There is no way this could have been as big as 9/11. And I do not believe that I'm being told the whole truth, (probably never will, never mind that). For instance, why exactly the use of the word "Disrupted"? "Police disrupted terrorist activity,". What the hell does that actually mean? It's just meaningless and, more to the point, extremely vague. And I simply don't believe the magical timing. I mean, people just start to get annoyed over our being so... What's the word? Oh yes, fucking useless in Israel, and then suddenly there's this huge terrorist threat! Fear the darkies! You are under threat! Kill the darkies! Bomb foreign places! No negotiations with terrorists!
First they tell us that a Jamacan boy is shot because he ran from police, jumped a ticket barriar and was wearing a puffer jacket. Then it turns out that he wasn't wearing a puffer jacket, and he didn't jump a ticket barriar. And if you were being chased by people not in uniforms with guns, wouldn't you run? Then they tell us that they shoot a man in a raid because he was resisting and had a gun. That he was clearly told that he was being raided by the police. Well, it then turned out that none of that was true either. I mean, isn't Blair still saying that they expect to find Weapons of Mass Distraction (whoops, typo)? What about the nabbing of the head of Alqieda in Iraq, supposedly the end of the organisation in all the world. Oh, turns out that was a pathetic exageration. I'm just tired of being given information which has been warped and exagerated. But what really gets to me, what really pisses me off, is how unsubtle it is. How obvious. It's not even convincing. And how it really doesn't seem to matter that no one believes a word that comes from the government's mouth anymore.
edit: I love the use of "Little Iraqis". It's so beautifully patronising. Was that deliberate parody?