Preliminaries

First, I need to make a few statements about myself and this article.  I’m not impartial.  I don’t respect Julian Assange.  I have never given Wikileaks money or secrets.  I’ve worked with Muslims and had Muslim friends, some of whom were Kurds later killed by Saddam Hussein.  I don’t understand the complexities of Lebanese, Syrian or Israeli politics, and I believe few people do.  In general, I don’t trust Russian media, but I thank them for being the first to tell the world that Japan and TEPCO were lying about the seriousness of the damage to the reactors at Fukushima.  This article runs nearly as long as an article in a print magazine.  I’ve used headings to help you skim it.  You can find my recommendation in the last paragraph.

The Room

Sayyid Nasrallah is not present in person for the interview.  Assange sits at a desk in a cluttered office.  We only see Nasrullah respond to Assange’s questions on a video monitor on Assange’s desk.  Assange explains that Nasrallah is in a secret location.  Two interpreters, one to translate Assange’s remarks for Nasrallah and one to translate Nasrallah’s remarks for Assange, sit to Assange’s left.  The entire interview was prerecorded before broadcast.  

Attacks on Civilians

Assange begins by asking about Hezbollah’s attacks on the civilian population of Israel.  Nasrallah quite predictably answers that Hezbollah only began these attacks in response to Israel’s attacks on civilian areas in Lebanon.  I hope Assange asked this question to make Nasrallah comfortable.  You don’t have to be Carl von Clausewitz to understand that attacks on civilians have a political purpose and that Nasrallah hasn’t commented on the political purpose of the Hezbollah attacks.  Is Hezbollah trying to use the attacks to provoke a change in Israeli politics or bolster support at home?  

Corruption in Hezbollah   

Assange asks Nasrallah about observations Nasrallah made about signs of corruption and wealth in Hebollah.  Assange wants to know if corruption is inevitable once Hezbollah ventures into electoral politics.  Assange carefully bases his question on remarks of Nasrallah that were quoted in (stolen) cable messages from the US Embassy in Lebanon.  Nasrallah says this report was part of an effort by the US to discredit Hezbollah.  Some rich families now support Hezbollah, Nasrallah says, but they’re not in Hezbollah.  Nasrallah’s remarks don’t give a coherent answer to the question, nor do they address the problem of money in politics in Lebanon, nor do they address why the US government would waste its time making secret propaganda cables.  Propaganda needs to be public to work.  

Syria

Assange next asks Nasrallah why Hezbollah supports the Syrian government against an Arab Spring movement even though it supported the protesters elsewhere.  Nasrallah says that Hezbollah supports negotiations and reform in Syria because “the alternative is to push Syria into civil war and this is exactly what America and Israel want for Syria.”  Nasrallah seems to say he’ll support anyone who opposes the US and Israel.  At this point Assange shows some heat and asks a probing question, “Does Hezbollah have a ‘red line?’  If there are 100,000 people killed, if there are 1 million people killed, when will Hezbollah say that is enough?”  Nasrallah answers that when Hezbollah contacted the Syrian opposition, they rejected dialogue.  In my view, Nasrallah blames the victims.  Assange asks what practical steps might be taken to stop the bloodshed.  Nasrallah replies the countries providing arms and money to the opposition could get them to sit down to negotiations.  In a bizarre twist, he also says it’s unfair to give Israel years to come to negotiations but not even a few months to Syria.  I see no real linkage between Israel and the prospect of negotiations and reforms in Syria–except that Hezbollah wants to continue to feed in Syria’s trough.  If Nasrallah is telling the Syrian opposition that they need to wait until Israel falls to have pro-democracy movement, no wonder they ignore him.

Pressed by Assange, Nasrallah insists Hezbollah is a friend of Syria and not an agent of Syria.  Assange continues to inquire about red lines, but Nasrallah says only that Assad and the Syrian government have red lines and Hezbollah reaffirms them.  Assange points out that Tunisia no longer recognizes the government of Syria and asks why Nasrallah believes Tunisia takes this position.  Nasrallah answers that Tunisia may have based its response on incomplete information or perhaps a wish to appease the US and the West. 

