[Lotyqnag]

It's reported by more sources than that. This is how it is... any source will be shot down like they're laughable. Who is a believable source?

The Daily Mail is perfect for scare tactics because they have lots of readers who are possible to influence.

Every video ever is on Youtube, it doesn't mean they're all rubbish.

Which new's sources are more reliable than the Guardian or RT? Those were just some examples, the same thing is reported by Channel 4, CBS, The Mirror, The Telegraph and Sky after a quick google seach. I suppose no source of news is credible though.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...aks?intcmp=239
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...i6-fury-829182
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...perations.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-...ear-bomb-plot/
http://news.sky.com/story/17132/brit...lane-bomb-plot
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-national.html
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/sh...ps-sink-spies/

The story that he handed the bomb over to the CIA like a good chap is what they have to concoct when it comes to light that he is working for the CIA, essentially. If that doesn't come to light then it's another foiled terrorist plot so that we become more reliant on our government to save us, so we accept having our genitals groped at air ports.

Name a few credible sources and we'll see what they say. You're laughable because you believe everything the news initially tells us and what the government says. Use your own brain for a change.