Who is Abu Hamza al-Muhajer and where is he?

Egyptian newspaper Al-Masri al-Yawm has quoted Mamduh Ismail as saying he met al-Muhajir, also known as Sharif Hazaa, or Abu Ayub al-Masri, in Tura prison in Cairo, where he has been held for seven years.

"Sharif Hazaa [al-Muhajir] is in Tura prison, and I met him two days ago while I was visiting some of my clients," Ismail, a lawyer known for defending Islamist groups, told the newspaper.

Al-Muhajir is on the "most wanted" list issued by the Iraqi government last week. The US military in Iraq has put a $5million price on his head.

The US army media centre in Iraq said: "We cannot comment on the news that ... al-Masri is in an Egyptian prison and not in Iraq, we have to clarify that from the Egyptian government."

Zarqawi successor 'in Egypt jail'
Aljazeera.Net, July 6, 2006

Asks The Truth Will Set You Free:

Does that mean Mubarek gets the $5 million bounty the US has on “al-Masri’s” head?

Personally, I am less concerned with President Hosni Mubarak's financial situation than I am with how we perceive the overall war on terror and the information that emerges about it. According to the CNN report on a recent audio tape released by Osama Bin Laden:

On the tape, bin Laden also names Abu Hamza al-Muhajer as the new leader of al Qaeda in Iraq and wishes him luck.

"Our brothers, the mujahedeen in the al Qaeda organization, have chosen the dear brother Abu Hamza al-Muhajer as their leader to succeed the Amir Abu Musab al-Zarqawi," bin Laden says. "I advise him to focus his fighting on the Americans and everyone who supports them and allies himself with them in their war on the people of Islam and Iraq."

U.S. officials have said the leader of the group is a man named Abu Ayyub al-Masri. Senior military sources say al-Masri and al-Muhajer are the same person.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Friday authorized a reward of up to $5 million for information leading to the capture of al-Masri.

Tape: Bin Laden tells Sunnis to fight Shiites in Iraq
Octavia Nasr, CNN, July 2, 2006

These contradictory reports definitely justify the question of whether or not the Bin Laden tape is a fake. But even if it is not - should we trust him?

It is peculiar how we have been conditioned to believe the enemy every time they give out any information signifying some evil intent on their part. Osama Bin Laden is, according to the offical story, an evil genius capable of unspeakable atrocities. Wouldn't you think lying and deception could also be part of his arsenal?

FBI disrupts New York transportation plot

"We have disrupted a terrorist network that was in the planning stages of an attack," the FBI and Department of Homeland Security said in a statement.

Officials said the FBI had been monitoring Internet chat rooms and cited the arrest of a key suspect by Lebanese authorities as a significant break in the investigation.

Lebanese authorities, working with U.S. law enforcement agencies, arrested an al-Qaida operative who admitted to plotting a terror attack in New York City, a senior Lebanese security official said Friday.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing, said the arrest was made a month ago. The suspect was identified as Amir Andalousli, but his real name is Assem Hammoud, a Beirut native, the official said. The official said he was an al-Qaida member and had confessed to the plot.

...

New York's transportation system has emerged as a potential terrorist threat in several recent cases. A June book by journalist Ron Suskind highlighted a reported plot by al-Qaida terrorists to kill thousands of New Yorkers by spreading cyanide gas in the subway. In May, a man was convicted of plotting to blow up a subway station.

In the latest case, a federal official said FBI agents monitoring Internet chat rooms used by extremists learned of the plot in recent months and determined that tunnels were possibly being targeted after investigators pieced together code words from their conversations.

The official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing, said terrorists were looking at Lower Manhattan but there was no specific target mentioned. Federal officials indicated that there was a difference of opinion among investigators as to what the actual target was, the official said.

The case has apparently been under investigation for about a year, and authorities believe there were multiple conspirators.

"At this time we have no indication of any imminent threat to the New York transportation system, or anywhere else in the U.S.," Richard Kolko, Washington-based FBI special agent, said in a statement to Associated Press Radio.

One U.S. official called the plot "largely aspirational" and described the Internet conversations as mostly extremists discussing and conceptualizing the plot. The official said no money had been transferred, nor had other similar operational steps been taken.

