Military Tribunals vs. Civil Courts

Re “Even If You Dress It Up, a Kangaroo Is Still a Kangaroo,” by Jonathan Turley, Commentary, March 21, and Michael Ramirez’s cartoon, March 23, on military tribunals: I must say that Ramirez got it right. This constant blathering about civil rights is losing its sting. When you whine about everything, you lose the credibility required to exact people’s attention.

When you consider the recent problems with the Lockerbie trial, such that complications may have caused a retrial or acquittal, it is clear. We want military tribunals. No O.J. Simpson trial, technicalities, constant extensions or trial motions here; we want justice, something that is difficult in a normal trial.

To refer to our military courts as something other than just is a slap in America’s face. Our military courts, run by a blind, deaf monkey, are more just than 99.9% of the world’s courts, especially compared with the backward, medieval, dare I call them, civilizations that the terrorists come from. Being ex-military, I am sure our military courts are not “kangaroo,” just as I am sure that those who whine about them are jackasses.

James Bonn

Los Angeles

*

Just after World War II, I was a civilian chaplain at the large prison outside of Manila, where Japanese prisoners of war, convicted by military tribunal, were being held. I had to witness several hangings. In an article published in a U.S. magazine, the Christian Century, I criticized the military trials.

Among the points I raised were the following: 1) The crimes were committed during the heat of war, when armies are first of all concerned with self-preservation; 2) many misdeeds were apparently done under orders of the commanding officer of an area; 3) a military jury is made up of a panel of military men untrained in evaluating evidence and conditioned to the idea of punishing the enemy; 4) prosecution tends to be vindictive in military trials; 5) evidence was not equally available to the defense; and 5) public sentiment is against the accused, since they are identified with the enemy.

I am glad that reports indicate a possible change in procedures, but I still feel that a regular, nonmilitary court would be a better way of dealing with the present prisoners.

The Rev. Eugene A. Hessel

Pasadena