why do anti-terrorist tactic have to be so mean

the washington post a coupla articles to discredit

a) US anti-terrorist efforts as ineffective

b) racial-profiling

c) the bush administration

d) all of the above

this sunday, the WaPo dismiss ~40 terrorism convictions since 9/11 [how many were there before 9/11?] further that article implies rwanda war criminals and palestinian terrorism don't really count.

today's WaPo article dismisses such things as fraud to secure government jobs and immigration violations as to warrant action.

i suppose the WaPo believes those involved with anti-terrorism efforts should be armed with spitballs instead of the laws on the books. [that zell miller quote is a winner]