Details of the plot emerged on the one-year anniversary of the attacks on the London transportation system that killed 52 people.

FBI disrupts New York transportation plot
Pat Milton, Associated Press, July 7, 2006

While I wouldn't know whether the timing of this press release is accidental or not it is certainly interesting that the discovery of this "largely aspirational" plot to attack the largest American city's transportation system happened exactly a year to the date of a highly suspicious but very deadly attack on the largest British city's transportation system.

The authorities must certainly be congratulated on a successful operation. It doesn't matter how many lives they may have saved for even one victim of terrorism is obviously one too many. However it must be noted that the alleged terrorist' savvy is far less than impressive and it is likely their plot would never have amounted to much. The suspects' clumsy communication habits match those of their alleged Toronto counterparts. And their lack of preparedness seems as profound as that of the "Miami seven".

There is not much to say about this until more information emerges. However, this report as many other post 9/11 reports of alleged Muslim terrorist activity appears to be both overblown and well-timed to generate maximum political benefit to the Bush administration in the war on terror.

The strange saga of the 9/11 planes

According to a July 6 2006 Rumor Mill News article titled Very Strange 9/11 Aircraft Registrations there are some very disturbing irregularities in the way the airlines or the FAA handled documentation associated with the flights allegedly hijacked on September 11, 2001. The registration for both United Airlines flights involved was only cancelled on September 28, 2005, over four years after 9/11. Hence a very pertinent question:

How can American Airlines flights show the planes destroyed and the registration cancelled, while both United flights show the planes as simply being cancelled without explanation 4 years after they allegedly were destroyed? Why?

The following are registration details on all four airplanes:

American Airlines Flight 11

-	ACCIDENT DETAILS
Date:	September 11, 2001
Time:	08:47
Location:	New York City, New York
Operator:	American Airlines
Flight #:	11
Route:	Boston - Los Angeles
AC Type:	Boeing 767-223ER
Registration:	N334AA
cn / ln:	22332/169
Aboard:	92 (passengers:81 crew:11)
Fatalities:	92 (passengers:81 crew:11)
Ground:	2583
Summary:	The aircraft was hijacked shortly after it left Logan International Airport in Boston. The hijackers took control of the aircraft and deliberately crashed it into the north tower of the World Trade Center between the 94th and 99th floors at approximately 450 mph. After 102 minutes, the building collapsed. It was one of four planes that were hijacked the same day.

FAA registration record

FAA Registry
N-Number Inquiry Results

---

N334AA is Deregistered

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description

Serial Number		22332		Type Registration		Corporation
Manufacturer Name		BOEING		Certificate Issue Date		01/06/2000
Model		767-223		Mode S Code		50722254
Year Manufacturer		1987		Cancel Date		01/14/2002
Reason for Cancellation		Destroyed		Exported To

United Air Lines Flight 175

-	ACCIDENT DETAILS
Date:	September 11, 2001
Time:	09:03
Location:	New York City, New York
Operator:	United Air Lines
Flight #:	175
Route:	Boston - Los Angeles
AC Type:	Boeing B-767-222
Registration:	N612UA
cn / ln:	21873/41
Aboard:	65 (passengers:56 crew:9)
Fatalities:	65 (passengers:56 crew:9)
Ground:	2583
Summary:	The aircraft was hijacked shortly after it left Logan International Airport in Boston. The hijackers took control of the aircraft and deliberately crashed it into the south tower of the World Trade Center between the 78th and 84th floors at approximately 550 mph. After 56 minutes, the building collapsed. It was one of four planes that were hijacked the same day.

FAA registration record

Aircraft Description

Serial Number		21873		Type Registration		Corporation
Manufacturer Name		BOEING		Certificate Issue Date		01/18/1984
Model		767-222		Mode S Code		51773757
Year Manufacturer		1983		Cancel Date		09/28/2005
Reason for Cancellation		Cancelled		Exported To

---

Aircraft Registration prior to Deregistration

Name		UNITED AIR LINES INC
Street		BOX 66100
City		CHICAGO State ILLINOIS Zip Code	60666
County		COOK
Country		UNITED STATES

American Airlines Flight 77

-	ACCIDENT DETAILS
Date:	September 11, 2001
Time:	09:45
Location:	Arlington, Virginia.
Operator:	American Airlines
Flight #:	77
Route:	Washington D.C. - Los Angeles
AC Type:	Boeing B-757-223
Registration:	N644AA
cn / ln:	24602/365
Aboard:	64 (passengers:58 crew:6)
Fatalities:	64 (passengers:58 crew:6)
Ground:	125
Summary:	The aircraft was hijacked after taking off from Dulles International Airport. The hijackers took control of the aircraft and deliberately crashed it into the Pentagon. It was one of four planes that were hijacked the same day.

