Media speculation over Abedi’s possible motives includes only abbreviated suggestions of ‘blowback‘, the link to UK foreign/war policy framed mainly as an election issue around whether Jeremy Corbyn’s proposed security agenda can really be trusted against May’s more ‘proven record’ and ‘stronger commitment’ to fighting terror.While the BBC’s Andrew Neil conducted a virulent smear job on Corbyn, spending almost half their interview on spurious ‘evidence’ of his ‘IRA associations’, May has been spared any such interrogation by the BBC over her actual part in protecting Libyan-connected terrorists.We also hear the usual calls for ‘greater Muslim vigilance’, and ‘need to identify’ those elements feeding radicalisation, all coated in supportive liberal messages to the wider Muslim community. Yet, much more carefully avoided is the possibility of deeper state collusion with those very jihadist individuals and groupings, the issue here again pitched around the ‘need for greater sharing of information’ and ‘lessons to be learned’ by MI5.Beyond all this token ‘analysis’ and establishment ‘self-inspection’, real pressing questions should be exercising serious journalists:What is the precise connection between the UK security forces, MI5/MI6, and the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group based in Manchester and other parts of the UK?Why, as detailed by the MEE report, was there an ‘open-door’ arrangement in place for the easy movement of Salman Abedi and other jihadists between the UK and Libya?Why wasn’t Abedi detained, or more closely monitored, by the security agencies despite mosque authorities and others reporting concerns over his conduct?Why didn’t the UK act upon recent US intel warnings about Abedi?Why were Theresa May, Home Secretary Amber Rudd and the UK intelligence services so aggrieved at the US leaking of Abedi’s name and details?Why aren’t the BBC and other ‘mainstream’ media headlining the MEE story as central context to the Manchester bombing?Why aren’t the media pointing a damning finger at Theresa May, who must have known about this arrangement, not just on becoming PM, but, even more crucially, under her watch as Home Secretary between 2010 and 2016?How was the UK’s regime change decision to oust Gaddafi conveyed by the Home Office to the security agencies, the green light given to assist LIFG and the instruction made to lift control orders on known jihadists?Where is the investigation of David Cameron’s own role in this affair and his bombing of Libya in 2011?While a few decent efforts to address these questions have been made, most major media either avoid, or merely hint at, the dark extent of UK malfeasance. All told, the negating of this story is a striking example of compliant, boundaried journalism, understanding the limitations of critical enquiry, and the safe, ‘dignified’ tone to be observed. Much is still to be learned about the actual motives and movements of Abedi and his assumed network. But the absence of serious media coverage and investigation only serves to hide deep state subterfuge and protect those war-promoting politicians responsible for intensifying the terror environment.