to clarify, before I get jumped on - I'm not saying this isn't an outrage. but really, is it so much more outrageous b/c this dude's an American citizen, or b/c Jose Padilla was, & so on?
Well, this is my take: I've never invested a lot of faith in international law or governance, as it seems to be a work-in-progress and is mostly still just voluntary. The reason that this is important is that the same thing doesn't hold at the national level where we do have strong institutions and a long legal tradition. Although there isn't a legal system to enforce human rights internationally, I don't think that is reason to allow American rights to be trampled for the sake of consistency. A double-standard is better than no standard at all.
when have Americans ever really cared about the rule of law or due process when it did was an obstacle to their goals? like many things, they are "cherished [nationality] values" mostly when it is expedient.
Internationally that's true, but again, domestically I think that there is actually a high level of support for strict procedural standards. Take for example laws on evidence: people are mostly OK now with letting people off when the police collect evidence improperly, even in quite serious cases, and allowing for a reasonable doubt standard, rather than a balance of probabilities standard for criminal law. If we can let murderers off on technicalities and improbable alibis, then I'm not sure why it is such a nuisance to give an American terrorist a trial.