The 9/11 Commission Report, which was released in 2004, has been criticized for a number of reasons. Here are some of the most common criticisms.

The 9/11 Commission Report, which was released in 2004, has been criticized for a number of reasons. Some of the most common criticisms are:

1. Lack of access to key witnesses and documents: Some people believe that the Commission was not provided with full access to all the relevant witnesses and documents that could have helped shed light on the events leading up to the 9/11 attacks.

2. Reliance on government agencies: Some critics have accused the Commission of being too reliant on information provided by government agencies, such as the CIA and FBI, and not doing enough independent investigation.

3. Omission of important information: There have been claims that key information was omitted from the final report, such as evidence of foreign government involvement or warnings about the attacks that were ignored by government officials.

4. Political influence: Some people believe that the Commission was influenced by political considerations and that its findings were shaped by political pressure.

5. Unanswered questions: Despite its extensive investigation, some questions about the 9/11 attacks remain unanswered and the Commission's report has been criticized for failing to fully address these questions.

It is important to note that the 9/11 Commission Report is widely regarded as a comprehensive and detailed examination of the events leading up to the 9/11 attacks, and it has been widely praised for its efforts to provide a thorough and impartial account of what happened. Nevertheless, the criticisms mentioned above continue to be a source of debate and discussion.