Al-Menar

At this point Assange must feel he’s made Nasrallah uncomfortable because Assange asks another easy question.  Assange asks Nasrallah about the hypocrisy of the US block of Al-Menar, the Hezbollah satellite channel, within the US.  Nasrallah comments, without the appearance of giving any thought to his answer, that the US isn’t fair and is refusing to let Hezbollah explain its side of the story.  In truth, the US does block Al-Menar broadcasts internally because the US classifies Hezbollah as a terrorist organization–but other countries that do not classify Hezbollah as a terrorist organization block it, too.  For example, France blocks Al-Menar because the station airs anti-semitic views.  

I have to admit that I did not know my government blocked the broadcast of Al-Menar.  If I want to explore the offerings on Al-Menar, I have to go to their English-language website or sort through the 2000 or so videos of theirs on YouTube.  I went to their website for the first time yesterday, and I don’t see a reason to go there again.  A search on the term Syria brought up only four English-language stories.  Al-Menar has nothing on Al-Jazeera, unless you want to watch Arab-language music videos or soap operas.  Julian Assange asks Nasrallah why the American government fears Al-Menar.  I’m wondering the same thing.  Who would watch?  Al-Menar would have to improve its English- and Spanish-language programming and news-gathering tremendously to reach a US audience of any size, for only about 0.2 percent of Americans speak Arabic.

Leadership

Assange next questions Nasrallah on how he kept his people together under enemy fire.  Nasrallah’s answer is, to say the least, offbeat. He explains that his organization has a clear objective that they rallied around.  Nasrallah tells Assange that the purpose of his organization is resistance to Israeli occupation and that Hezbollah only got into government to further that objective. He adds that Hezbollah cooperated with other groups to achieve this objective.  Nasrallah states that he still believes his country is threatened by Israel.

Boyhood

Shifting gears completely, Assange asks Nasrallah about his boyhood, about his first memories and about how these memories affect his political thought.  Nasrallah appears somewhat taken aback.  He does reply that the neighborhood where he grew up in East Beirut was very mixed and that he grew up among Muslims, both Shi’a and Sunni, Christians, Armenians, Kurds and Palestinians.  This environment, Nasrallah says, sensitized him to the fate of the Palestinians who had been forced out of Israel.  One wonders why Nasrallah does not mention the displacement of the Armenians and Kurds.

Encryption

Assange states that he is an expert in encryption, which helps him do his work despite tight surveillance.  He attempts to strike a bond with Nasrallah by asking him to tell a funny story about encryption.  Nasrallah explains Hezbollah’s system of encryption: two boys from the same village use local village terms and sayings to communicate over walkie-talkies.  This system is impervious to decryption by Israeli military intelligence or anyone else who did not grow up in the same village as the boys.  Nasrallah jokes that Assange shouldn’t try this system.  I found this exchange revealing.  Hezbollah isn’t going to be a serious military force in the Middle East until it finds more sophisticated communications tools, for a large portion of its own warfighters can’t understand these locality-based communications either.

Religion

Now Assange asks a very difficult question.  Having opposed the hegemony of the United States, a superpower, shouldn’t Nasrallah also oppose the idea of monotheism, which Assange says is the ultimate expression of hegemony and totalitarianism.  Nasrallah has spent more time praying in Qom that than reading Camus, and he was stunned to be asked such a question.  His answer is garbled, but it’s something like the following: monotheism is consistent with human resistance to evil because God made man.  Nasrallah won’t be converting many atheists to Islam with this argument.  

Credits

The credits at the end of the program are whited out.  Assange says his organization removed the credits to protest the grand jury investigation of the parties listed in the credits of his video “Collateral Murder.”  The video concludes with a few public encryption keys so viewers can send confidential communications to Quick Roll Productions.

My Take Away

Julian Assange

I don’t like Julian Assange as a person.  I don’t like the way he looks.  I wouldn’t want my older daughter to step within 200 feet of him.  Redacting the credits in protest sounds like a cool way to protest investigation of the parties involved in the “Collateral Murder” video, but this self-censorship also means Assange takes exclusive credit for the show.  He makes my skin crawl.  With that out of the way, I have to admit he worked hard to put together a good interview.  He researched his questions–or had someone else do it for him–and stayed in control of the interview.  

