U.S. WAR CRIMES IN THE PHILIPPINES

The U.S. occupation of the Philippine Islands came about as a result of military operations against the Spanish Empire during the Spanish-American war of 1898-99. The seizure of the Philippines by the United States, however, was not unplanned. American eyes had been set on the Philippines since before the outbreak of war. To many prominent Americans, establishing a colony in the Philippines was a logical extension of the nation's "manifest destiny" to play a leading role on the world stage. An expanded American presence in Asia was also thought to have significant commercial advantages for the nation, since American companies could then participate directly in large Asian markets.

For all the alleged advantages to possessing the Philippines, no thought was given to whether or not native Filipinos would welcome American as opposed to Spanish rule. The Filipinos were of course never informed of American intentions to stay in the Philippines. This turned out to be a serious error. By 1898 Filipinos had already shed a considerable amount of blood since rising up in 1896 to free themselves from Spanish domination. They would not take kindly to a change in colonial administration from Spain to the United States.

The First Philippine Republic and the End of Spanish Rule

On May 1, 1898, an American fleet under Dewey sailed into Manila harbor and quickly destroyed a small force of Spanish ships anchored there. Plans for Dewey to commence offensive operations against the Spanish in the Philippines had originated several months before, in February, when Assistant Secretary for the Navy, Theodore Roosevelt, had cabled Dewey to say "Your duty will be to see that the Spanish squadron does not leave the Asiatic coast ... start offensive operations in Philippine Islands."[1]

Because a considerable number of Spanish troops remained stationed throughout the Philippines, including a large force in Manila itself, American diplomats urged resistance leader Emilio Aguinaldo to return to the Philippines from exile in Hong Kong. Before journeying to his homeland, Aguinaldo, who was overjoyed at the American declaration of war on Spain, cabled resistance members the following message, which clearly expresses his belief that the Americans had come to liberate his people:

"Divine Providence is about to place independence within our reach. The Americans, not from mercenary motives, but for the sake of humanity and the lamentations of so many persecuted people have considered it opportune to extend their protecting mantle to our beloved country. ... At the present moment an American squadron is preparing to sail to the Philippines. The Americans will attack by sea and prevent any re-enforcements coming from Spain. ... We insurgents must attack by land. ... There where you see the American flag flying, assemble in number; they are our redeemers!"[2]

Aguinaldo sent another message several days later expressing the same confidence in American altruism:

"Filipinos, the great nation, North America, cradle of liberty and friendly on that account to the liberty of our people ... has come to manifest a protection ... which is disinterested towards us, considering us with sufficient civilization to govern by ourselves this our unhappy land."[3]

Energized by the seemingly fortunate turn of events, the Filipinos immediately went on the offensive. Within weeks Aguinaldo's insurgents had pushed the Spanish back to Manila. Fighting would continue for another two months, until American forces arrived in enough numbers to complete the defeat of Spanish troops holed up in Manila. Aguinaldo and his men were ecstatic with their victory and on June 12, 1898 they proclaimed Filipino independence. The First Philippine Republic had been founded.

What the Americans Promised the Filipinos

The declaration of a Philippine Republic should not have come as a shock to the Americans. No American military commander or politician had formally promised the Filipinos independence after the end of fighting, but this is not the impression that motivated Emilio Aguinaldo and his men. Statements made by several of the participants in these events suggest that by supporting the armed resistance of Filipinos to the Spanish, the United States was de facto guaranteeing the Filipinos their independence. For example, American Consul Wildman in Hong Kong wrote at the time, "the United States undertook this war [against Spain] for the sole purpose of relieving the Cubans from the cruelties under which they were suffering and not for the love of conquests or the hope of gain. They are actuated by precisely the same feelings for the Filipinos."[4] Admiral Dewey emphasized that during the liberation of the islands the Filipinos had cooperated directly with every American request, as if they were working with an ally and not a ruler. To quote the admiral, "Up to the time the army came he (i.e. Aguinaldo) did everything I requested. He was most obedient; whatever I told him to do he did. I saw him almost daily."[5] Finally, as General T.M. Anderson, commander of U.S. forces in the Philippines, later concluded, "Whether Admiral Dewey and Consuls Pratt (of Singapore), Wildman ( Hong Kong) and Williams ( Manila) did or did not give Aguinaldo assurances that a Filipino government would be recognized, the Filipinos certainly thought so, probably inferring this from their acts rather than from their statements."[6]

American Forces Arrive

The first American soldiers under General Anderson had landed in the Philippines in June 1898 as part of an expeditionary force sent by President William McKinley to secure the archipelago for the United States. They did not participate in military operations until August 1898 when Manila was captured. The overwhelming bulk of the fighting had been carried out by the Filipinos themselves. Nevertheless, once the Spanish signaled their desire to surrender. General Anderson ordered Aguinaldo to keep his men outside of Manila while American troops marched into the city. After Manila was secured, Anderson then told Aguinaldo that his men could not enter Manila. The Filipinos were stunned by this and tensions began to rise between the Americans and Filipinos.

The Americans Double-Cross Aguinaldo

What Aguinaldo and his men had not been told was that the United States never entered the Philippines with the intention of "liberating" the native population and then withdrawing. Filipinos had done the fighting and dying. They had, in fact, liberated themselves from Spanish rule while U.S. and Spanish representatives negotiated an end to the war and the future right to territories that neither the Americans nor the Spanish controlled.

Nevertheless, President McKinley made it explicit in Washington that he did not intend to give up the Philippines once the war with Spain had been concluded: "Incidental to our tenure in the Philippines is the commercial opportunity to which American statesmanship cannot be indifferent. ... The United States cannot accept less than the cession in full right and sovereignty of the island of Luzon."[7]

McKinley later explained his motives in deciding to seize the Philippines out of a sense of Christian mission:

"One night late it came to me this way - I don’t know how it was, but it came: (1) That we could not give them (i.e. the Philippines) back to Spain - that would be cowardly and dishonorable; (2) that we could not turn them over to France and Germany - our commercial rivals in the Orient - that would be bad business and discreditable; (3) that we could not leave them to themselves - they were unfit for self-government - and they would soon have anarchy and misrule over there worse than Spain’s was; and (4) that there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them, and by God’s grace do the very best we could by them, as our fellow-men for whom Christ also died."[8]

The missionary zeal of President McKinley, as well as a patronizing sense of the inferiority of the Filipino people, was shared by other leading political figures. For example, Indiana Senator Albert Beveridge argued that "[God] has made us the master organizers of the world. ... That we may administer ... among savages and senile peoples."[9]

Double-Cross Complete: The Treaty of Paris

Tensions between the Aguinaldo government and the U.S. Army in the Philippines simmered between August 1898 and February 1899. There was not yet any general outbreak of violence in the islands. General Aguinaldo continued to hold out hope that the U.S. would reverse its imperialist course and would grant the independence to the Philippines that he thought American involvement in the war had promised. With the formal signing of the Treaty of Paris on December 10, 1898, however, it became obvious that the U.S. intended to stay. One of the treaty's provisions was that the United States purchased the Philippines from Spain for $20 million, this despite the fact that Spain no longer controlled the Philippines and the Filipinos had formed their own republican government months earlier.

