Originally Posted by
Machdiamond
There's got to be more to the story, there is nothing suspicious about what is described.
In the paranoid world of security theatre,
every action is suspicious.
If there's more to the story I suspect it's something like he has non-white skin, speaks with an accent, wears and uncommon piece of clothing or dress, or some such thing.
As others have noted, there's nothing unusual about a meeting being cancelled at the last minute, or some other emergency requiring an immediate return home -- be it a family emergency or a hostile takeover attempt.
Update at:
http://www.torontosun.com/news/canad.../13012671.html
After questioning the man and searching all passengers’ luggage with sniffer dogs, police declared the incident a non-event.
“No crime was committed and the suspect, a man in his 40s, is now a free man after explaining the situation,” said Const. Andre Leclerc, a Montreal police spokesman.
“Nothing in his behaviour was criminal. . . The circumstances were cleared up and the man, who is unknown to police, was able to go ahead and walk free.”
And so it begins... the stupidity infecting the US has spread north. The people responsible for this nonsense need to have the life ground out of their future employment anywhere in the travel industry. I don't think it will happen, but I'd be a happy traveller if someone like Eddie Greenspan went to work for the victim.
Originally Posted by
Machdiamond
There's got to be more to the story, there is nothing suspicious about what is described.
Even if you used to believe that no one would ever be fingered for no good reason whatsoever, this should be a clear indication that security paranoia knows no bounds.
It should also be a lesson the next time you hear the phrase "suspicious behaviour" you should be extremely skeptical.
Originally Posted by
jjclancy
How about
:
- Trying to light your shoes on fire.
- Igniting your underwear.
Well? Was this "suspicious" enough for you?
Given that "Nothing in his behaviour was criminal" and that in fact nothing he did was even remotely suspicious (at least to a reasonably intelligent person) why should he ever have been forced in to "explaining the situation"?
What an utter disgrace.