Dick Cheney

I had a very emotional and unexpected reaction to Sayyid Nasrallah.  Halfway through the interview, I found myself comparing him to Dick Cheney.  Why?  They both think everything revolves around one issue.  In Cheney’s case, it’s 9/11.  Israel is Nasrallah’s 9/11.  Nasrallah and Cheney also sit in a chair like a frog in repose.  

Al-Menar

I did learn something about my own government from the interview.  On principle I don’t approve of the censorship of Al-Menar.  Nevertheless, Al-Menar will need to put tens of thousands of hours of work into its programming for me to feel like I’m missing anything.  

Did the Syrian opposition reject Hezbollah’s offer of mediation?

With the exception of one statement, Nasrallah said nothing new.  He did make the claim, which we heard for the first time on “The World Tomorrow,” that the Syrian opposition rejected Hezbollah’s offer of mediation with the government.  Nevertheless, this statement isn’t news, it’s hearsay, even coming from him.  He’s telling us what and hoping we won’t ask him about who, when, where and how.  

Sayyid Nasrallah feels your pain if you’re Muslim and not Kurdish

The selective sensitization of Nasrallah disturbed me.  He says he became aware of the plight of the Palestinians when he was growing up in a diverse area that included Muslims, Christians, Armenians, Kurds and Palestinians.  Why such a limited sensitization?  I’m willing to forgive his ignorance of the obliteration of a large portion of Christian Armenia, and I’ll let him fail to remember that his country still had a fair-sized Jewish population when he was a boy, but why wasn’t he sensitized to the oppression of Kurds?  Why does he mention them as a group distinct from other Muslims?

Hezbollah 

An ugly picture of Hezbollah emerges from the interview.  Political potentates at the top mingle with the wealthy while poorly equipped young boys, with the occasional help of a rocket launched by the elite, oppose a mechanized army.  

Recommendation

I recommend watching “The World Tomorrow,” and I plan to watch the next episode.  Assange works hard to make these interviews informative.  No American interviewer would have talked to Nasrallah about God as a hegemonic concept.  I doubt Nasrallah understands how his answer discredited him among leftists in countries where the left has a strong anti-clerical tradition.  Assange’s interview style, on the other hand, is soft on the interviewee.  I doubt any guests will walk out on him.  ”The World Tomorrow” will be worth watching as long as Assange’s reputation allows him to book unusual guests.    

The World Tomorrow, Episode 1 link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDLXPpooA18

Republicans will never see it this way - but Romney is actually the only sensible candidate amongst the entire bunch who tried for the nomination.

Just picking a few at random, Santorum came across as a fanatic obsessed about sex, Rick Perry forgot his own policy, Herman Cain couldn’t keep his hands to himself, Trump and his hair were in there for a while, and  Gingrich thinks the wisdom of the world, not a horny old goat, lives inside his head.

That may make them sound interesting, but worrying too, and hardly Presidential. For many voters the fact that a candidate is not Obama is enough. But that’s a big part of the problem. Because millions of others who can think for themselves, but don’t shout so much, want more from a President.

Once Romney secures the nomination and escapes from the wild eyed fantasists of his own party he’ll probably come up with a decent, if dull, campaign. So surely he needs someone with a sprinkling of wit and charisma to energise the package?

Here comes the first problem. Romney can only pick one running mate so top politicians, being the creatures they are, have to guard against not being the chosen one. They pre-empt the situation by saying – they don’t want to be on the ticket. They can be polite about it and they won’t lose face by not being chosen.

Florida Senator Marco Rubio who could add Hispanic appeal, has said no thanks. So has Susanna Martinez, Governor of New Mexico, who could do the same and possibly win the women’s vote. Bob McDonnell is happy being Governor of Virginia. Chris Christie of New Jersey and former Governor of Minnesota Tim Pawlenty have said no thanks, together with Nikki Haley Governor of South Carolina and Ohio Senator Rob Portman. There will be more when the hopefuls discover they aren’t in the running.

