http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911...
Look for the report by the 9/11 commission
No, it does not. There is nothing called "the official report" on 9/11.
There is the 9/11 Commission Report, which has some good information but is not really complete. There are the NIST technical reports, NCSTAR1 and NCSTAR1A on the collapses of the twin towers and the Salomon Brothers building respectively.
Then there are countless other articles and reports and studies, such as the evacuations studies, elevator studies, etc.
Mark F gave you a good, comprehensive response.
There is no such thing. It would be more correct to say there is a "generally accepted sequence of events."
The villain in the Truther narrative is always some manifestation of "the government". Bush and Cheney, the NWO, the Illuminati, Zionists/Israel, The Powers That Be, etc. So part of the conspiracy itself is providing the public with a false story (a Big Lie). Thus they make up this "official story" business as an attempt to make dismissing the generally accepted account easier by attributing the entire narrative to a "single" source that very few people have much faith in: the government. Truthers say "official story" when they want to set up a strawman that everything we know is from the government, with the insinuation that therefore it can not be trusted. It is yet another demonstration of sloppy thought and argumentation. What we know about 9/11 comes from thousands of sources including some from "the government" but from many different forms, levels and branches of government - not one all-seeing entity.
Yes, there are indeed "Official" reports. The NIST report is one. The 9/11 Commision Report is another, although I'd note that much of what was in that work was simply taken from already available sources, so it's much more an aggregation of existent knowledge rather than a generation of such. Regardless, it was assembled by a congressional body, so it's as official as it gets. But that doesn't make the entire narrative single-sourced; even the "Official" reports here aren't single sourced, but rely on a large foundation of other group's individual efforts (look at the citations in either work for validation of this).
But the narrative of 9/11 is built on much more than that. It goes back to pre-2001 reports of radical Islamic terrorism, and extends laterally out from just government sources. Original information producers, such as NEADS in NORAD, and the information distributer (in this case, Vanity Fair) is one example. Eyewitnesses who were quoted for news stories is yet another. The recipients of passenger calls from the hijacked airliners is a third (and BTW, this is what I mean by "official" reports not being single sourced. The government via FBI interviews did indeed report what the victims relatives said, but they didn't originate it. That's an important distinction). And so on, and so forth, from historians who've covered Bin Laden in the 90's, to first responders who talked to reporters, across groups like RJ Lee and the UC Davis Delta group who did independent research, to groups like Worcester Polytechnic's bunch who were contracted by NIST to study a specific issue that arose from the rubble piles (the sulfidation eroded steel). And more.
Where can I find it? Does it even exist?
