The "war on terror" is only linked to Iraq when it suits...

The "war on terror" is only linked to Iraq when it suits liars.


LONDON (Reuters) - Tony Blair has won broad support for his handling of London bombings, but may soon face scrutiny over a question striking at the heart of his premiership; were the deadly attacks triggered by Britain's role in Iraq? In the immediate aftermath of bus and underground railway attacks that killed at least 52, only mavericks like firebrand George Galloway dared criticize the prime minister, airing arguments many would prefer not to hear.

Galloway, thrown out of Blair's Labour party only to enter parliament as an independent, said invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq had fed hatred throughout the world's Islamic communities.

Certainly, Britain's military role in Iraq cost Blair many votes in May's election, not least among young Muslims.

Now Charles Kennedy, head of Britain's Liberal Democrats who always opposed the Iraq war, has explored the same theme.

"I am not here implying some causal link between Britain's involvement in Iraq and the terrible terrorist attacks in London last week," he said by way of qualification in a speech.

But he went on: "Those like President Bush and Tony Blair, who have sought to link Iraq with the so-called 'war on terror' can hardly be surprised when members of the public draw the same link when acts of terrorism occur here in the United Kingdom."

Blair was widely regarded to have acted swiftly and struck the right tone after the attacks, receiving plaudits from world leaders and political friends and foes at home. As the dust settles, however, he may come in for more stringent. Consensus forged by the bombs may not last for ever.

Blair's office reacted sharply to the suggestion of a link between the bombings and Iraq.

"This kind of terrorism was active long before the Iraq war," Blair's spokesman said. "9/11 was in September 2001, not 2003."