It was Professor Julian Zelizer from Princeton who said Romney should go for a boring VP. His evidence is a list of successful tickets, Dick Cheney with George Bush, Al Gore with Bill Clinton and surely the clincher, George HW Bush with Ronald Reagan. The big snag of course is that Romney doesn’t have the persuasive charm of a Clinton or Reagan – and unlike Dubya he doesn’t have a brother to count the votes for him in Florida!

So he probably does need a partner with a sparkle. A smarter Sarah Palin would do nicely. Perhaps there’s one out there.

If unfamiliar with the tea party backed, Florida Representative, West, all one needs to do is google him to discover he is constantly mad and railing about something. It usually involves someone receiving some assistance unfairly or, frankly, President Obama doing anything. Today he is took on the “nanny-state” again, complaining about the regulation requiring public pool owners to make their pools access to people with disabilities. Let me repeat that, people with disabilities. He’s complaining about a year old piece of legislation that will allow people with disabilities to be able to use a public pool, such as a resort’s pool, when paying to stay at said resort. He claims the economic burden this puts on the hotel owners is unfair. However, I guess it’s fair for the same hotel owners to take money from a person in a wheel chair to stay in on of their hotels? I am sure they don’t allow a person in a wheel chair to stay for free, since they wouldn’t be able to use the facilities, right? 

I am betting that he would have protested against having ramps and elevators installed in public places as well, since they caused economic hardship as well. And, hell, those pesky front parking spots that had to be made handicap accessible, they were prime spots for customers without disabilities. Yes, why should we go out of our way to assist someone who might be forced to live with a disability, that maybe wasn’t their fault, like a birth defect, or injured in a car accident, or a veteran that lost a leg defending our freedom. Being that West spent 20 years in the military, you would think that the last one would at the very least hit somewhat close to home.

So that leads me to my conclusion, that Dick Cheney took Allen West’s heart since there’s no question, West isn’t using it.

His first heart attack he had been with for 37 years: Former Vice President Dick Cheney here last November in Washington

Former U.S. Vice President Richard “Dick” Cheney has apparently received a new heart. He had an operation on Saturday in a hospital in Virginia, near the capital, Washington, U.S. media reported, citing an employee of the 71-year-olds. Cheney, who had suffered heart attacks was only five, therefore, for 20 months on a waiting list for a donor organ.

“Even if do not know the former vice president and his family, the identity of the donor, it will be for this life-saving gift forever grateful”, said Cheney’s spokeswoman Kara Ahern is reported to be with.

The conservative Republican has long been a serious heart condition and had to undergo repeated surgeries. He suffered his first heart attack at the age of 37 years. A pump 2010, he was used to support the heart in the chest.

Proponents of torture and illegal eavesdropping, interrogations

Cheney was under then President George W. Bush from 2001 to 2009 Vice President of the United States – the culmination of a long political career: In 1975, he was chief of staff under Gerald Ford at the White House, Congressman from 1979-89. Under George Bush senior, he was defense minister until 1993. Then he went for years in the private sector. For five years he was at the head of the oil services giant Halliburton.

Historians consider him one of the most influential and controversial vice presidents in U.S. history. He is said to have played even with Bush’s decision to invade Iraq in 2003 a potentially crucial role. As number two, he strengthened himself, and for the controversial Guantanamo Bay prison camp and was also a major proponent of secret CIA prisons, torture and illegal interrogation techniques interception.

Image by The U.S. National Archives via Flickr

Condoleezza rice was both National Security Consultant and Secretary of Condition under Leader George W. bush. She seemed to be an administration representative who assisted scare the United states citizens into supporting the

I do not believe that there’s any chance that the Arab Spring flourishes in Iraq. An Arab Spring in Iraq appears like Syria, but so much worse. Because, unlike.

The first kind secretary of condition can look November. 15 at Bolingbrook Club together with her new book.

Former Secretary of Condition Condoleezza rice stated Herman Cain shouldn’t be playing the race card within an interview broadcast following the former pizza executive stated he’s being assaulted by liberals for his race although not by conservatives.