President McKinley finally disabused Aguinaldo of his hopes on December 21, 1898 when he issued the so-called "Benevolent Assimilation Proclamation". This proclamation, which McKinley ordered broadcast all over the Philippines signaled once and for all that the United States had no intention of leaving. In the proclamation, McKinley stated:

"The destruction of the Spanish fleet in the harbor of Manila by the United States squadron commanded by Rear-Admiral Dewey followed by the reduction of the city and the surrender of the Spanish forces practically effected the conquest of the Philippine islands and the suspension of Spanish sovereignty therein. With the signature of the treaty of peace between the United States and Spain by their respective plenipotentiaries at Paris on the 10th instant, and as a result of the victories of American arms, the future control, disposition, and government of the Philippine islands are ceded to the United States. In the fulfillment of the rights of sovereignty thus acquired and the responsible obligations thus assumed, the actual occupation and administration of the entire group of the Philippine Islands becomes immediately necessary, and the military government heretofore maintained by the United States in the city, harbor and bay of Manila is to be extended with all possible dispatch to the whole ceded territory.

The authority of the United States is to be exerted for the securing of the persons and property of the people of the Islands and for the confirmation of all private rights and relations. It will be the duty of the commander of the forces of occupation to announce and proclaim in the most public manner that we come not as invaders or conquerors, but as friends, to protect the natives in their homes, in their employment, and in their personal and religious rights. All persons who, either by active aid or by honest submission, cooperate with the Government of the United States to give effect to these beneficent purposes will receive the reward of its support and protection. All others will be brought within the lawful rule we have assumed, with firmness if need be, but without severity, so far as may be possible. ... it should be the earnest and paramount aim of the military administration to win the confidence, respect, and affection of the inhabitants of the Philippines by assuring them in every possible way that full measure of individual rights and liberties which is the heritage of a free people, and by assuring them in every possible way that full measure of individual rights and liberties which is the heritage of a free people, and by proving to them that the mission of the United States is one of the benevolent assimilation, substituting the mild sway of justice and right for arbitrary rule."[10]

The Philippines would thus not receive the independence that they had fought so hard to achieve. Instead, it was made apparent to Aguinaldo and his followers that they had simply assisted the transition of rule in the Philippines from one foreign power to another.

War Breaks Out by Mistake: The Americans Deliberately Escalate

Hostilities in Manila between Aguinaldo's resistance fighters and American troops erupted on February 4, 1899. That day, U.S. troops were extending the American perimeter around Manila when a Filipino man who approached U.S. lines was shot by a sentry. After this open fighting between Aguinaldo's men and American soldiers began along the perimeter. According to the Military Governor, General Elwell Otis, this fighting had not been planned:

"An insurgent approaching the picket (of a Nebraska regiment) refused to halt or answer when challenged. The result was that our picket discharged his piece (killing the Filipino) when the insurgent troops near Santa Mesa opened fire on our troops there stationed. ... During the night it was confined to an exchange of fire between opposing lines for a distance of two miles. ... It is not believed that the chief insurgents wished to open hostilities at that time."[11]

Studies have since established conclusively that although the Battle of Manila was deliberately brought on by General Otis. In this context it is worth quoting from one study. According to Lichauco and Storey's, The Conquest of the Philippines,

The next day (Feb. 5) General Aguinaldo sent a member of his staff under a flag of truce to interview General Otis and to tell him that the firing of the night before had been against his orders and that he wished to stop further hostilities. To bring this about he proposed to establish a neutral zone wide enough to keep the opposing armies apart. But to this request Otis replied that the fighting having begun must go on 'to the grim end'. This refusal was followed by an attack on the Filipino forces which lasted all day and resulted in killing some three thousand natives."[12]

The battle was an initial defeat for the Filipinos, but it started a war that lasted until 1913.

The Pacification of the Philippines

At the outset of the fighting, American troops in the Philippines numbered around 40,000, but by 1902 this number had risen to 126,000. During the first phase of the war, Aguinaldo's men fought and lost a succession of formal battles against the U.S. Army. In 1900, however, Aguinaldo abandoned head-on conflicts with the Americans and resorted to the guerrilla warfare tactics that had served him and his men so well against the Spanish.

For all the talk of bringing "civilization" to the Philippines, American commanders responded to the Filipino insurgency with the utmost brutality. Over the course of the next decade, and especially in the first few years of the conflict, it became commonplace for entire villages to be burned and whole populations to be imprisoned in concentration camps. No mercy was accorded to Filipino prisoner, a large number of whom were shot. This certainly was not in keeping with the spirit of "benevolent assimilation" proclaimed by President McKinley.

From Liberators to Killers: American Attitudes Toward Filipinos

The attitudes of American commanders involved in pacifying the Philippines are remarkable for both their disdain for the people they had allegedly "liberated" and their willingness to resort to the most ruthless methods in suppressing resistance. For example, General J.M. Bell, wrote in December 1901:

I am now assembling in the neighborhood of 2,500 men who will be used in columns of about fifty men each. I take so large a command for the purpose of thoroughly searching each ravine, valley and mountain peak for insurgents and for food, expecting to destroy everything I find outside of towns. All able bodied men will be killed or captured. ... These people need a thrashing to teach them some good common sense; and they should have it for the good of all concerned.[13]

That same month, General Bell issued Circular Order No. 3 to all American commanders in the field:

Batangas, Dec. 9, 1901.

