Goose Creek Indictments--Question

So by now you've heard the two young fellows arrested in South Carolina with a trunk full of explosives and a (tenuous) connection to Sami al-Arian have been indicted on terror-training and explosives-transport charges. Michelle has the blog-blitz on them, and a link to the .pdf of the rather terse indictment, and Dan Riehl has some interesting details about their former landlord.

I've just got a question, based on the indictment: why is there a forfeiture action being asserted along with the two criminal counts?

From their engagement in any or all of the violations alleged in Counts One and Two of this Indictment, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 842, defendants
AHMED ABDELLATIF SHERIF MOHAMED and YOUSSEF SAMIR MEGAHED, shall forfeit to the United States, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(2)(B), any and all of the defendants’ right, title, and interest in any property constituting, and derived from, any proceeds the defendants obtained directly or indirectly as a result of such violation.

While I would expect to see this action filed as a matter of course along with a drug arrest (for obvious reasons), why is it being filed in a terrorism case? Do the authorities suspect that they have somehow profited from their alleged crimes? Was someone paying them to drive the potassium chlorate from Florida to South Carolina?

This may be a just-in-case measure that's filed as a matter of course in the Middle District of Florida (given the high number of drug prosecutions in the region, I can see it being an office rule to append a forfeiture count). But maybe this hints at a wider conspiracy.