>>The media shows itself yet again to have lost its way and to be subservient to interests - primarily government/enforcement - rather than truth, accuracy and timeliness in reporting.
>
>I know where you're going with this and I agree to some degree. But I think in the US the mainstream media is heavily biased to one party. I wouldn't say that the US meida has been a friend of the Bush administration.
>
>Anyway. What gets me about the London police shooting is that it was SO blatan. I mean, how do you rough up and shoot a man who was just simply sitting and reading a news paper and was posing no threat to anyone without even giving him a chance to ID himself? Is this shoot first and ask questions later mentality?

You know this type of post gives no credence whatsoever to (a) the police and special forces that were involved and (b) the environment that they were operating in.

Do you honestly think that they set out to purposely kill an innocent person? And if so dont you think they could have done such a deed in a more covert manner? You keep going on about this but have you even tried to consider the environment in which this happened, the tension and stress, the dangers, etc? Do you think that all the UK police and special service units are pychotic killers just sitting around waiting to use their weapons? Do you really think they just walked up to some guy reading a paper and shot him?

Yes it was bad, yes it was a mistake, and yes I am sure people will be held accountable. Do you know of any other countries where this type of incidents might occur. It's a rhetorical question.