To All Station Commanders:

A general conviction, which the brigade commander shares, appears to exist, that the insurrection in this brigade continues because the greater part of the people, especially the wealthy ones, pretend to desire, but in reality do not want, peace; that, when all really want peace, we can have it promptly. Under such circumstances it is clearly indicated that a policy should be adopted that will as soon as possible make the people want peace, and want it badly.

Commanding officers are urged and enjoined to use their discretion freely in adopting any or all measures of warfare authorized by this order which will contribute, in their judgment, toward enforcing the policy or accomplishing the purpose above announced. ... No person should be given credit for loyalty solely on account of his having done nothing for or against us, so far as known. Neutrality should not be tolerated. Every inhabitant of this brigade should either be an active friend or be classed as an enemy....

Another dangerous class of enemies are wealthy sympathizers and contributors, who, though holding no official positions, use all their influence in support of the insurrection, and, while enjoying American protection for themselves, their families and property, secretly aid, protect, and contribute to insurgents. Chief and most important among this class of disloyal persons are native priests.

The same course should be pursued with all of this class; for, to arrest anyone believed to be guilty of giving aid or assistance to the insurrection in any way or of giving food or comfort to the enemies of the government, it is not necessary to wait for sufficient evidence to lead to conviction by a court, but those strongly suspected of complicity with the insurrection may be arrested and confined as a military necessity, and may be held indefinitely as prisoners of war, in the discretion of the station commander or until the receipt of other orders from higher authority. It will frequently be found impossible to obtain any evidence against persons of influence as long as they are at liberty; but, once confined, evidence is easily obtainable."[14]

Even worse, perhaps, is the fact that the policies instituted by General Bell and other American commanders were endorsed by Secretary of War Elihu Root. In an amazing letter to the Senate dated May 7, 1902, Root argued that

"The War Department saw no reason to doubt that the policy embodied in the above-mentioned orders was at once the most effective and the most humane which could possibly be followed; and so, indeed, it has proved, guerrilla warfare in Batangas and Laguna and the adjacent regions has been ended, the authority of the United States has been asserted and acquiesced in, and the people who had been collected and protected in the camps of concentration have been permitted to return to their homes and resume their customary pursuits in peace. The War Department has not disapproved or interfered in any way with the orders giving effect to this policy; but has aided in their enforcement by directing an increase of food supply to the Philippines for the purpose of caring for the natives in the concentration camps."[15]

Like many of their officers, American troops also showed incredible callousness toward the Philippine civilian population. A man named Clarence Clowe described the situation as follows in a letter he wrote to Senator Hoar. The methods employed by American troops against civilians in an effort to find insurgent "arms and ammunition" include torture, beating, and outright killing.

At any time I am liable to be called upon to go out and bind and gag helpless prisoners, to strike them in the face, to knock them down when so bound, to bear them away from wife and children, at their very door, who are shrieking pitifully the while, or kneeling and kissing the hands of our officers, imploring mercy from those who seem not to know what it is, and then, with a crowd of soldiers, hold our helpless victim head downward in a tub of water in his own yard, or bind him hand and foot, attaching ropes to head and feet, and then lowering him into the depths of a well of water till life is well-nigh choked out, and the bitterness of a death is tasted, and our poor, gasping victims ask us for the poor boon of being finished off, in mercy to themselves.

All these things have been done at one time or another by our men, generally in cases of trying to obtain information as to the location of arms and ammunition.

Nor can it be said that there is any general repulsion on the part of the enlisted men to taking part in these doings. I regret to have to say that, on the contrary, the majority of soldiers take a keen delight in them, and rush with joy to the making of this latest development of a Roman holiday.[16]

Another soldier, L. F. Adams, with the Washington regiment, described what he saw after the Battle of Manila on February 4-5, 1899:

In the path of the Washington Regiment and Battery D of the Sixth Artillery there were 1,008 dead N*ggas, and a great many wounded. We burned all their houses. I don't know how many men, women, and children the Tennessee boys did kill. They would not take any prisoners.[17]

Similarly, Sergeant Howard McFarland of the 43rd Infantry, wrote to the Fairfield Journal of Maine:

I am now stationed in a small town in charge of twenty-five men, and have a territory of twenty miles to patrol.... At the best, this is a very rich country; and we want it. My way of getting it would be to put a regiment into a skirmish line, and blow every N*gga into a N*gga heaven. On Thursday, March 29, eighteen of my company killed seventy-five N*gga bolo men and ten of the N*gga gunners. When we find one that is not dead, we have bayonets.[18]

These methods were condoned by some back at home in the U.S., as exemplified by the statement of a Republican Congressman in 1909:

You never hear of any disturbances in Northern Luzon; and the secret of its pacification is, in my opinion, the secret of pacification of the archipelago. They never rebel in northern Luzon because there isn't anybody there to rebel. The country was marched over and cleaned in a most resolute manner. The good Lord in heaven only knows the number of Filipinos that were put under ground. Our soldiers took no prisoners, they kept no records; they simply swept the country, and wherever or whenever they could get hold of a Filipino they killed him. The women and children were spared, and may now be noticed in disproportionate numbers in that part of the island.[19]

The Example of Samar: A "Howling Wilderness"

Early in the morning on September 28, 1901 the residents of the small village of Balangiga (located in the Samar Province) attacked the men of U.S. Army Company C, Ninth U.S. Infantry, who were stationed in the area. While the Americans ate breakfast, church bells in the town began to peal. This was the signal for hundreds of Filipinos armed with machetes and bolos to attack the garrison. Forty-eight U.S. soldiers, two-thirds of the garrison, were butchered, in what is called the Balangiga Massacre. Of the Filipinos who attacked, as many as 150 were killed.[20]

American troops began retaliating as soon as the next day by returning to Balangiga in force and burning the now abandoned village. General Jacob H. Smith, however, sought to punish the entire civilian population of the Samar province. Arriving in Samar himself toward the end of October, Smith charged Major Littleton Waller with responsibility for punishing the inhabitants of Samar. Smith issued Waller oral instructions concerning his duties. These were recounted as follows (see below) in Smith and Waller's court martial proceedings the following year in 1902. These proceedings, indeed attention to the entire matter of U.S. Army conduct in the Philippines, were driven by the appearance of an interview with General Smith in the Manila Times on November 4, 1901. During this interview, Smith confirmed that these had truly been his orders to Major Waller.

