Bushists' twice botched terror effort

John Aravosis writes:

While the American public is paying the bad news the usual inattention it gives any scandal not involving a missing blonde chick, the Brits have gotten the message and they’re not happy. A recent Guardian/ICM poll shows that two-thirds of Britons see a link between the recent London bombings and Britain’s decision to join the war in Iraq. My conversations with locals on a recent visit to London, hours after the July 7 bombings, confirmed as much. In addition to the surprising number of people I spoke to who blamed the attacks on Britain’s involvement in Iraq, the sole cop standing guard in front of Buckingham Palace that evening, when asked why the attacks happened, told me that it was “because some people want to be free.” Imagine a Secret Service agent saying that in front of the White House on 9/11.

The British public’s ire over the bombings only increased after it was discovered that police had one of the suspects in custody months ago, but released him after determining he posed no threat. No doubt the Brits will be even more pissed once they realize the Bush administration twice botched efforts that could have helped prevent the attack.

Read on for further explication.

The first instance Aravosis is talking about was mentioned in the Seattle Times this past weekend. The second one is derived from an ABC News report about Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan's link to the July 7th bombings. Still, for whatever reason, ABC couldn't connect the dots to last year's story on Khan's outing by the administration, something Aravosis had to do on his own.

Beyond that, this story has been dead in the water. It's rather curious that the press hasn't been willing to give it legs, either here or in Britain.