In the fall of 2004, my unit was preparing to clear the city of Fallujah, Iraq.  For the previous six months, US policymakers decided that leaving the city alone was "good" for the overall effort.  After watching the insurgents take over the town and create their own fundamentalist terror state, someone decided that enough was enough. 

I remember my commander sitting down with us before crossing the berm.  He looked us in the eye and said the following:

"The guys you are fighting are not supermen.  They have no special powers, no special training, and no special tactics that are better than what you will put on them.  All they've done is conduct the standard IED attack or occasional ambush.  They have NEVER fought a sustained battle against us.  That's what they're about to get now.  And, mark my words, men, they will break." 

When we finally went into the city after Election Day 2004, that's exactly what happened.  The enemy fought hard - for the first couple of days.  After 7 days of continuous combat, though, they broke.  True, there were hard-core fighters that hid and fought to the death, but the majority of the resistance dropped their weapons or ran away. 

Why am I talking about this? 

Well, for some strange and unusual reason, there are those who believe that the "jihadi superman" will come to NYC, break into a Federal courtroom, and free Khalid Sheik Muhammad and his ilk.  Or, even worse, KSM will gain superhuman powers and intimidate the DoJ lawyers and the Federal judge into doing his will. 

If this stuff was just coming out of the fringe right-wing, then I wouldn't worry about it.  But, when the media entertains this meme, it simply disgusts me. 

Just like I saw in November 2004, our enemy is no superman.  Despite the mistakes and errors we've made in this war, that fact has not changed. 

Our rule of law is stronger than they ever will be, as long as we stick to it. 

Why is the rule of law important?  This question has been asked a lot lately, and has gotten a pretty wide variety of answers (from both left and right of center).

I approach this from a different perspective:  namely, by sticking to the rule of law, we expose the weakness of the terrorists' argument against us.

For most jihadis, the US is the "far enemy."  We are difficult to reach and even harder to hurt.  Their goal is to one day confront us directly, but they can't (except for in Iraq and Afghanistan, which is another story). 

The more accessible targets are the "near enemies," those regimes that are allied with the United States.  Examples include Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan.  Now, why would jihadists hate these regimes?  Because of our freedoms?  Because they don't "like" us?  I don't think so.  They hate their "near enemies" for a variety of reasons - our support just adds fuel to the fire.

Egypt:  Been under a state of emergency since 1981.  Persecutes, attacks, and bans opposition political parties.  Has an economic system that cannot absorb millions of college educated young men that the schools produce (that's why there are so many Egyptian expats around the world in medicine, engineering, and law). 

Saudi Arabia: Ruled by the Saudi family for generations.  Little to no rights for their women.  Promotes wahhabism, a strict form of Sunni Islam that promote Islamic (sharia) laws  - laws that, by the way, hundreds of Saudi princes openly ignore. 

Pakistan:  In its 60+ years of existence, Islamabad has never exercised control over, or provided services to, the entire country.  Has had a string of military dictators who routinely broke Constitutional law in order to achieve their goals.  Uses an intelligence agency (ISI) to promote PK's agenda across the region through espionage and covert activity.  

This is just three countries in the region with close ties to the US.  I could go on without even touching Israel. 

The common thread among all of these countries is the blatant disrespect for the law.  Those governments will follow and enforce the law, but only when it suits their needs.  When it doesn't, then they make up their own rules.  Sound familiar??

When jihadis see the USA violating its own laws, they say, "See?  The US is just like the illegitimate, apostate goverment in your (pick a Middle Eastern capital city)!  Why should you believe anything they say?  The only real law is sharia, the law of Islam!"  Believe me when I say that this message resonates with more than a few folks across the Middle East. 

Now, imagine what will happen when we put the Gitmo folks on trial, in an open court, in front of a civilian jury, with competent defense attorneys, and presented the evidence of their guilt.   
The Middle East will see, first hand, how the US follows the rule of law. 

• Will the defendants make a scene?  I can almost guarantee it. 
• Will some embarassing stuff will come out in trial?  More than likely.
  
• Is a "guilty" verdict guaranteed?  There is no such thing when dealing with a jury.
• Will politicians and talk-show hosts try to make political hay out of the proceedings?  I can guarantee that. 
  

But, by doing so, we will show that our system of laws is more powerful than the fear of embarassment, political convenience, or a bad verdict.  Regardless of the possible outcome, the law ensures that our victims and suspects are heard, evidence is presented and challenged, and that the jury alone determines for the verdict. 

Isn't that what we're supposed to be fighting for? 

I'm new on TPM, so if this blog is a little harsh, then I apologize. 

When AG Holder made his famous, "we're a nation of cowards" statement in February 2009, there were howls and protests across the blogosphere.  Holder's intent was to highlight how the USA has hidden behind tradition, laws, and excuses in order to avoid the ugly sin of racism.  In other words, we 've been too afraid to act. 

As a Soldier and a minority, I understood Holder's intent, but thought that he was too blunt and overbearing in his statement. 

Then, on November 13, 2009, I see AG Holder stand up and declare that the murderers responsible for planning the September 11th attacks will face justice in New York City. 

The right-wing response, sadly, only confirmed Holder's February speech.  According to them, those terrorists are too dangerous to ever step foot on US soil.  In their opinion, we're a bunch of incompetent idiots, fools for thinking that the rule of law can handle such scary folks.

Thus, according to the GOP, we are a nation of cowards. 

If we, as a country, are too afraid to put mass murderers on trial - in the district where the trial was committed - because "they might get media visibility" or that "a lawyer can get them off," then we are truly a nation of cowards.  And, like any other wimp, we deserve any treatment that the world's bullies give us, because we're too chickenshit to stand up for ourselves. 

I did not go to war - in two different theaters - just to come home and watch my fellow citizens hide under their beds.  

I still believe that we are a great country of great people.  I still believe that we are braver and stronger than our enemies (including the GOP) think.  I still believe that we are a nation that chooses the harder right over the easier wrong. 

I still believe that we are not a nation of cowards.  Mr. Holder showed that to both our friends and enemies today.  

Where do you stand?