions (6)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

Books by Kurt Eichenwald

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About 500 Days: Decisio...

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (6)