BY Aliyah Shahid Former Secretary of Condition Condoleezza rice recalls in her own new memoir as soon as she discovered that they after which-Leader George bush might have been poisoned. Inside a revealing ABC interview, rice recounted the storyline during tour on her

 Former Vice President Dick Cheney praised the Obama administration Sunday for using a drone strike to kill American-born Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, but said President Barack Obama should now reverse past criticism of former President George W. Bush’s actions against suspected terrorists.

 Al-Awlaki — an American whose fluency in English and technology made him one of the top terrorist recruiters in the world — was killed Friday in Yemen, according to U.S. and Yemeni government officials.

 The strike also killed Samir Khan, an American of Pakistani origin, and two others who were in the same vehicle as al-Awlaki, said the U.S. official, who was briefed by the CIA. Khan specialized in computer programming for al Qaeda and authored the terror network’s online magazine, Inspire.

 ”I think it was a very good strike. I think it was justified,” Cheney told CNN’s Candy Crowley on “State of the Union.” But “I’m waiting for the administration to go back and correct something they said two years ago when they criticized us for ‘overreacting’ to the events of 9/11.”
Cheney approves of al-Awlaki attack
Cheneys: Iraq and 2012 GOP field
Getting to know Dick and Liz Cheney

 The Obama administration has “clearly … moved in the direction of taking robust action when they feel it is justified,” Cheney said.

Cheney’s daughter, Liz Cheney, went a step further, saying Obama “in effect said that we had walked away from (America’s) ideals.”

“I think he did tremendous damage,” Liz Cheney said. “I think he slandered the nation and I think he owes an apology to the American people.”

 When asked by Crowley if Dick Cheney also wants an apology, the former vice president replied, “Well, I would. I think that would be not for me, but I think for the Bush administration.”

 Republican critics of the administration claim it is hypocritical for Obama to approve the killing of Americans without due process while criticizing Bush officials for signing off on the use of so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques” such as waterboarding.

The use of such techniques has been banned by Obama.

 Former Rep. Jane Harman, D-California, told CNN that she believes many of Obama’s critiques of the Bush White House — most notably its secrecy — are valid.

 ”I don’t think the Obama administration should be repeating” those mistakes, Harman said. “I think the debate about the legal grounds (for counterterrorism strategy) should be more in the open,” she said. In particular, “we should have a legal framework around our interrogation and detention policies far more than we do now.”

 Harman, a former top member of the House Intelligence and Homeland Security committees, also cautioned about the need for strict guidelines in the use of drone strikes, which have increased under Obama’s watch. Critics of drone strikes argue that they undermine the U.S. cause by killing innocent civilians, infringing on the sovereignty of other nations and generating sympathy for al Qaeda and other extremist organizations.

 ”We could abuse this program,” Harman said. “We’ve got to have a counter-narrative (to dissuade potential terrorists). We’ve got to live our values.”

 Retired Gen. Michael Hayden, a former CIA director under George W. Bush, largely dismissed Harman’s warning, telling CNN that critics of drone strikes “greatly exaggerate” their collateral damage.

 The strikes are arguably the most critical weapon in the U.S. arsenal against al Qaeda, Hayden said.

Image via Wikipedia

Have human rights organizations today, American and Canadian press conference and seminars in Vancouver, Canada urges the Attorney General of Canada to open an investigation and prosecution against former U.S. President George W. Bush on issues related to the torture of detainees in U.S. prisons.

She said such organizations – in a statement, I got a copy of Alice – The call to open an investigation and initiate prosecution of Bush is based on individual responsibility and leadership, under Canadian law and international law of human rights.

The Canadian Centre for Justice and International Center for Constitutional Rights in America – who fly the case – they will show at the press conference for a file specifies a detailed and lengthy case against former U.S. President, and request a formal investigation and legal prosecution against him. The centers that the file consists of a four thousand page contains materials to support the case to the Attorney General.

Bush had canceled a planned visit to Switzerland earlier this year after the announcement of the Centre for Constitutional Rights filed a criminal complaint that he will in this country on behalf of two detainees who were tortured, according to a press release of the two jurists.