FAA registration record

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description

Serial Number		24602		Type Registration		Corporation
Manufacturer Name		BOEING		Certificate Issue Date		05/08/1991
Model		757-223		Mode S Code		52072030
Year Manufacturer		1991		Cancel Date		01/14/2002
Reason for Cancellation		Destroyed		Exported To

United Airlines Flight 93

-	ACCIDENT DETAILS
Date:	September 11, 2001
Time:	10:03
Location:	Shanksville, Pennsylvania
Operator:	United Air Lines
Flight #:	93
Route:	Newark - San Francisco
AC Type:	Boeing B-757-222
Registration:	N591UA
cn / ln:	28142/718
Aboard:	44 (passengers:37 crew:7)
Fatalities:	44 (passengers:37 crew:7)
Ground:	0
Summary:	The aircraft was hijacked after taking off from Newark International Airport. The hijackers took control of the aircraft and turned the plane towards Washington D.C. A struggle ensued between the passengers and hijackers after which the plane crashed at a high rate of speed into a field in the Pennsylvania countryside. It was one of four planes that were hijacked the same day.

FAA registration record

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description

Serial Number		28142		Type Registration		Corporation
Manufacturer Name		BOEING		Certificate Issue Date		07/01/1996
Model		757-222		Mode S Code		51721341
Year Manufacturer		1996		Cancel Date		09/28/2005
Reason for Cancellation		Cancelled		Exported To

---

Aircraft Registration prior to Deregistration

Name		UNITED AIR LINES INC
Street		1200 E ALGONQUIN RD
City		ARLINGTON HEIGHTS State ILLINOIS Zip Code	60005-4712
County		COOK
Country		UNITED STATES

These problems with the official account of the events of 9/11 are by far neither the most glaring not most severe. They might simply be an indication of a very severe bureaucratic dysfunction on the part of the United Airlines, or the FAA, or possibly both. There are plenty of other irregularities conclusively proving that for events to take place the way we are told by the Administration or the 9/11 Commission is for all intents and purposes impossible.

However, it is still in my opinion important to note these aircraft registration irregularities as they prove, among other things, that there is hardly any aspect of the official 9/11 narrative that is not suspicious. What adds to the suspicion is that apparently none of the aircraft were positively identified by the serial-numbered parts in the wreckage.

In his article on the subject titled Impossible to Prove a Falsehood True retired US Air Force Colonel and an expert aircraft accident investigator George Nelson states:

July, 1965 I had just been commissioned a Second Lieutenant in the U. S. Air Force after taking a solemn oath that I would protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that I would bear true faith and allegiance to the same. I took that oath very seriously. It was my constant companion throughout a thirty-year military career in the field of aircraft maintenance.

As an additional duty, aircraft maintenance officers are occasionally tasked as members of aircraft accident investigation boards and my personal experience was no exception. In 1989 I graduated from the Aircraft Mishap Investigation Course at the Institute of Safety and Systems Management at the University of Southern California. In addition to my direct participation as an aircraft accident investigator, I reviewed countless aircraft accident investigation reports for thoroughness and comprehensive conclusions for the Inspector General, HQ Pacific Air Forces during the height of the Vietnam conflict.

In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. This is because every military and civilian passenger-carrying aircraft have many parts that are identified for safety of flight. That is, if any of the parts were to fail at any time during a flight, the failure would likely result in the catastrophic loss of aircraft and passengers. Consequently, these parts are individually controlled by a distinctive serial number and tracked by a records section of the maintenance operation and by another section called plans and scheduling.

