i've got to admit, this does demonstrate that the military tribunals have more independence than i gave them credit for. the thing that separates a kangaroo court from a non-kangaroo court are the existence of at least occasional acquittals. if there never is an acquittal, it's not a real court. acquittals are what gave the nuremberg trials their credibility, making them more than simple victor's justice.
this wasn't an acquittal. the judge just threw out the charges, without prejudice, on a technicality. "without prejudice" means that the government can bring the charges again if they fix the procedural flaw in the case. and i expect they will do just that (especially since this same flaw, the fact that the government never classified the detainee as an "unlawful enemy combatant", would also apply to all of the remaining gitmo detainees).
so while, the tribunal still hasn't proven itself and i still have my doubts about it, at least this shows that the judge's are giving some cursory thought to the case before them. and that, quite frankly, is better than i feared.