logo
Who Gets Panzer Tattooed on Their Arm?

Who Gets Panzer Tattooed on Their Arm?

Yahoo01-05-2025

On the long list of reasons the United States could have lost World War II—the terribly effective surprise Japanese attack, an awful lack of military readiness, the relatively untrained troops—there is perhaps no area in which Americans were more initially outmatched than armament. Americans had the M4 Sherman, a tank mass-produced by Detroit automakers. Germans had the formidable panzer, a line of tanks with nicknames such as Panther and Royal Tiger that repeatedly outgunned the Americans. In the 1940s, you couldn't pick up a newspaper in the United States without reading about the panzer's superior maneuverability and robust armor, qualities that made it especially hard for Americans to stop. 'This doesn't mean our tanks are bad,' The New York Times reported in January 1945. 'They are the best in the world—next to the Germans.'
The panzer invoked Nazi might and aggression even decades after the war ended. Sylvia Plath's 'Daddy,' first published in 1965, contains this stanza: 'Panzer-man, panzer-man, O You—— / Not God but a swastika / So black no sky could squeak through.' In the 2000s, popular video-game franchises—including Call of Duty, Battlefield, and Medal of Honor—released installments set during World War II that featured the panzer, etching it into the collective consciousness of a new generation of Americans.
So you can see why it's noteworthy that Joseph Kent, Donald Trump's nominee to head the National Counterterrorism Center, has a panzer tattoo. Last month, Mother Jones's David Corn uncovered a shirtless picture of Kent from 2018, in which he has the word PANZER written down his left arm. Why? It's not clear. Kent did not respond to multiple requests for comment, and the Trump administration hasn't offered an explanation either. Olivia C. Coleman, a spokesperson for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, directed me to a post on X in which Ashley Henning, a deputy chief of staff at the agency, calls Kent a 'selfless patriot who loves this country and his family.'
Kent's tattoo is all the more curious considering his background. A former member of the Army Special Forces who twice ran for Congress in Washington State, he has had repeated interactions with far-right extremists. During his unsuccessful 2022 congressional bid, Kent consulted with Nick Fuentes, the young white supremacist, and hired a campaign adviser who was a member of the Proud Boys, a violent far-right group. (Kent ultimately disavowed Fuentes, and his campaign said that the Proud Boys member, Graham Jorgensen, was a low-level worker). The tattoo 'could mean that he's glorifying the Nazis. Or it could have a different context,' says Heidi Beirich, a co-founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, an organization that tracks right-wing extremism. Despite what the word evokes in history, panzer references are not common on the far right, Beirich told me. 'I don't think I've run across a panzer.'
Other discernible possibilities make less sense. Right-wing accounts on X have spread the claim that Kent has jäger—German for 'hunter'—tattooed on his other arm. The two tattoos together would add up to 'tank hunter.' The accounts claim that heavy-anti-armor-weapons crewman was one of Kent's jobs in the Army. It's oddly specific enough to sound plausible, except that I couldn't find any evidence that Kent was part of an anti-tank unit—let alone one that would be targeting German tanks—or that he even has a jäger tattoo on his other arm. (Let me point out that Kent could resolve all of this by simply rolling up a sleeve.) There aren't many other explanations. The United States Army has an installation on a base outside Stuttgart, Germany, called Panzer Kaserne, but there's no information to suggest that Kent was ever deployed there. All we're left with is a strange tattoo associated with Nazi Germany.
Of course, people frequently make strange tattoo choices. Some get ones they come to regret, and plenty have tattooed foreign words onto their body that they don't fully understand. Yet it's reasonable to wonder about the messages a person decides to make permanent on their body. Tattoos can connote in-group belonging or membership to a subculture. Olympians are known to get tattoos of the Olympic rings to commemorate competing in the games. Bikers famously love getting tattoos of skulls and flames. And then there are white supremacists, who have emblazoned themselves with swastikas, Norse runes, the SS logo, and other symbols. Why settle for a T-shirt or a flag when you can carve your values into your skin?
The Trump administration seems to strongly agree with the notion that tattoos are meaningful—but only when convenient for the president's agenda. Consider Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Maryland resident the Trump administration deported to El Salvador's Terrorism Confinement Center, or CECOT, prison camp last month. Garcia was living with protected legal status in the U.S., and the government's own lawyers have acknowledged that he was deported because of an 'administrative error.' Trump loyalists have doubled down on Garcia's detention, in part pointing to his tattoos. On Truth Social, Trump posted a picture of Garcia's knuckle tattoos—a leaf, a smiley face, a cross, and a skull. The photo was altered with text above each symbol to spell out M-S-1-3, suggesting Garcia's tattoos are a code for the gang MS-13. (Criminal-justice professors doubt that claim.) In an interview with ABC this week, Trump insisted it's 'as clear as you can be' that Garcia has MS-13 tattooed on his knuckles, even as ABC's Terry Moran noted that the actual M-S-1-3 in the photo Trump has distributed clearly is Photoshopped in.
[Read: An 'administrative error' sends a Maryland father to a Salvadoran prison]
At least some of the hundreds of other immigrants who have been deported to CECOT appear to have been targeted simply for having the wrong tattoos. Andry José Hernández Romero, a makeup artist with no confirmed gang affiliation, was deported after his crown tattoos were reportedly mistaken for symbols associated with Tren de Aragua. Neri José Alvarado Borges, according to his family and friends, was deported for his tattoos, including an autism-acceptance symbol that he got in support of his younger brother.
Tom Homan, the White House's 'border czar,' has claimed that tattoos alone are not being used to label people as gang members. I reached out to the White House for comment, but received only another response from Coleman, the ODNI spokesperson, pointing to another post on X by Henning. This post mocks the fact that The Atlantic had contacted them to ask questions. In reference to Kent's tattoo, Henning wrote, 'Should we just reply that it's photoshopped?' and then included a video clip of Trump's ABC interview. To put this in plain terms: I asked the administration to address concerns that one of the president's nominees has a tattoo associated with Nazis, and its response was to make a joke.
Trump's secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, has some questionable tattoos of his own. On the right side of his chest, Hegseth has a large Jerusalem Cross: It has even sides and looks like a plus symbol, with four smaller crosses in each quadrant. On his right arm, Hegseth has a large tattoo of Deus vult (Latin for 'God wills it'), written in Gothic script. Also on Hegseth's right arm is a tattoo of the Arabic word Kafir, which commonly translates to 'infidel' or 'unbeliever.'
Both the Jerusalem Cross and Deus vult date back to the Crusades, the bloody series of wars between Christians and Muslims during the Middle Ages. But modern extremists have co-opted them to invoke a new war on Muslims. Insurrectionists who mobbed the Capitol on January 6, 2021, flew a Deus vult flag and wore shirts that featured it and the Jerusalem Cross. The Trump administration defends Hegseth's ink: In an email, Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Kingsley Wilson said that Hegseth's tattoos 'depict Christian symbols and mottos used by Believers for centuries,' and that 'anyone attempting to paint these symbols and mottos as 'extreme' is engaging in anti-Christian bigotry.'
[Read: A field guide to flags of the far right]
The Jerusalem Cross is still occasionally used in non-extremist religious contexts, Matthew D. Taylor, the senior Christian scholar at the Institute for Islamic, Christian, and Jewish Studies, in Baltimore, told me. 'If that was the only tattoo he had, I'm not sure how I would interpret that,' he said. But Taylor finds Hegseth's Deus vult tattoo to be noteworthy. 'Deus vult is not a common symbol. It has very strong connotations,' he said. During the Crusades, Deus vult was the 'phrase that sanctioned violence against Muslims.' Other members of the military have also tattooed Kafir on themselves, reportedly in an act of defiance against Islamic terrorism, especially those who have seen combat in the Middle East, as Hegseth has. An American soldier with a Kafir tattoo might be interpreted as a provocation—essentially, I'm an infidel. Come and get me. Taylor reads Hegseth's Kafir tattoo as 'a signal of aggression towards Islam and embracing Islamic aggression towards himself.' When Hegseth's three tattoos are taken together, Taylor said, 'it's not hard to interpret what he's trying to signal.'
Maybe both Hegseth and Kent have bad luck and got their tattoos without knowing what they might signal. Maybe they just don't care about the possible darker implications. But this is the constant problem of trying to make sense of the signs from people in Trump's orbit—the recurrent use of white supremacists' favorite sequence of numbers, ambiguous (and sometimes unambiguous) Nazi salutes, and other dog-whistling. How much benefit of the doubt really should be given? At some point, there's not a lot of room to interpret things any other way. As of 2024, Hegseth was a member of the Tennessee congregation of an Idaho-based church run by a Christian nationalist. He has appeared to express support for a relatively niche theocratic ideology that advocates for laws to be subordinate to the perspectives of Christian conservatism. Kent, in addition to associating with Fuentes during his first congressional campaign, was interviewed by the Nazi sympathizer Greyson Arnold. (Following the interview, a campaign spokesperson said that Kent was unaware of Arnold's beliefs.)
Trump's White House operates on inconsistency. High prices on consumer goods are bad, unless they are the result of the tariffs. Unelected bureaucrats must be excised from the government, unless they are Elon Musk and his team at DOGE. Free speech is a tenet of American values that is to be vehemently upheld, unless people say things that Donald Trump does not like. Tattoos matter. Except they also don't. They are a sufficient admission of guilt—sufficient enough to disqualify you for due process, even—unless you are part of Trump's team. If you're on the losing side, there is no recourse. If you're on the winning side, there are no consequences.
Article originally published at The Atlantic