Following a certain number of flying hours or, in the case of landing gears, a certain number of takeoff-and-landing cycles, these critical parts are required to be replaced, overhauled or inspected by specialist mechanics. When these parts are installed, their serial numbers are married to the aircraft registration number in the aircraft records, and the plans and scheduling section will notify maintenance specialists with a work order when the parts must be replaced. If the parts are not replaced within specified time or cycle limits the airplane will normally be grounded until the maintenance action is completed. Most of these time-change parts, whether hydraulic flight surface actuators, pumps, landing gears, engines or engine components, are virtually indestructible. It would be impossible for an ordinary fire resulting from an airplane crash to destroy or obliterate all of those critical time-change parts or their serial numbers. I repeat, impossible.

Considering the catastrophic incidents of September 11 2001, certain troubling but irrefutable conclusions must be drawn from the known facts, and I get no personal pleasure or satisfaction from reporting my assessment of these facts.

United Airlines Flight 93

This flight was reported by the federal government to be a Boeing 757 aircraft, registration number N591UA, carrying 45 persons, including four Arab hijackers who had taken control of the aircraft, crashing the plane in a Pennsylvania farm field.

Aerial photos of the alleged crash site were made available to the general public. They show a smoking hole in the ground, but private investigators were not allowed to come anywhere near the crash site. If an aircraft crash caused the hole in the ground, there would have literally hundreds of serially controlled time-change parts within the hole that would have proven beyond any shadow of doubt the precise tail-number or identity of the aircraft. However, the government has not produced any physical evidence that would prove beyond a doubt, the specific identity of the aircraft that allegedly crashed at that site. On the contrary, it has been reported that the aircraft, registry number N591UA, is still in operation.

Unfortunately, the article is not dated so I can't tell at the moment what time Col. Nelson is referring to when in his opinion the aircraft alleged to have been United 93, the Boeing 757 tail number N591UA, was "still in operation". But according to the FAA that could be any time until September 28, 2005.

So, as they say, what's the bottom line. The bottom line is, we have practically no proof that the four passengers aircraft that, according to the official narrative, were involved in 9/11 were in fact the attack vehicles. And the proof, if they in fact had been, would have been neither secret, nor difficult to produce.

C.I.A. Closes Unit Focused on Capture of bin Laden

The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday.

The unit, known as Alec Station, was disbanded late last year and its analysts reassigned within the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, the officials said.

The decision is a milestone for the agency, which formed the unit before Osama bin Laden became a household name and bolstered its ranks after the Sept. 11 attacks, when President Bush pledged to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice "dead or alive."

The realignment reflects a view that Al Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was, intelligence officials said, and a growing concern about Qaeda-inspired groups that have begun carrying out attacks independent of Mr. bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Agency officials said that tracking Mr. bin Laden and his deputies remained a high priority, and that the decision to disband the unit was not a sign that the effort had slackened. Instead, the officials said, it reflects a belief that the agency can better deal with high-level threats by focusing on regional trends rather than on specific organizations or individuals.

C.I.A. Closes Unit Focused on Capture of bin Laden
Mark Mazzetti, The New York Times, July 4, 2006

Says Mark Rivero of What Really Happened, "No use hunting for a dead guy, right?" A possibility the CIA experts would be well-advised to consider.

Or maybe it is just that they finally got in touch with their friends at the FBI and learned that there is no hard evidence connecting Mr Bin Laden to the 9/11 attacks. Who knows? The world of intelligence works in mysterious ways.

Bush: fighting fit and shocked to be 60

On Thursday, however, President George Bush will undergo what will come to be the defining experience of boomers in the next few years: he turns 60. In the US the high-profile milestone - which Bill Clinton reaches in August - has prompted an outbreak of reflection on the ageing of the baby-boom generation.

It also seems to have provoked much introspection on the part of President Bush himself, who rarely lets a week pass these days without mentioning his advancing years. "I'm a bike guy, and I like to plug in music on my iPod when I'm riding along, to hopefully help me forget how old I am," he told an audience in Minnesota in February.

"I'm getting kind of old these days," he told Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, the next month.

In Nebraska in June he thanked the state governor for taking "time out of your schedule to say hello to the old president. Getting older by the minute, by the way." And on returning from a surprise trip to Baghdad three weeks ago, in response to a reporter who asked how he was doing, the president said: "A little jet-lagged, as I'm sure you can imagine. Nearly 60."