It is scheduled to speak at Bush’s Economic Summit Regional held on October 20 / October, compared to $ 150 thousand charge for participation.

The human rights organizations had earlier threatened to take legal action against Bush in Switzerland for alleged abuse of detainees at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

It also called on the Human Rights Watch, human rights U.S. foreign governments to prosecute Bush and senior administration officials for war crimes, if it failed to manage the current President Barack Obama in the investigation in a number of evidence growing that proves the involvement of Bush and his men in the use of torture.

Published a human rights organization based in New York report in July saying that the U.S. authorities to investigate the legally binding by senior Bush administration officials for war crimes such as kidnapping, torture and ill-treatment of prisoners.

The report explained that the legal team of the previous U.S. administration was part of a conspiracy in the preparation of the opinions which allows violations are well aware that they have no basis in American or international laws.

In addition to Bush, identified by Human Rights Watch’s name Vice President Dick Cheney and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and former director of the CIA George Tenet, as guilty as potential authorization of torture and other crimes.

Source: Al Jazeera

 Mitt Romney and Rick Perry wasted very little time in going straight at one another Wednesday night, sparring over whether the former’s business expertise or the latter’s decade as governor of Texas is healthier coaching for enhancing jobs because the occupant of the White House.

“Michael Dukakis created jobs thrice faster than you did, Mitt,” said Mr. Perry, referring to the previous liberal Democratic governor who lost the 1988 presidential election.

“George Bush and his predecessor created jobs at a faster rate than you did, governor,” retorted Mr. Romney, a one-term Massachusetts governor who made his fortune leading a capital investment firm, as he pointed to the person whom Mr. Perry succeeded in 2000.

With the Republican presidential nomination on the road, the GOP field squared off at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in a nationally televised discussion within which the candidates clawed at one another on their records and rhetoric amassed over years of state service.

But the moderators repeatedly brought the fight back to Mr. Perry and Mr. Romney, the 2 front-runners in the national polls.

Mr. Perry took hearth over his state’s low rankings on education, Texas’s record-breaking pace of executions of criminals, and his move as governor to undertake to possess all 12-year-old girls in his state inoculated against a sexually transmitted disease — something he acknowledged he would have done differently currently.

Meanwhile, Mr. Romney was blasted for his decision as governor to sign a health care law that features a private mandate that every resident of his state purchase health care or face a fine.

“It was an excellent opportunity for us as a folks to ascertain what’s going to not work, which is a private mandate in this country,” said Mr. Perry, whereas businessman Herman Cain said he had opposed former 1st lady Hillary Clinton’s Nineties health care set up, President Obama’s 2010 set up and “now I’m running against Romneycare.”

Mr. Romney said what worked in his state won’t work everywhere, and said one of his 1st acts as president would be to possess his administration issue waivers to every state.

“I understand health care pretty darn well, having been through what I went through as a governor. And one factor I’d do on day one if I’m elected president is direct my secretary of Health and Human Services to put an executive order granting a waiver from Obamacare to any or all fifty states,” he said.

As much because the candidates sparred among themselves, they saved their harshest criticism for Mr. Obama.

“Obamacare took over one-sixth of the economy,” said Rep. Michele Bachmann, Minnesota Republican. “This is the issue of 2012, along with jobs. this can be our window of opportunity. If we fail to repeal Obamacare in 2012, it will be with us forever, and it will be socialized medicine.”

For Mr. Perry, the debate was his 1st likelihood personally to mix things up with his fellow candidates, and to indicate Republican voters that he deserves the first adulation he’s received from several of them.

He gave the impression to stumble over a handful of answers when asked to face his past rhetoric with his stances as a presidential candidate, however had his strongest moments when he was defending his state’s specific record during his decade as governor.

He conjointly didn’t go into reverse on his criticism of Social Security as a Ponzi scheme, and said that applied despite former vp Dick Cheney, who earlier Wednesday had suggested such language was over the highest.

For one instant on the morning of Sept. 11, an airliner that had vanished from all the tracking tools of contemporary aviation suddenly became visible in its final seconds to the people that had been attempting to search out it.