"'I want no prisoners. I wish you to kill and burn: the more you kill and burn, the better you will please me,' and, further, that he wanted all persons killed who were capable of bearing arms and in actual hostilities against the United States, and did, in reply to a question by Major Waller asking for an age limit, designate the limit as ten years of age. ... General Smith did give instructions to Major Waller to 'kill and burn' and 'make Samar a howling wilderness,' and he admits that he wanted everybody killed capable of bearing arms, and that he did specify all over ten years of age, as the Samar boys of that age were equally as dangerous as their elders."[21]

Smith carried out his mission by having U.S. troops concentrate the local population into camps and towns. Areas outside of these camps and towns were designated "dead zones" in which those who were found would be considered insurgents and summarily executed. Tens of thousands of people were herded into these concentration camps. Disease was the biggest killer in the camps, although precisely how many lives were lost during Smith's pacification operations is not known. For his part, Major Waller reported that over eleven days between the end of October and the middle of November 1901 his men burned 255 dwellings and killed 39 people. Other officers under Smith's command reported similar figures. Concerning the overall number of dead, one scholar estimates that 8,344 people perished between January and April 1902.[22]

The Death Toll of American Occupation

The overall cost in human lives of American actions in the Philippines was horrific. One scholar has concluded concerning the American occupation that "In the fifteen years that followed the defeat of the Spanish in Manila Bay in 1898, more Filipinos were killed by U.S. forces than by the Spanish in 300 years of colonization. Over 1.5 million died out of a total population of 6 million."[23]

A detailed estimate of both civilian and American military dead is offered by historian John Gates, who sums up the subject as follows:

"Of some 125,000 Americans who fought in the Islands at one time or another, almost 4,000 died there. Of the non-Muslim Filipino population, which numbered approximately 6,700,000, at least 34,000 lost their lives as a direct result of the war, and as many as 200,000 may have died as a result of the cholera epidemic at the war's end. The U. S. Army's death rate in the Philippine-American War (32/1000) was the equivalent of the nation having lost over 86,000 (of roughly 2,700,000 engaged) during the Vietnam war instead of approximately 58,000 who were lost in that conflict. For the Filipinos, the loss of 34,000 lives was equivalent to the United States losing over a million people from a population of roughly 250 million, and if the cholera deaths are also attributed to the war, the equivalent death toll for the United States would be over 8,000,000. This war about which one hears so little was not a minor skirmish."[24]

Yet another estimate states, "Philippine military deaths are estimated at 20,000 with 16,000 actually counted, while civilian deaths numbered between 250,000 and 1,000,000 Filipinos. These numbers take into account those killed by war, malnutrition, and a cholera epidemic that raged during the war."[25]

That U.S. troops slaughtered Filipino civilians out of proportion to the conventions of so-called "formal" warfare was remarked upon during the Senate investigation of the war's conduct. As one official from the War Department estimated,

"The comparative figures of killed and wounded -- nearly five killed to one wounded if we take only the official returns -- are absolutely convincing. When we examine them in detail and find the returns quoted of many killed and often no wounded, only one conclusion is possible. In no war where the usages of civilized warfare have been respected has the number of killed approached the number of wounded more nearly than these figures. The rule is generally about five wounded to one killed. What shall we say of a war where the proportions are reversed?"[26]

INVESTIGATING WAR CRIMES: THE U.S. SENATE INVESTIGATING COMMITTEE

The United States Senate Investigating Committee on the Philippines was convened from January 31, 1902 after word of the Army's Samar pacification campaign reached Washington via the Manila Times story of November 4, 1901. Chaired by Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, the committee heard testimony concerning crimes that had allegedly been committed by U.S. troops and officers in the Philippines. The policies behind the U.S. occupation were also examined.

For six months officers and political figures involved in the Philippine adventure, both pro and anti-imperialists, testified as to the brutal nature of American anti-insurgent operations. Although attempts were made to justify the amount of damage U.S. troops were doing, as well as the number of Filipino lives lost, the evidence provided by several individuals was damning.

Major Cornelius Gardener, for example, a West Point graduate and the U.S. Army's Provincial Governor of the Tayabas province in the Philippines, submitted the following evidence via letter on April 10, 1902:

"Of late by reason of the conduct of the troops, such as the extensive burning of the barrios in trying to lay waste the country so that the insurgents cannot occupy it, the torturing of natives by so-called water cure and other methods, in order to obtain information, the harsh treatment of natives generally, and the failure of inexperienced, lately appointed Lieutenants commanding posts, to distinguish between those who are friendly and those unfriendly and to treat every native as if he were, whether or no, an insurrection at heart, this favorable sentiment above referred to is being fast destroyed and a deep hatred toward us engendered.

The course now being pursued in this province and in the Provinces of Batangas, Laguna, and Samar is in my opinion sowing the seeds for a perpetual revolution against us hereafter whenever a good opportunity offers. Under present conditions the political situation in this province is slowly retrograding, and the American sentiment is decreasing and we are daily making permanent enemies."[27]

The letters of American troops home to the U.S. were also introduced as evidence of war crimes. In this case, a letter written in November 1900 by one Sergeant Riley described an interrogation torture procedure used on Filipino captives:

"Arriving at Igbaras at daylight, we found everything peaceful; but it shortly developed that we were really "treading on a volcano." The Presidente (or chief), the priest, and another leading man were assembled, and put on the rack of inquiry. The presidente evaded some questions, and was soon bound and given the "water cure". This was done by throwing him on his back beneath a tank of water and running a stream into his mouth, a man kneading his stomach meanwhile to prevent his drowning. The ordeal proved a tongue-loosener, and the crafty old fellow soon begged for mercy and made full confession. ... The presidente was asked for more information, and had to take a second dose of "water cure" before he would divulge."[28]

Committee proceedings adjourned on June 28, 1902. For two months after this the legal team presenting evidence for the committee compiled its report. This report was released on August 29, 1902 under the title Secretary Root's Record: "Marked Severities" in Philippine Warfare, An Analysis of the Law and Facts Bearing on the Action and Utterances of President Roosevelt and Secretary Root. The report was a damning indictment of U.S. policy in the Philippines and the almost criminal conduct of the war by War Secretary Elihu Root, who multiple times had expressed support for the extreme measures implemented by the U.S. Army.

