Security vs freedoms

What happened in London on March 22 was just another reminder to the international community of nations that no one is immune to terrorism and violence. Rising up all together and shouting "We are all Londoners" might help demonstrate solidarity with the victims and in condoning acts of terrorism. But would it help stop a similar dastard attack somewhere else tomorrow? Unfortunately not.

The United States and Britain took some nasty and restrictive measures this week with the aim and intention of preventing acts of terrorism on passenger planes. Banning iPads, laptops and all other electronic devices bigger than a cellular phone on planes, and compelling passengers to place them in their luggage; was just another measure restricting the rights, liberties and the comfort of passengers.

Was it a security measure or was it an economic sanction - as some people immediately claimed, by looking at the list of countries and airports from where such devices were banned in flights to the U.S. or the U.K. Terrorists using laptops or iPads as an explosive device might appear difficult for ordinary people to accept. Yet, aviation security experts claim Americans and Britons must have acted on sufficient and credible intelligence that such a heinous action was being planned by some radical Islamist terrorists. The assumption is simple. If it happened once, it could happen again. If despite security checks, a terrorist could still use a bomb-laden laptop when attacking a Daallo Airlines plane flying from Somali to Djibouti, should the world wait for the next or third similar attack before taking measures? 

Although people, such as this writer, who loved writing and going through a read while flying, particularly transatlantic flights, will get very bored...