Mr Bush has referred to the upcoming birthday as "a personal crisis". He meant the remark as a joke, and used it to lend weight to his controversial attempts to push through changes to welfare and medical care for America's future generations of over-60s, which he says will be needed precisely because boomers are working and living longer.

But it is impossible to avoid the sense that turning 60 is a genuine personal shock for the world's most powerful baby boomer - as it surely will be for other members of the generation who, according to the cliche, believed they would live forever.

Bush: fighting fit and shocked to be 60
Oliver Burkeman, The Guardian, July 3, 2006

Happy Birthday, Mr President!

I hope you handle this shock gracefully. I also hope you continue to take good care of your health and stay in shape. It will be a shame if you end up avoiding having to stand trial for the crimes you have commited due to fragile health the way Augusto Pinochet did.

US media ensnared in liberty vs security debate

There is an important debate taking place in the United States over the Bush administration's resolve to conduct its "war on terror" versus the need of the media to be the nation's conscience. Time magazine in its latest issue calls it "the tension between liberty and security".

That subject has arisen many times in the short history of the United States. It was never really resolved before in the sense that no lasting conclusions were reached that are applicable during different eras. Instead, a general understanding has prevailed whereby the media have acquired a permanent role as the watchdog of the people to ensure that there remains a healthy balance between liberty and security.

This time, the issue is the government's need to wage the "war on terror" and the US media's responsibility to report ostensibly unconstitutional or extraconstitutional actions. The administration of President George W Bush, as expected, holds to its right to do whatever is necessary to protect the American people against global terrorism, while the media have decided that they have been too deferential to the government's claim of its rights to wage the war, and now should scrutinize and report its actions vigorously in the name of protecting liberty and ensuring that the system of checks and balances, which the US constitution has so carefully established, is not violated by the executive branch.

US media ensnared in liberty vs security debate
Ehsan Ahrari, Asia Times Online, July 4, 2006

The article quoted above presents a nice overview of the current conflict between civil liberties and security needs of the US. Frankly, in my opinion, this conflict is perceived rather than real.

Then, of course, there is this whole issue of how you define the concepts involved. Of course, if "security" is taken to mean "the security of the ruling elite" then the whole discussion takes on a whole new meaning.

Are all lives equal? Not according to the way the US compensates victims

Question: How much is an Iraqi life worth? Answer: A lot less than an American or British life, according to the amount of compensation paid to the relatives of victims.

...

In the early months of the invasion, the United States paid Iraqis $106,000 for 176 claims - averaging about $600 per claim.

During the siege of Fallujah, where US soldiers killed 18 people and wounded 78 during an April 2004 firefight, the American military commander in the area paid $1,500 for each fatality and $500 for each injury.

More recently the US paid $38,000 for Haditha victims' family members. That comes up to less than $1,600 per person killed. What a bargain.

The most any Iraqi has received to date for injury or property damage is $15,000.

By comparison, the Libyan government recently settled a lawsuit for victims of Pan Am 103, which was blown up over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988. The Libyans paid $2.7 billion for 270 passengers with an average payment of $10 million per death. Shortly after the war with Iraq, the Bush administration pressed for legislation to double the death benefits paid to the families of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan to $500,000.

Last year a Seattle woman was awarded $45,000 for the wrongful death of her cat.

For Iraqis to get a claim paid is harder than getting a rebate on your iPod. First you must have all your documents in order - birth certificates, witness accounts, proof of identity, etc. Most witnesses are afraid to come forward for fear of retribution. Obtaining birth certificates and proof of identity for some is nearly impossible, due to displacement or other mitigating circumstances. Then, you must get "proof of negligence of US soldier from a US soldier or unit."

That's a task that is virtually impossible, being that US soldiers are instructed not to assume blame. The claim must be filed within 30 days of the death along with a phone number for contact, making it out of the question since the overwhelming majority of Iraqis do not have phones.

Furthermore, the loopholes are so complicated that for most Iraqis it is nearly impossible to get a claim filed, let alone paid.