Altogether thirteen conclusions were drawn from the evidence, the most significant of which were:

1. That the destruction of Filipino life during the war has been so frightful that it cannot be explained as the result of ordinary civilized warfare.

2. That at the very outset of the war there was strong reason to believe that our troops were ordered by some officers to give no quarter, and that no investigation was had because it was reported by Lieut.-Colonel Crowder that the evidence "would implicate many others," General Elwell Otis saying that the charge was "not very grievous under the circumstances."

3. That from that time on, as is shown by the reports of killed and wounded and by direct testimony, the practice continued.

4. That the War Department has never made any earnest effort to investigate charges of this offence or to stop the practice.

5. That from the beginning of the war the practice of burning native towns and villages and laying waste the country has continued.

6. That the Secretary of War never made any attempt to check, or punish this method of war.

7. That from a very early day torture has been employed systematically to obtain information.

8. That no one has ever been seriously punished for this, and that since the first officers were reprimanded for hanging up prisoners no one has been punished at all until Major Glenn, in obedience to an imperative public sentiment, was tried for one of many offences, and received a farcical sentence.

9. That the Secretary of War never made any attempt to stop this barbarous practice while the war was in progress.

11. That the statements of Mr. Root’s, whether as to the origin of the war, its progress, or the methods by which it has been prosecuted, have been untrue.

12. That Mr. Root has shown a desire not to investigate, and, on the other hand, to conceal the truth touching the war and to shield the guilty, and by censorship and otherwise has largely succeeded.

13. That Mr. Root, then, is the real defendant in this case. The responsibility for what has disgraced the American name lies at his door. He is conspicuously the person to be investigated. The records of the War Department should be laid bare, that we may see what orders, what cablegrams, what reports, are there. His standard of humanity, his attitude toward witnesses, the position which he has taken, the statements which he has made, all prove that he is the last person to be charged with the duty of investigating charges which, if proved, recoil on him."[29]

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/R...Philippines.htm

_______________

Today, after sixty-five years of American protectorateship masquerading as independence, American troops are still in Philippine soil, raping, killing, pillaging, all in the name of "counter-terrorism". After one hundred and thirteen years since the start of American treachery, Filipinos, many of whom still wallowing in innocence of the genocide in the Philippines by Americans, still glorify Kanos, worshipping them through the entertainment industry and through offering their sovereignty to be breached and trampled upon.

"When shall these sacred shores finally be free?" - Isagani, from Jose Rizal's novel El Filibusterismo

Of course the answer is NEVER, until Filipinos wake up from their innocence and blind worship toward Americans.

_______________

In other forums featuring Spratlys, A LOT of replies even asked the "Americans to come back and build bases in the Philippines" or "let's ask the Americans to return to the Philippines" or "The Americans are our friends". One even quipped, "I'd rather see the entire Philippines go back to the US than the Spratlys go to China".
A survey done duringthe mid 2000s showed that MORE THAN HALF of Filipinos would want the Philippines want to revert to American rule.

" Where are the youth who will consecrate their golden hours, their illusions, and their enthusiasm to the welfare of their native land? Where are the youth who will generously pour out their blood to wash away so much shame, so much crime, so much abomination? Pure and spotless must the victim be that the sacrifice may be acceptable! Where are you, youth, who will embody in yourselves the vigor of life that has left our veins, the purity of ideas that has been contaminated in our brains, the fire of enthusiasm that has been quenched in our hearts! We await you, O youth! Come, for we await you!" - Padre Florentino, from Jose Rizal's novel El Filibusterismo

Has anyone seen this movie? I've had trouble finding a copy. Is it any good?


Amigo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDQIpQa2mdk

i don't think the filipinos are worshiping america, i did not see it when i was there

What ever! You can brainwash other Pinoys into hating America, but I'm proud to be American who also happens to have Filipino blood in me. My grandfather fought the Japanese during WW2. He was Filipino and guess what? After WW2, he served in the U.S. Army and that's how my dad came to California. I also served in the U.S. Army for over 20 years. lol at your prehistoric rhetoric crap. America has been good to my family.

I know a guy by the name of Ejay and he lives and loves America but he hates Americans especially the white, latinos and australoid looking fil-ams.

US betrayed Philippines after the US-Spanish War. Although, some Filipinos think that they are heroes because they are the one who beat the Spaniards & gave us freedom from Spanish Colonization. A lot of Filipinos died more during the US-American War than the Spanish Colonization.

Japanese was worst also during WWII. I remembered my grandma was a college student during World War II but because she was afraid to get rape & she said if you are married and have child the Japanese during WWII will not rape you so she got married with my grandfather during WWII.

But all of these countries colonized us and past is past. what they can do now is try help re-build the Philippines from this colonization by helping us because we still need help & we have to admit that hindi pa rin kayang tumayo ng walang tulong sa iba cause they cause a lot of disaster to our country and people siguro sa ganun paraan na lang sila puwedeng bumawi. I don't think we have to blame everything to them on what happened to our country, we already have our independence since 1946 but look at our country now. There is more poorer Filipinos, our population is getting huge. We still have to leave our country to work abroad to earn more money for our family.

I am still hoping for the Philippines though that we can make it to 2nd to 1st World Country.

I guess we have to blame it also to us specially from the government. A lot of us don't even follow simple rules.

Why is this individual trying to poke around incite hatred/negative views about America while at the same time trying to promote China in the Philippine forums? Last time I heard, China is not highly thought of in the PI. Does he want to change that? Does he want to change the public opinion and perception of China in SEA? It's obvious that this guy has China interests, most likely a Chinese person who thinks he's clever enough to try to dissuade PI from having an even stronger alliance with the US.

you notice that also..i agree with you. promoting china here on Filipino Chat I've seen a lot of thread with a topic regarding china and chinese trying to
connect with us

Trying to connect with you?.....no... They are trying to change public opinion of China in the mind of the common Filipino. It's a lame attempt at using soft power.. By trying to be provocative, bringing up touchy subjects and making China "the friend, not the enemy".

The Chinese are always resentful about their $hitty past and won't let go, they try to "restore honor" or whatever. I've been to the Philippines and people there for the most part are very happy, friendly and loving life...something that I can't say for the Chinese, or Koreans for that matter....

It's sad that some people post nonsense and spew China poison to make themselves feel better.

Propaganda goes both ways, I've heard plenty of talk regarding America as the savior and messiah of the Philippines and how we should side with the U.S. against China. How China is the evil communist regime out to dominate the world.

