So what do terrorists act like? He looked and acted exactly like many other people would have done, and are indeed entirely allowed to do in a democratic and accountable society - or have some people forgotten that this is what Britain is supposed to be in their enthusiasim for macho tactics?
However he looked 'foreign'. That was basically what this amounted to. None of the other things would have been 'suspicious' had that not been that case. We've been through exactly the same thing with Jean Charles de Menezes, in which all kinds of 'terrorist activity' were reported from changing modes of transport (gasp!), to running in an tube station (no!), to wearing a bulky coat (never!) and carrying a backpack (who on earth in their right mind would carry a back pack?).
Never mind that these were shown to be largely misidentifications and half-truths later, the situation is that if it's been decided that you look like a terrorist, your appearance and actions are then reinterpreted (at the time by the racist, twitchy officer) and then afterwards by tabloids or the kind of armchair know-nothings who inhabit web fora.
If you are a normal person going about your legal business, you don't know you are 'acting like a terrorist' until someone arrests you for it - and why would it occur to you? You are innocent. The only people who would be concerned about not being seen to 'act like a terrorist' would be:
1. terrorists; and
2. people who have so much bought into the state line on the need for repressive measures that they repress themselves in advance and become nice compliant little subjects. They then try to impose these new 'social values' on the rest of us and try to paint those who don't comply as latent terrorists or legitimately suspicious.
I don't see any of the former here - least of all pzychoman, who has posted here on all sorts of topics (particularly cycling and photography), but I can see several of the latter.
