“We are a government of laws, not men.” – John Adams

With those famous words later incorporated into the Massachusetts Constitution, Adams expressed one of the fundamental premises of our great nation – the rule of law.

The rule of law is one of the most fundamental libertarian premises and the cornerstone of our freedom. Simply stated, the principle of the rule of law is that all laws should be written without being directed at a particular class, individual or group, and thus the law should also be applied consistently without regard to background or circumstance, all through due process and fair trial. Unlike in feudal ages, when the laws were made by monarchs and subject to the caprice or temperament of the ruler, the characteristic principle of the rule of law is that the law itself is objective – hence our ideals of “justice being blind.”

With respect to Sept. 11, many have already begun to finger Osama bin Laden as the prime suspect in the tragedy, many even calling for such drastic measures as a full-scale invasion of Afghanistan if he is not surrendered by the Taliban government or covert operations to assassinate him – all before any sort of trial or substantive investigation could be carried out.

Such proposals prove to be quite cathartic but very dangerous in the sense that we are blinding ourselves to that which separates us from the Taliban and bin Laden – our core belief in the rule of law.

In Afghanistan, individuals can be executed on the street without a trial or the ability to speak in their own defense. Calling in the crack troops to “take out” bin Laden without hard evidence or a trial makes us no better than bin Laden or his (allegedly) deplorable tactics. It makes us no morally better than the Taliban we decry or Henry VIII’s Court of Star Chamber that we fought to secure against.

What has been further ignored in all of the heated rhetoric is that so far, this has been linked to acts of individuals, not a nation or government. While the Taliban has been most uncooperative in our search for answers, their impedance alone is not “an act of war.” Rather, the events of Sept. 11 were a crime, a horrendous, heinous crime against private citizens which deserves to be exposed for what it is in a court of law, whereupon the guilty parties should be punished as the law prescribes.

An “act of war” is an act of a government against citizens or other governments. Until we have hard evidence linking the Taliban (or any other government) and direct support of Al-Qaida (bin Laden’s terrorist faction), any such declarations of war are patently inappropriate. At best the Taliban could be accused in this case of obstruction of justice and harboring a fugitive, hardly the high crimes warrant-ing carpet-bombing and ground invasions.

Were we to follow this line of logic, should we not have also threatened to invade Switzerland when Marc Rich evaded the law after he was indicted in federal court with evading $48 million in taxes and 51 counts tax fraud (not to mention illegally making oil deals with Iran during the hostage crisis)? Ludicrous? You bet.

Yet this is what “Operation Infinite Justice” promises to do – go to war with noncombatants and uninvolved parties over what amounts to a diplomatic dispute. This is what extradition treaties are for, because going to war over the matter of fugitives is patently absurd. Our conflict with Afghanistan at the moment is thus more diplomatic than tactical, causing one to wonder why we feel it necessary to swing such a “big stick” so near Afghani borders.

The United States needs to make an example of bin Laden’s suspected involvement not by bombing Afghanistan into oblivion but by showing the world that we are in fact a civilized nation capable of putting our emotions aside in favor of pursuing the basic principles of liberty and justice.

Only when bin Laden is brought to trial and tried for his crimes in a public venue will justice be served, just as we would with any other criminal. It’s in this way that we can demonstrate that we are a nation committed not only to defending our citizens and our way of life but also the principles of justice and equality under the law.

Going into Afghanistan with both guns blazing makes us into the very same thing the Taliban is, which defeats the point of going in to begin with.

Like it or not, the idea of “Operation Infinite Justice” as it is currently being staged would be more aptly named “Operation Vigilante Justice.” All we need is a sturdy noose and a high enough tree.

Steve Skutnik is a senior in physics from Palm Harbor, Florida.