PEOPLE'S LEGAL FRONT

INTERACTIVE FORMS HOME ABOUT US HISTORY LAWS MOTIONS LINKS INTERNET SEARCH

Click To Open Reference List

Jim Miklaszewski , and Tribunals

by Lee Allen Martin

To: "Miklaszewski, Jim (NBC)" Jim.Miklaszewski@nbc.com Cc: jim.mik@nbc.com Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 10:26 AM Re: Jim Miklaszewski , and tribunals Dear Mr. Miklaszewski:: You have failed to answer my question. Surely you have done your research and know the provision that give US military tribunals jurisdiction over foreign combatants. If you have not done your research it is well past time to do it. The navy told me that once you become part of the military you give up some of the rights provided in the Constitution. Military personnel voluntarily relinquish these rights, but has any foreign combatants? I think not. What provision of the UCMJ allows jurisdiction over enemy combatants? I believe none, and your report never produced any authority to the contrary. If military tribunals are allowed to try foreign combatants why have a world court to address disagreements between individual countries? The reply you sent only leads one to think that the authority granted in the UCMJ over rules the provisions of our Constitution. The Blood of Americans has been spilt for the protection and implementation of the Constitution and not the UCMJ. Now there is a story that needs to be told. Our Soldiers are being put in harms way not for the Constitution, but for the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I thank you for the link to the UCMJ. It is good to know that the UCMJ is on the internet for all to see. Unlike so many of our "LAWS", but then being a news reporter probably allows you much more access to the public record than us ordinary citizens. However, the UCMJ seems to actually be Title 10 of the US codes. Jurisdiction is only granted to foreigners as prisoners of war. Thought the president refused to call these people prisoners of war preferring "illegal Combatants". Am I wrong? Here is the link to the "LAW" as I read it. UCMJ If you have an authority that is more correct please let me know. I hope this helps you in your endeavor to become an "INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER". Lee Allen Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Miklaszewski, Jim (NBC)"Jim.Miklaszewski@nbc.com To:lee@plf.net Cc:jim.mik@nbc.com Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 6:46 AM Subject: FW: Jim Miklaszewski , and tribunals Mr. Martin, The "LAW" is the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and the authority granted the President under the UCMJ has been upheld by the Supreme Court. If you don't have a copy of the UCMJ you can get on on the web at Defenselink.mil. Thanks for your attention. Jim Miklaszewski -----Original Message----- From: Lee Martin Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 11:05 AM To: Nightly News Viewer Mail (NBC) Subject: Jim Miklaszewski , and tribunals I would like more in depth information concerning a news story ran on the 20th day of March 2002 reported by Mr. Miklaszewski. The story was on the war tribunals. Mr. Miklaszewski reported "the law" allows President Bush to set wide standards for appeals, and evidence. What "LAW"? Do you have a code #, Regulation #, etc. I have been under the impression that the constitution of the US sets the actions for courts, am I wrong? Has there been a new amendment to our constitution that I am not aware of, or that you have failed to report? When your news uses terms as vague as "the law" you assume an authority that you do not have. You may very well be experts in news, and journalism; but I do not believe you are experts in "the LAW". Isn't it time to report the news, which in this case is "the LAW". Please send me the code, statute, regulation, etc. that you are quoting as the "LAW"! Lee Allen Martin President of the People's Legal Front, Inc. "Because these are not TRADE SECRETS of Attorneys" 7050 County Road 2810 West Plains, Missouri 65775 Because e-mail can be altered electronically, the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed. EMail Home HOME ABOUT US HISTORY LAWS MOTIONS LINKS INTERNET SEARCH