Tight security measures following the unravelling of an alleged plot to down transatlantic airliners have affected everyone, from (reportedly) Gulf royalty to faux royalty King Becks to tens of thousands of commoners catching - or to be more exact missing - their flights.

The night England beat Greece 4-0 at Old Trafford, axed team captain David Beckham was late for training at his club Real Madrid. His private jet had been held up two hours in London due to the airport chaos.

British holidaymakers clutching duty-free bottles had their high spirits confiscated. Orlando airport in the US warned passengers that bagels with cream cheese would not be allowed onboard. And those flying from KLIA who erred on the side of caution reluctantly dispensed with essentials like water tumbler, mosturiser and minyak angin.

The restriction on liquids had been strict to the extent that pilots were banned from bringing toothpaste and contact lens solution into the cockpit.

The terrorist alert locking down airports globally has given rise to extraordinarily suspicious minds with security officials cautioning senior citizens that even their Zimmer frames could be subject to X-ray.

Plastic bag

Incensed British Airways (BA) chief executive Willie Walsh complained that 'the queues for security [had] wound all around the terminals like a bad dream at Disneyland'. He likened the ensuing chaos to handing the terrorists 'a victory by default'.

I landed in Heathrow a few days after the restrictions on hand luggage were imposed, when security alert at one of Europe's busiest airports had been lowered from 'critical' to 'severe'. I had spent the eve of departure on a futile shopping expedition for a transparent plastic bag just in case.

The new security rules had indeed caused mayhem of nightmarish proportions, coming as they did in August, a peak travel season for Europe. Longer check-in lines resulted in inevitable delays which in turn made many passengers miss their connections. More than a thousand flights in all were also delayed or cancelled.

The initial ban on carrying luggage on board meant that many more bags were checked in. Those smaller than regulation size failed to be recognised by Heathrow's check-in system which couldn't cope and several times ground to a halt, according to BA's Walsh.

Airlines had threatened to sue the British government for 300 million over lost revenue, and from having to put up delayed and rerouted passengers at hotels, pay compensation for missing luggage (it is claimed possibly as many as 20,000 bags at one point were separated from their owners and awaiting reunification) as well as other emergency costs.

Turbulent times

In wake of the liquid air bomb revelations came more paranoia. A United Airlines plane departing from Heathrow had to be diverted to a Boston airport - escorted in landing by two F16 fighter jets - after an agitated woman passenger was found to have 'interfered' with the flight.

The 59-year-old managed to sneak on board a screwdriver, matches and a tub of hand cream (how criminal!). Luggage belonging to the rest of the passengers was unloaded on the tarmac and subjected to sniffer dogs.

Panic attacks, bomb hoaxes and evacuations exacerbated the already tense atmosphere permeating the beleaguered aviation industry. Prejudice against Muslim men caused jittery passengers and the flight crew on a Monarch Airlines flight to Manchester to insist that two men of Middle-Eastern appearance - overheard apparently speaking Arabic and repeatedly checking their watches - be taken off the plane.

While it could be said that this was an instance of overreaction, another insidious and polarising trend had taken already root - profiling.

When I was in the queue at Heathrow, the middle-aged white New Zealander ahead of me breezed through customs and immigration whereas a South Asian-looking man, possibly in his early to mid-30s, was harangued by the officers.

Indeed, the contentious screening of passengers based on ethnic origin and religious affiliation has become a matter of public debate in the UK, and Britain's Muslim community is up in arms over being singled out for suspicion.

Choosing to appease

There are minorities in almost every country and each group has its grievances, with the British Muslims being particularly vocal in airing theirs. But minorities in Malaysia - who have stronger and more legitimate cause for complaint with regard to our repressive government's many discriminatory policies - and elsewhere have not (with singular exceptions) resorted to killing and maiming civilians to score political points.

On the other hand, extremist and militant factions in Islam have been fingered or implicated in urban terrorism worldwide targeting non-Muslims in general (Israeli Jews, needless to say, are always fair game), like the last month's devastating rail bombing in Mumbai or London's bus bombing the previous July.

Can the larger community in the UK be entirely blamed for their tetchy response to home-grown terrorism given the attitudes of the Muslims themselves? A Pew Research Centre poll in June revealed that 15 percent of British Muslims believe that 'violence against civilian targets can be justified often or sometimes'.

The same poll showed that 81 percent of British Muslims said they thought of themselves as Muslims first and citizens of their native country second.

If 'Letters to the Editor' and leaders in the popular press are any indicator, a portion of Brits are getting fed up with their discrete (used to mean disconnected) Muslim community's increasing demands to respect their sensitivities and for 'special' treatment, compared to other immigrant communities like the East Europeans, for example.

Political correctness to appease disgruntled Muslims and their kid-glove handling in the UK can at times go ludicrously overboard - one five-year-old girl's passport photo was rejected on the grounds that her bare shoulders (she wore a summer dress) may offend Muslims.

Targeting infidels

In the meantime, the rest of civil society puts up with the ubiquitous CCTV cameras in subways and stations, with sniffer dogs for explosives patrolling tourist spots like Westminster Abbey, and announcements over the PA system for tube commuters to immediately report any unclaimed parcels.

However, it is a sad indictment of the discord that terrorism has sown when even a house of worship like the Westminster Cathedral has a notice saying: 'Please keep your personal items with you at ALL times. Unattended items will be removed and may be destroyed.'

Another sign of the times is this grim reminder attached to my Singapore Airlines boarding pass. It said: 'If you are travelling on a flight to or from the United States, please provide the name and telephone number of a person not travelling with you whom we can contact in the event of an emergency. This is a requirement of the US Department of Transport.' The implication is that if you're bombed to bits, do tell us who to call.

While terrorists may believe that targeting flights from Heathrow to American cities will represent a strike against the enemies of their faith, the truth is that international air travel is not restricted to 'Yanks and Brits only please'. When explosives go off in mid-air or when a plane crash lands, everybody in it dies.

The British public is rightly asking the Muslim community to clean up its act and clamp down on incendiary imams and brainwashing 'madrasahs'. In Malaysia, too, we have our own shiny, happy people who proudly declare their allegiance with terrorist organisations and who will no doubt spout conspiracy or apologist theories regarding this most recent escapade.

They do not pause to reflect that somebody's daughter may be travelling to the US for study, nephew for a working stint or neighbour with his kids to Disneyworld in Florida, and that particular somebody could be a person sharing his nationality, albeit second-class.

These apolitical innocents - like the Indian Malaysian victim of Sept 11 - surely stand a chance of becoming another statistic on the indiscriminate death roll.

Obviously, Malaysian born and bred zealots who express their support of Muslim terrorists care not a jot about the threat to the lives of their fellow Malaysians abroad whose only sin is to have been travelling by air or using public transport in a foreign land.

These people would privilege just one identity - solidarity with their brethren - over all else. But they at least show their true colours. What is the private stand of others such as our fiery populist politicians, I wonder?