:::Agreed, a timeline would be helpful  perhaps a comparative timeline that shows events from both the perspective of the attackee and the attacker.  The major problem I see in doing this is that using only secondary sources, which I assume is desired, will result in an attackee timeline, for events during the attack, that's composed largely of McGonagle's recall of the attack (i.e., COI findings about events during the attack, and their sequence, are almost exclusively based on McGonagle's testimony; and the NSA History Report used the COI findings as a reference source).  So, for the attackee, the timeline may represent the "official view," as reported in NSA's History Report; but its base information source, McGonagle testimony, can be easily shown as being fraught with errors.  Nonetheless, as long it's made clear to readers that the timeline is based on secondary sources, and that there is contention about the reliably of the secondary sources' references, then I suppose it would be a fair representation of the matter.