Titlebook: America in the Philippines, 1899-1902; The First Torture Sc Christopher J. Einolf Book 2014 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Nature Americ

靦腆

Introduction, active service in 1891. He had served in leadership positions in the army’s legal department and had written a textbook on international law. Now he was standing trial for torture. If convicted, he could face prison time and the loss of his officer’s commission.

飛行員

Between

,Einführung und Untersuchungsrahmen,ty politics debate over whether the administration and the senior military leadership in the Philippines were responsible for the water cure and a symbolic debate over how the violence against noncombatants in the Philippines compared to violence in the Civil War and Indian conflicts.

刀鋒

Spangle

Book 2014ensuing political scandal that resulted. Drawing on primary source documents to construct a detailed narrative history of the events, the book also proposes an original theory for the causes of torture, which emphasizes the moral agency of low-level actors. Einolf uses the historical debate to illum

含水層

Die Europ?ische Union als globaler Akteuruns. Field officers did not use torture in obedience to orders but instead innovated torture methods on their own in spite of official policy not to use it. Senior commanders responded differently to their subordinates’ use of torture. A few worked hard to prohibit it, but most either remained ignorant of its use or chose to look the other way.

整潔漂亮

outset

The Scandal Breaks, April 1902,lines about a possible cover up. Finally, American newspapers reported on the court-martial of Major Anthony T. Waller, who defended himself against charges of killing prisoners by accusing his commanding officer, Major General Jacob H. Smith, of ordering him to kill all males on Samar over the age of ten.

柔軟

休閑

Conclusion,ry of how atrocities occur and to illuminate and expand upon existing theories of human rights advocacy and discourse. The chapter suggests how historians and social scientists can build upon this study in future research and concludes with a discussion of the study’s relevance to present-day human rights advocacy.