I think the threats are a little different here, however.
I can understand the need for more compromise somewhere like Israel where there's a very visible and real terror threat. It's perhaps a more applicable system in that environment. We don't have that here - I don't think it's particularly useful given the threat landscape in the UK.
Perhaps at the height of the troubles in Northern Ireland, where there was a tangible threat of terrorism.
If we're to be interviewed in line by security officers, I'd prefer that they identify themselves as such and make it clear that this is a security screening and not just a friendly chat from a genuinely interested CS agent. To do otherwise just seems deceitful.
Edit: To add, while I don't necessarily agree with your assessment, I did upvote your comment - I think it adds to the discussion and provides some valuable perspective.
I can understand the need for more compromise somewhere like Israel where there's a very visible and real terror threat. It's perhaps a more applicable system in that environment. We don't have that here - I don't think it's particularly useful given the threat landscape in the UK.
Perhaps at the height of the troubles in Northern Ireland, where there was a tangible threat of terrorism.
If we're to be interviewed in line by security officers, I'd prefer that they identify themselves as such and make it clear that this is a security screening and not just a friendly chat from a genuinely interested CS agent. To do otherwise just seems deceitful.
Edit: To add, while I don't necessarily agree with your assessment, I did upvote your comment - I think it adds to the discussion and provides some valuable perspective.