I may have been against ocrap on the Spratly issue because the China claim doesn't make sense but it makes even less sense to make an enemy out of China.

The fact of the matter is that it's in our best interest to deal with China, they're the economic superpower of today's world and have much opportunities to offer, Africa is an example of how China can greatly aid in development. Foreign "aid" from the west has mostly gone wasted in Africa and put them even deeper into debt with unsustainable projects sugar coated in human rights and feel good stories. China moves in and much like in their own country hands get dirty but $hit gets done. There's much to learn and gain from China, a nation that pulled more than 200 million out of poverty in 20 years.



Actually for the most part we're knee deep in poverty and mostly devoid of industry, its just that when people come to visit they go for the resorts and tourists spots where people who can afford to can enjoy themselves. No one comes over here to check out the overcrowded slums, public hospitals or the undeveloped rural villages where there's nothing good to see.

Exactly. The majority of Propaganda I hear is pro-American, anti-China rhetoric. Just because people don't fall for the US/Hollywood/NATO propaganda machine into hating China, doesn't mean they have bad intentions.

We all know America is the leader of manipulation and soft power. They've even got us brainwashed into supporting Israel's illegal occupation.

LOL. Because America is NEGATIVE. The more fact that it willfully colonized the Philippines WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE it bad enough.

AMERICA DOESN'T RESPECT SOVEREIGNTY of other countries.

It has conquered MORE SOVEREIGN NATIONS in THE PRESENT AGE THAN did other countries. Look, Grenada, Haiti, Dominica, South Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Philippines.... ALL THESE NATIONS WERE CONQUERED BY AMERICA WITHOUT CONSENT OF THE RESIDENT PEOPLES.

So tell me, is this good?

China is not highly popular in the Philippines because the PEOPLE ARE TOO MUCH WESTERNIZED and because of the SPRATLY ISSUE. Otherwise, Filipinos are OK with China and some are even keen in promoting the Asian Union cause.



What "$hitty past? are you talking about? For thousands of years, China was the single superpower in the entire world, spewing out discoveries and inventions that laid down the foundation for the Modern World. It enjoyed freedom, mobility, paper, printing, toothbrush, vaccinations, and thousand more inventions all the while Westerners are still living in their cave worlds.

Sorry, it's Whites who have a "$hitty past". Just because they overtook China during the Industrial Revolution of the early 1800s doesn't mean they're superior. In fact, they're quite LATE in this aspect, being overtaken by several Asian, African, and Indigenous American empires already.

LOL. It's even sadder that the Filipinos are still victims of pro-Uncle Sam poison propaganda started since 1898.

After all, Filipinos desert the Philippines and contribute to the brain drain not by migrating to China but by migrating to the USA, isn't that right?

What past? do I really have to go there? I don't want to embarrass you since you are so passionate about China, yet don't seem to know anything about it. I'm not denying that the Chinese invented "toothbrushes" or whatever, I am denying that the intentions of China in SEA are of any benefit to those countries. Altruism is not a trait that anyone would associate with China.. Just ask around.

And one more thing....PEOPLE ARE "NOT" TOO MUCH WESTERNIZED, they are more educated and informed than ever, hence why China is seen as a true threat and viewed negatively (as it should). What does "bran-drain" have to do with anything,, you are just shooting aimlessly. Apparently you seem to feel that it is wrong to migrate to America for better opportunities and better education.

I would confidently say that Filipinos have better opportunities for success in the USA than in China.

I

I'm going to have to ask that you explain the logical reasoning behind that position in detail.

Because anyone who follows international politics would know that China would never start a war in the South China Sea, because it isn't in China's best interest to do so. China as a nation may be wealthy but its currently in a critical stage of its development and a lot of its citizens still aren't living in ideal conditions, for China to get into a war now would not only jeopardize that development causing domestic unrest (which is what they are afraid of most) but also threaten their relationships with their neighbors, relationships that they have been trying very hard to improve under the "Peaceful Rise" image they have been building on for years.

They especially want to promote that image because its what gives them the best chance of acquiring as much of the Spratly as possible, by allowing them to leverage their economic influence instead of military force they are attempting to negotiate with claimant nations individually increasing their bargaining position for better deals. A direct military confrontation will only serve to unite ALL claimant nations which is completely contrary to China's interests.

China is also tapping into oil everywhere they have trade deals with numerous countries across the middle east, investments in Africa and a more recent negotiation with Russia, all of which have a lot of fuel to offer. Bigger picture China would be stupid to put those relationships at risk for some untapped resources in the Spratlys. A war there would also physically compromise the security of the trade routes of vital oil imports that go through the South China Sea.

China will not start a war over the Spratly because there's no point in taking so much risk when they are already dominating in the only thing that really matters, economics, and economics is not a zero sum game. This concept of China being a "threat" to us is just the typical scare mongering BS similar to the "Weapons of Mass Destruction" nonsense that Americans pulled on Iraq, and then later also attempted to do on Iran had Russia not stepped in with the backing of the SCO.



That's really a trait that wouldn't be associated with any country at all...



What great economic opportunities can we possibly gain from America over China? Please explain that too because amid this economic downturn caused by the west, it would seem that your confidence is unfounded. If you mean individuals who work overseas and not the country as a whole then yes probably better there in the US than in mainland China, but on the other hand even better in HK where they have plenty of benefits as well and its largely unaffected but the economic crisis of the west.

Still, you cannot deny that at one point in history (and in fact, for more than ten centuries), China has been the sole world power.

Maybe the intentions of China regarding the SPRATLY/NANSHA are only partly or of no benefit at all to the SEA nations, but it still is the truth that CHINA has NEVER OCCUPIED ANY SOUTHEAST ASIAN COUNTRY, and does NOT HAVE PLANS TO. This is one TELLING POINT that shows how China differs from the arrogant usurpers of sovereignty, like MOST of the European countries.

Yeah, Filipinos are just too Westernized. For one thing, ONLY the Philippines is very passionate about having the US in the Southeast Asian region. Noy many countries want that. And China is not at all viewed negatively. In fact, many Southeast Asians believe that the only way for Asia to totally succee and collapse the Western order of imperialism is to unite with all Asian countries, and that includes China.

