Disclaimer: I do not like Ashcroft, OK? Somebody posted that the Missourians were happy to elect a dead man instead of him. They were wise.

That being said, this "sends a message" [yechh] in several ways.

The Executive Order says that such people *can* be tried by military tribunal, not that they *must* be. The reason for a military tribunal is twofold: first, it avoids the Simpson Circus Effect; second, the likelihood that a "chain of evidence" can be maintained in military and quasimilitary operations is nil.

So what this trial says is that if they do have what they believe is sufficient admissible evidence, they'll go for the trial rather than the tribunal; the circus is manageable. (And I do mean "admissible" under the rather tortuous and arcane rules of evidence currently in force.) Why? Well, there are a lot of people who kneejerk against the tribunals, and a lot more who are made uncomfortable by them -- in which latter group I include myself, by the way. The more convictions they can get by standard trials, the more credible the whole effort becomes.

Once again, don't fall into the trap of believing that because someone doesn't agree with your Personal View of the Universe as handed down by the Prophet Noam they're necessarily stupid, or don't pay attention to what's going on. Like I said, I can think of several things I'd like to do with Ashcroft, none of them very enjoyable for the man himself; but I find this development heartening, on the whole.