To explain my point,here is an example of a possible scenario: A...

To explain my point,here is an example of a possible scenario:

A flight is booked to leave from Sydney to Singapore,when the flight arrives there has been a terrorist attack in Singapore.
After a family chat we decide that we don't want to stay in Singapore,it has suddenly become a terrorist hotspot.We want to abort our holiday and come home.

There is no insurance to cover this scenario,no refunds,etc.

We have lost our freedom of choice and have to pay a hefty fee to regain it.

It is not about giving in to terrorism ,it is about maintaining our freedom of choice,at no economic expense.

The existing "staus quo" does not recognise the liberty of innocent people.We still seem to be saying,I won't let those terrorists beat me.But they have beaten us if we are forced to pay 1 dollar to regain our freedom of choice.

We need to look at this whole thing with a different perspective.