As others have referenced, Israeli airport security use profiling extensively. The questions that are asked are almost (but not quite) irrelevant - they are trained to gauge a person's reactions, their unconscious biological responses, etc.
It seems likely to me that what they keyed in on wasn't the author's questions, responses, or even their general attitude, but the overall resistance to having their laptop searched. The distinction between "I resent this process and need my laptop for work" and "If they take my laptop I'm going to be in trouble" is probably below the threshold of their training. I'd even say it's possible that the author's reaction to having their laptop confiscated was part of the profiling technique.
The fact that they let them continue on to their flight tells me that they didn't perceive them to be a security risk at the end of the process.
I’m having a bit of trouble understanding the rationale allowing continued travel, but not allowing continued travel with the laptop. Can anyone here shed a bit of light on this?
> The distinction between "I resent this process and need my laptop for work" and "If they take my laptop I'm going to be in trouble" is probably below the threshold of their training.
And I agree with you. But 1000s of people must resent the process and need their laptops! If they picked up on that, they would have to confiscate laptops approaching 100% of the time they asked people questions about it.
None of this makes sense on the face of it. I wonder if you were connected to a network that was compromised and they tracked your computer? Also unlikely.
Do you think the last person you talked to was just having a bad day and as you got annoyed you triggered them and they took it on you?