Yeah, Brain-drain is WRONG. It has resulted to lack of adequate supply of nurses, teachers, medical doctors, engineers, and many other professions in the Philippines that only go to the US. It's the result of 40-years of American education that portrayed America as the land of milk and honey, when in reality it is nowhere near that for non-Whites, more so for brown-skinned Filipinos.

As Jose Rizal exclaimed, "America is the land of freedom par excellence for Whites, but not for the colored peoples". LOL. That includes Filipinos.

Not really. Scores of Filipino Americans are now going home like crazy to avert the upcoming economic disaster that is going to hit the US any time right now.

Just face it, your IDEAL DREAM that is the United States is on its way to absolute collapse. And no one's gonna help it because EVERYONE in the world, Muslim, Hindus, Chinese, and Africans, and even Europeans, VIEW United States as a tyrant seeking to impose its will on the world.

If you think China is the most hated... just think about the protests worldwide against the USA. I think the number of international protests against the USA does not even match one-fourth of that of China or any other country. Hahaha.

So true.

Long time HK residents from the Philippines even dream to retire there. The health system is good, the climate is good, and most of all, the social support exists, since Filipinos form the second largest group of people after the Han Chinese in Hong Kong.

Many Filipinos working there, be they Domestic Helpers or multinational professionals, like their lives in HK and have loved HK as their own, all the while retaining their Filipino identity.

On the other hand, Filipino migrants to the USA suddenly seem not to remember a word of Tagalog or Bisaya and forgets that he is brown-skinned. LOL. Fil-Ams are some of the people in the world with much inferiority complex and self-hatred.

China was supposedly “the sole world power?” That is irrelevant and inaccurate. Many civilizations throughout history can be said to be the sole world powers, Mesopotamians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Mayans, Aztecs, Greeks, Romans, Huns, Persians, etc. But that was the past and it is irrelevant, because most of these civilizations don’t exist. But in the modern context of what a sole world superpower is cannot be applied to China. Pre-revolution China had no swaying influence in the entire world, It might have had one or two tributary states (i.e. Korea/Vietnam) which were really just bully victims. Was Dynastic China an advanced civilization? Absolutely, like many before and after it. But the sole world power? NO way. Some might think they were because it makes them feel better themselves, delusional pride. China most definitely uses this propaganda to ignite rabid nationalism. I do not subscribe to that silliness.

I will stand by my claim that the Philippines have better opportunities and has benefited from America. And I am confident about it. Please try to looks at things empirically, with proof, not just by assuming that an economic situation makes my claim invalid. In the States, I have bumped into ethnic Philippine doctors, lawyers, newscasters, nurses, politicians, Ivy-Leagues, and professionals thriving in the American Economy. You cannot say this about China, certainly not mainland China. If anything, Filipinos in Asia are big in the services sector, housework, prostitution etc. You don’t believe me? HK is a man’s paradise if you’re into Thai and Filipino whores. Google it. I’ll get you started

http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,,,H...e12ee76c,0.html

Also, the American economy (even with its “downturn”) happens to provide the Philippines with massive amount of remittances by Philippines people working and living in the USA. In fact, nearly as much as Asia, Europe and the Middle east Combined. In 2010, the US remittances reached approximately 8 billion, while those from , Europe and the Middle east combined reached approximately 8.5 billion. Mainland China reached 22 million. Don’t believe me? Check the official stats.

http://www.bsp.gov.ph/statistics/keystat/ofw.htm

And I’m pretty certain that the US is one of the biggest if not the biggest donators from foreign aid to the Philippines, something like 600 million. While China is receives foreign aid.
China would not start a war in SEA? Are you sure about that? Have you read the news lately? Vietnam doesn’t seem to think so. Neither does the Philippines. I’m sure they know a thing or two about geopolitics more than you and me. The US might not be in the best shape, sure the US has had ups and downs before, and probably again. No big deal.. It’s just people (Mostly Chinese nationalists and card carrying buffoons) who are literally salivating wishing the US “collapses” that’s a bit dramatic and a bit perverse..Do you really want these people as your friend and overlords?

1. I didn't contest that opportunities were better in the US than in mainland China in fact I pointed that out myself.

2. Since when is the current economic situation felt around the world not evidence, as compared to your anecdotal experiences of ethnic Filipinos you have seen as Doctors, Lawyers, etc... also this isn't about race/ethnicity its about nationality, even if someone is 100% ethnic Filipino but has become an American citizen that's an American not a Filipino, and many OFW's who get high end jobs like Doctors and above, decide to change citizenship and bring their family over, it may benefit that individual but that does not benefit the Philippines.

3. Your assumption that HK is a paradise of whores and prostitution based on a single report on illegal trafficking is ludicrous, OFW's don't go to HK for prostitution, most of that is here in the Philippines where there are a lack of jobs. Those illegally trafficked into the sex slave industry is a criminal matter and is a miniscule compared to hundred thousand OFW's who work there. They also recently won a milestone case allowing for permanent residence and more benefits after a number of years.


Again I didn't contest that opportunities for migrant workers are better in the US than in mainland China, this straw man argument is getting old.

However in terms national (not individual) interests industrialization is the future. While OFW's do provide a source of income to depend on it for our future is a weak strategy that puts us at the mercy of foreign nations as it creates a dependence outside of Philippine control, for our nation to develop we need to provide jobs here instead of sending people abroad that means building infrastructure and developing our rural provinces.

And China can offer us the best opportunities to do so, as evidenced by their progress in the largely undeveloped Africa which is very real. Also this isn't some untested economic theory, what China is doing in Africa is what it itself did to industrialize after the cultural revolution where China was very much mired in poverty not unlike Africa and the Philippines.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZfDYnOLw5w


Donations? By far the most popular topics of American benevolence I keep hearing from those who simply assume what "foreign aid" is. I for one would very much prefer that the Philippines no longer receives this foreign aid from the west, which I will explain in detail later because it takes quite a while to explain to people who aren't familiar with how it works.


I do read Philippine news and I have not read a single official statement from anyone in our government fearing an actual military invasion from China.

Sure there's a bunch of petty military posturing in the Spratly and some of our retarded politicians waste money buying old obsolete warships in a sad attempt to show off, money which would have been better spent in infrastructure development, if China wanted to blow up those rust buckets they could without so much as breaking a sweat but they won't because it's not in China's best interest to start a war.


