[Seattle-editorial] feature proposal

[jonathan lawson]

HeyNgaio,

great first feature! I have 2 comments. First, I think its a bit long for 
the information contained--perhaps more like an article, out of which a 
feature could be made. But I think it could be condensed a bit and made 
more pithy.

It would benefit from links to IMC articles or other alt. media sources, if 
any have covered the story.. finally, though there is no hard and fast 
rule, we have generally avoided linking to corporate media sources like the 
NYT, even as background references.

Usually, in making comments like this, I would take a stab at actually 
making the changes I proposed--but I'm just way way too busy with NAB 
stuff. Can someone else (Heather? Jeremy?) please give this a quick scan?

Many thanks, Ngaio, for telling this important story!!!!

Jonathan




At 10:57 AM 8/29/2002 -0700, Ngaio Robertson Halsey wrote:


>Hello IMC
>
>This is my first time proposing a feature..so please be patient.
>Unfamiliar with how to create links, I simply left the websites in bracketts.
>Also, I didn't attach a picture..I just remembered now that I might want one.
>Suggestions on a graphic would be welcome.  I am not sure if I am still on 
>the
>editorals list, so if you wish to respond, include my e-mail address as well.
>Thank you.
>
>Ngaio Halsey
>ngaio at riseup.net
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Title: East Timor Signs Treaty with US
>Subtitle: US Attempts to Furthur Undermine Global Justice
>
>On August 26th, East Timor<www.nytimes.com/reuters/politics/politics-timor-
>court-usa.html> became the third country, after Israel and Romania to sign
>Article 98, a treaty with the United States pledgng that neither will 
>prosecute
>each other's soldiers in the International Criminal
>Court<www.globalpolicy.org/wldcourt/> in the Hague.
>
>Though once a proponent for the ICC, the United States, now under the Bush
>administration, has "un-signed" a 
>treaty<www.iccnow.org/html/icc19990712.html>
>that signals an intention to ratify the US's membership into the 
>International
>Criminal Court.  The US government defends itself with claims that other
>countries, envious of the United States's power, will attempt to abuse the 
>ICC
>and unfairly target US soldiers for prosecution of war crimes.  Supporters of
>the ICC, claim that the guidelines drawn up for the ICC will prevent this 
>from
>happening.  Suspicions have arisen that the US is more fearful of their 
>leaders
>being prosecutable for war crimes than actual soldiers.
>
>Still wary of the possibilty that US soldiers may be tried under the newly
>formed International Criminal Court, the US government jeopardized dozens of
>peace-keeping missions<www.globalpolicy.org/security/peacekpg> by threatening
>to withdraw all US support unless the ICC granted special immunity from
>prosecution to all US militray personnel.
>
>In mid-July, after three weeks of negotiations, the US and the UN agreed to
>suspend any action on either side for a year.  But since then, the US has
>actively persued countries internationally with a treaty pledeging that 
>neither
>country will send each other's soldiers to the ICC.    Countries, refusing to
>sign, declare their intention to stand firmly behind the ideal of equal
>treatment under global law.
>
>The International Criminal Court was born July 1st, 2002.  So far, 76 of the
>original 139 signees<www.iccnow.org/html/country.html>, have ratified their
>memberships.  The ICC is similar to, but a permanent replacement of,
>international tribunals<www.hrw.org/wr2k1/intro/intro15.html>, meant to try
>genocide and other crimes against humanity.  The ICC intends only to try
>individuals when their home states fail to take adequete disciplinary actions
>themselves.
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Seattle-editorial mailing list
>Seattle-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/seattle-editorial