Maybe it takes a conservative attorney general to help a president hunt down a cunning and powerful terrorist godfather and his gang of co-conspirators. But as Attorney General John Ashcroft and President George W. Bush chart the end game for the first phase of the war on terrorism, they are making a dangerous end run around the Bill of Rights.

Of course the United States has been plunged into a deadly defensive conflict against a shadowy terrorist network dedicated to the destruction of our country. Of course new terrorist attacks must be expected. Of course this struggle requires drastic changes in the way we live, work and operate our government. Of course there must be restrictions on our normal freedoms.

But consider what looks like a throwaway line in Mr. Bush’s new emergency order on the trial of terrorists by military courts. He wrote: “Given the danger to the safety of the United States and the nature of international terrorism, … it is not practicable to apply in military commissions under this order the principles of law and the rules of evidence generally recognized in the trial of criminal cases in the United States district courts.”

A close reading of the order shows harsh departures from normal court procedures. The military courts will accept hearsay evidence and any other evidence deemed to have “probative value to a reasonable person.” Defendants will not necessarily be permitted to choose their own lawyers. Military officers will take the place of judge and jury. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld will decide “the conduct, closure of, and access to proceedings” of the military courts. Conviction and sentencing (up to life imprisonment and death) will be by two-thirds vote of the commission that conducts a court, instead of the standard requirement of a unanimous jury vote. No appeal to or review by any domestic, foreign or international court

is permitted.

This court system, far from the “full and fair trial” promised by Mr. Bush, applies to any non-citizen whom he finds “reason to believe” is a terrorist or who has knowingly harbored a terrorist. It thus applies to suspected terrorists, a nicety that Vice President Dick Cheney ignored when he defended the emergency order. He said that “somebody who comes into the United States illegally, who conducts a terrorist operation killing thousands of innocent Americans -men women and children – don’t deserve the same guarantees and safeguards that would be used for an American citizen going through the normal judicial process.” Mr. Cheney assumes guilt in advance. What about mere suspects? Accepted judicial procedures are designed not only to punish the guilty but also to protect the innocent.

The emergency order comes on top of a questionable dragnet of 5,000 foreign students in this country (obviously weighted toward Muslims and Arabs) and an order authorizing government eavesdropping on conversations between prisoners and their lawyers, without even the authorization of a court order.

The military court system seems tailored first to fit Mr. bin Laden, if he escapes bombs and missiles and decides to give himself up rather than commit suicide. Officials have said that a normal trial could mean a drawn-out proceeding that would give him opportunity to spew his hateful propaganda, stir up new terror attacks and transform himself into a martyr. But how much more effective a martyr would he be if tried by an American kangaroo court stripped of standard procedures and protections?

The same goes for the hundreds of suspects that have been and will be rounded

up – the people Mr. Bush has “reason to believe” are terrorists. Their drumhead military trials will display to the world an America that has adopted some of the worst aspects of foreign dictators, not the proud American freedom that has been fashioned for two centuries and stands as a beacon to the oppressed.