It was simply when nine a.m., sixteen minutes when a plane had hit the north tower of the globe Trade Center, when a radio transmission came into the new york air traffic management radar center. “Hey, are you able to look out your window right now?” the caller said.

“Yeah,” the radar management manager said.

“Can you, are you able to see a guy at concerning 4,000 feet, concerning five east of the airport without delay, feels like he’s —”

“Yeah, I see him,” the manager said.

“Do you see that guy, look, is he descending into the building also?” the caller asked.

“He’s descending really fast too, yeah,” the manager said. “Forty-five hundred without delay, he simply dropped 800 feet in like, like one, one sweep.”

“What reasonably airplane is that, are you able to guys tell?”

“I don’t recognize, I’ll browse it out in a minute,” the manager said.

There was no time to browse it out.

In the background, people may be heard shouting: “Another one simply hit the building. Wow. Another one simply hit it exhausting. Another one simply hit the globe Trade.”

The manager spoke.

“The whole building simply came apart,” he said.

That moment is an element of a newly printed chronicle of the civil and military aviation responses to the hijackings that originally had been ready by investigators for the 9/11 Commission, but never completed or released.

Threaded into vivid narratives covering each of the four airliners, the multimedia document contains 114 recordings of air traffic controllers, military aviation officers, airline and fighter jet pilots, still as 2 of the hijackers, stretching across 2 hours of the morning of Sept. 11, 2001.

Though a number of the audio has emerged over the years, mainly through public hearings and a federal criminal trial, the report provides a rare 360-degree view of events that were unfolding at high speed across the Northeast within the skies and on the bottom. This week, the entire document, with recordings, is being printed for the primary time by the Rutgers Law Review, and alternatives of it are offered online at nytimes.com.

“The story of the day, of 9/11 itself, is best told within the voices of 9/11,” said Miles Kara, a retired Army colonel and an investigator for the commission who studied the events of that morning.

Most of the work on the document — which commission staff members called an “audio monograph” — was finished in 2004, not in time to go through a long legal review before the commission was finish off that August.

Mr. Kara tracked down the initial electronic files earlier this year within the National Archives and finished reviewing and transcribing them with facilitate from law students and John J. Farmer Jr., the dean of Rutgers Law faculty, who served as senior counsel to the commission.

At hearings in 2003 and 2004, the 9/11 Commission played a number of the recordings and said civil and military controllers improvised responses to attacks they had never trained for. At 9 a.m., a manager of air traffic management in new york called Federal Aviation Administration headquarters in Herndon, Va., attempting to search out out if the civil aviation officials were working with the military.

“Do you recognize if anyone down there has done any coordination to scramble fighter-type airplanes?” the manager asked, continuing: “We have several things going, happening here, it’s escalating big, big time, and we have to be compelled to get the military involved with us.”

One plane had already crashed into the north tower of the globe Trade Center. Another had been hijacked and was seconds from hitting the south tower. At F.A.A. headquarters, not everyone was up to hurry.

“Why, what’s going on?” the man in Herndon asked.

“Just get me somebody who has the authority to urge military within the air, now,” the manager said.

In its 2004 report, the commission praised front-line aviation officials. but it then thoroughly dismantled the accounts of senior government officials, who within the weeks when Sept. 11, and for more than a year afterward, assured the general public that fighter pilots had been in hot pursuit of the suicidal hijackers. during these chases, per accounts from vice chairman Dick Cheney, the F.A.A. and the Defense Department, the pilots were described as able to perform a wrenching order from President George W. Bush to shoot down airliners.

The commission discovered that little of that was true: of the four flights, military commanders had nine minutes’ notice on one before it flew into the globe Trade Center, and didn’t learn the opposite three had been hijacked until when they had crashed. Military commanders, given an order outside the chain of command to shoot down hijacked airliners, didn’t pass it along to the fighter pilots, but instructed them instead to spot the tail numbers of any suspected rogue planes. That turned out to be a prudent call as a result of by then, there were not hijackers within the air for them to shoot.

The newly printed multimedia document spells out exactly how the recordings contradicted the accounts of the senior officials.