I play many sites. Here's a few points I'd like to mention..
1) The better your play becomes, the less you lose but the more your losses will occur to bad beats and suckouts.
2) AA and KK (or any 2 'good' cards) are what you are looking for but still should be played with caution and clarity. Pushing all-in pre-flop is always a crapshoot regardless of how good your cards are. At the beginning of a tourney, expect to get called with anything (and thusly receive bad beats.) You can also expect more callers which can severly cripple your win odds.
Later on in a tourney, you face people on the verge of busting out, people who are tired, etc with the same possible results. Seeing a flop or slowplaying may make you feel more confident post-flop but a big pre-flop raise may commit callers to attempting to suckout. And you also face people chasing trips, straights, and flushes which may hit or hit close enough to make them chase down a suckout.
Most of the tourneys I play involve 1400 to 2000 people. I'd say just about every final table I've made it to was preceeded with me sucking out on someone, often several people. If my stack is massive and I'm demolishing my table, I may attempt many cheap suckouts. Even if I miss, I want people to be afraid that I'm willing to put them all-in with almost any 2 cards. Naturally, this lets me slap the bigger stacks hard when I actually do have good cards as well as the ability to buy smaller pots.
Fink22, there are many things your screenshot doesn't show. Ie.. who pushed first, was it before or after the flop, what were the chip stacks, what was the payout structure, what did your opponent discern from watching your previous play, etc. With AK, he had decent odds against almost any lower pocket pair. He may have put you on just 2 live cards. Maybe he watched you push other stacks around and was waiting for you to "bluff" him. You said a win would have put you in 2nd place, so I assume that it did the same if not better for him. I agree that the results sucked, sorry bro. I've folded AA before in order to sit my way into a top 5 sattelite win. If final table play is tight, I'll push more to win pots. If play is loose, I'll tighten up. I don't care as much about winning small pots, I'm looking for trips or better and huge double ups. The last thing I want is a coin-flip after getting that deep into a tourney unless my stack and my tourney life is becoming severly endangered.
One thing that others often imply is that perhaps some sites use software that cheats by using less than random mathmatics. The best argument I've heard against this is why would they risk a huge cash cow? What profit would outweigh such a risk?
I agree with Djucket that it's the suckouts that are often more memorable than the hands that hold up. I'd say collusion (especially on bigger stakes money tables) is the biggest threat to online play.
Ultimately, I'd say that you must weigh many factors that all contribute to how loose the play is in order to decide when and how hard to push with your biggest cards. In comparing sites, factor in things like...
how frequent are the games made available
game structure (max starting players and ESPECIALLY how fast the blinds level)
time of day for the majority of players (ie.. late time = less fish)
if in a tourney, what stage are you currently in
if in a ring game, are the stakes high enough to discourage loose play
and probably a lot more factors than come to my mind at the moment. I like AP because the freerolls are so big and slow, I can afford to wait out the suiciders and play a mostly tight/aggressive game. As I consider myself to be a student of the game, this lets me spend more time learning and less time crossing my fingers and holding my breath
AP and the suckouts 
Asteroids