I gave very detailed reasons as to why China would not attack, if you are going to contest my argument at least address it directly, in what way is my analysis incorrect? Why would China attack the Philippines? If your so sure that other people who think war is inevitable must know better than me then by all means post their statements and REASONS (I'm not just going to accept a statement of someone who says China will attack for no reason), rather than evade the issue by dismissing my argument without giving an actual counter argument.


It's like your saying the Mr. China wants the company owned by Mr. America to fail just out of spite ignoring the fact that China is its largest foreign investor.

Again economics isn't a zero sum game, someone does not have to lose for someone to win, I don't know why the concept of mutual benefit seems so alien to the West. The US is collapsing because it has resorted to the mass printing of dollar bills and increased spending by waging wars in the middle east, as opposed to making the cuts and sacrifices necessary to preserve its future.

China wants the US to collapse? If anything China has been angry about the US devaluing its currency, it's angry because America isn't doing anything to address the issue and save itself thus ensuring the safety of Chinese investments, China want's the US to pull out of this crisis because China has HUGE investments in America. That you would think others are out to get you for no apparent reason than simple spite is a shallow perspective that shows how your anti-China sentiment clouds your reason. It isn't in China's best interest to see America collapse, if you honestly think China wants America to fall then you are blinded by your view of China as an evil enemy.

Now in regards to foreign aid, people frequently mistake foreign aid for charity.

Charities are done by rich celebs, Governments don't do that, they do AID which is not a "donation".

AID is not FREE, it’s not a charity “here you go enjoy, goodbye”
AID is a soft loan to be paid back WITH INTEREST.

Now NORMALLY this would be a good thing, it’s a soft loan so its below the standard interest rate, and the idea is to help a developing nation get on their feet then pay it back later at a reduced rate than what normal interest would charge.

Like an aspiring businessman would take a loan from a bank, you need money to make money, once the business takes off and you start making money you pay it back with a little interest, and everyone is happy or at least that would be the case if that was all there was to it.

Now here’s where the PROBLEM starts, Western AID likes to dictate requirements for the AID, citing humanitarian/enviromental reasons.

“Okay buddy we’ll lend you the money to develop your country but before you start building factories and railroads and whatever else we want to make sure your people are taken care of first, see those poor folks down there, make sure they have access to clean water, those forests don’t build $hit there its bad for the environment and make sure your factories are all built with the extra stuff that minimizes pollution and if their not up to spec we want you to do them over etc…”

Now it all sounds nice and certainly something we would want to do, until you consider the big picture, we just took out a HUGE @$$ loan so that’s a lot of interest even with the reduced rate, and it incurs interest ANNUALLY and that interest is CUMULATIVE, so in order to make this work we need to use the money we borrowed to make ENOUGH money to pay it off and profit enough to make the whole venture worthwhile.

But with all the Humanitarian conditions, we end up spending a lot of time and money there first and while it creates a lot of TEMPORARY sunshine, rainbows and warm fuzzy feelings the one thing it does not generate is revenue.(and I say temporary because ultimately we cannot afford the upkeep to maintain them so people end up living back in $hit a few years down the road)

So again imagine a business owner borrowing from a bank but the bank has conditions the business owner must meet, the place must smell nice, have a lot of nice decorations, cool sculptures a red carpet, soft sofas, list goes on… Now again it sounds nice, sounds like something a business man would want EVENTUALLY, but a practical approach would focus on making the money and paying off the debt first, then later when the business is successful buy all the extras that make it better when you can actually afford them, UNFORTUNATELY the bank dictates that the businessman MUST do all the extras first so by the time he’s done with all the conditions not only did his loan fatten up with interest and he didn’t make any money yet but even what is left isn’t enough to make the kind of money he needs to pay off the loan plus interest anymore.

And that’s where we are Philippines, sure we’re the lowest in CO2 emissions in Southeast Asia and we’re a “democratic free country” with a lot less human rights issues than say China. But we couldn’t afford to pay our national debt in fact for quite some time all we could afford to pay was the interest, in other words we would have been stuck paying FOREVER.

Now with Asia being on the rise we’re actually doing better so we’re getting out of the debt hole but it’s gonna be awhile yet till we’re out of this mess and it definitely crippled our development.

A developing nation MUST focus on DEVELOPMENT first, human rights the environment all of these are important but we can’t make a permanent solution for those if we’re in a state of perpetual poverty. Put those in the backseat and prioritize our resources to develop a sustainable infrastructure first then LATER when we’re making more money use that to fix the humanitarian and environmental issues. Unfortunately the West has hammered those humanitarian and environmental values so hard into our heads that we can’t even do any real progressive $hit anymore without a whole bunch of activists getting in the damn way, I mean get this! there are talks to make wind generators in Illocos which would INCREASE our electric bill, WOW really… well $hit as long as its green go for it, screw the poverty issues! but anyway I digress.

We’re not the only country who got in this mess, Africa as I’ve brought up before was in a similar ditch with their foreign “AID”, and since they were broke they paid off their annual interest to the Western nations by their regularly shipping the West their natural resources.

This is why the West was all in an uproar when China moved in with their investments with no strings attached, with China’s investments Africa could do what they needed to do without any conditions to hamper their progress, and once Africa develops sufficiently the will be able to FULLY pay off any debts and the West losses their lifetime pass to Africa’s natural resources and when you consider how much untapped resources Africa has that’s a friggin big deal.

Now its important to note that CORRUPTION also plays a role here, like the conditions set by the Western nations (America, Europe) saps our ability to make good use of it, Corruption also does the same thing, and while corruption is indeed in our ball court it certainly didn’t stop the West from exploiting that problem, as long as corruption sapped the AID money in conjunction with all their prerequisites & conditions we got stuck paying interest to the West forever, so they were only too happy to keep sending in cash which we all knew would get stolen.

However as China demonstrated, this problem was easily solved if indeed anyone was serious in stopping it, which clearly the West weren’t despite all their empty protests against corruption in Africa.

China simply didn’t send cash to Africa, their deal was Africa would give them X worth of resources and China would in return deliver Y worth of investments and infrastructure development. Try as they might the corrupt cannot steal buildings, roads, railways, etc… China simply sent the materials and the workers with some agreement that they would hire and teach some Africans, but no large bulk of funds was transferred for anyone to steal.

So to sum it up foreign AID from America was not an act of altruism, no country ever gives anything for nothing just out of the kindness of their hearts.