When payments are made, liability is never acknowledged and oftentimes family members are asked to sign waivers to exempt US personnel from any legal action.

Beyond the initial payments there is little recourse for the families of the victim. Until today no American soldier has been prosecuted for illegally killing an Iraqi. Commanders refuse even to count the number of civilians killed or injured by their soldiers.

Under CPA Order No. 17, issued by the Coalition Provisional Authority prior to its dismantling in 2004, Iraqi courts are banned from hearing any cases filed against American servicemen or any foreign officials in Iraq.

Those who were allegedly involved in the Haditha massacre are awaiting a trial.

Waleed Mohammed, the attorney representing the victims, told The Washington Post that he has little hope for a fair outcome: "They are waiting for an outcome although they are convinced that the sentence will be like one for someone who killed a dog in the United States.... Iraqis have become like dogs in the eyes of Americans."

Are all lives equal? Not according to the way the US compensates victims
Anas Shallal, The Christian Science Monitor, July 3, 2006 edition

"We don't do body counts," said General Tommy Franks. So in essence from the very start of the war there has been a conscious effort on the part of the US military not to know how many civilians have died.

While Defense Secretary Rumsfeld is probably correct when he is saying that 99% of the US soldiers are acting honorably and not abusing civilians - and that percentage may even be higher than that - it doesn't help much those Iraqis whose family members or friends have been killed by those American soldiers who have crossed the threshold of law. And, regardless of whether the death in question was a result of criminal behaviour or just a tragic accident having insurmountable bureaucratic obstacles in the path of the family getting compensated adds insult to injury and probably serves to bolster the insurgency.

Altogether it seems hard to design a better policy of covert racism and to ensure that the ranks of those willing to harm Americans in Iraq - and probably elsewhere in the Muslim World - do not dwindle any time soon.

Blast kills 66 in Baghdad Shiite district

A huge car bomb exploded Saturday at a bustling outdoor market in a Shiite district of Baghdad, killing at least 66 people and injuring about 100. It was the deadliest attack since the new national unity government took office six weeks ago and one of the biggest this year.

Blast kills 66 in Baghdad Shiite district
Robert H. Reid, AP, July 1, 2006

An equivalent US headline would read, "A bombing in New York took about 700 lives injuring over a thousand."

The balance between liberty and security

Americans are going to have to decide which is the greater threat: terrorists, or the Republican Party's determination to shred American civil liberties and the separation of powers in the name of executive power and the "war on terror."

Bush's Assault on Freedom: What's to Stop Him?
Paul Craig Roberts, Antiwar.com, July 1, 2006

That's a very well-worded question. And a very pertinent one. The only part of it I might want to correct is that it is not just Republicans - it is, to be precise, some Republicans and some Democrats that applaud the fascistic expansion of the state powers that is happening in the US. To be fair, there are many politicians opposed to this power grab and various other illegalities the current administration has become famous for - including Rep. Ron Paul, a Republican.

As for the core of this question, I think one must also ask if there really is a correlation between liberty and security. It is probably true that an extreme form of illiberal society, such as what one had in Cambodia under Pol Pot, was likely immune from any sort of violence except for that perpetrated by the state. But in a country with open borders - such as the US - where business interactions are numerous and many different professional and religious associations exist it is hard to imagine that even a dictatorship - which will likely be more like that of General Pinochet than like that of Pol Pot - will serve as a guarantee against terrorism, crime and other causes of insecurity.

In fact, dictatorship founded on the premise of fighting terrorism might benefit from allowing a certain level of insecurity to persist as a continuing justification for its own existence and likely expansion. Terror warnings have already been used as a political tool by the Bush administration in the runup to the election in 2004. In a society where the central power is basically unchallenged and secrecy is widespread why would the government abstain from potentially using threat of terror, or even fake terror, to boost its popularity and marginalize dissidents? Or why is it outlandish that the government we have now has not already used that ancient trick on September 11, 2001 - an event for which the government provided only a nonsensical explanation but which it still uses as a foundation for its policy?

In short this author does not think there is a connection between liberty and day-to-day stability and security. But in a liberal society citizens get to decide, at least to some degree, how the society they live in ought to change. In a dictatorship their input is minimized. So I vote for liberty. You?