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Opinion: Where are the compassionate and moderating voices on Trump's travel ban?
Opinion: Where are the compassionate and moderating voices on Trump's travel ban?

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Opinion: Where are the compassionate and moderating voices on Trump's travel ban?

Before he secured the Republican nomination for president in 2016, Donald Trump announced that he would seek 'a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.' Reaction, including from human rights organizations and fellow Republicans, was swift, and, for the most part, was characterized by astonishment, outrage and condemnation. Marco Rubio posted online, 'I disagree with Donald Trump's latest proposal. His habit of making offensive and outlandish statements will not bring Americans together.' At that time, Trump was an unknown entity in politics, and many believed he would never actually seek to implement the outrageous things he said. Unfortunately, one of Trump's first actions as a newly inaugurated president in January 2017 was to sign an executive order banning nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the U.S. This was immediately met with lawsuits and protests. The order was amended two different times in response to court challenges; eventually, a scaled-back version was upheld by the Supreme Court. To their credit, many leaders and members of the president's party were dismayed by this ban at the time. They saw it for what it was — a threat to the religious freedom guaranteed by the Constitution. They could see it as a clear attack on the pluralism that has long guaranteed that our nation — a nation of immigrants — remains a haven for people seeking to practice their religion according to their conscience while also contributing to society. When candidate Trump first voiced his pledge to prevent Muslims from entering the U.S. in 2015, Utah Governor Herbert spoke out strongly against this idea: 'I am the governor of a state that was settled by religious exiles who withstood persecution after persecution, including an extermination order from another state's governor. In Utah, the First Amendment still matters. That will not change so long as I remain governor.' We remember both the early rhetoric of candidate Trump and the later actions of President Trump well. It was shocking and disorienting to watch his efforts to discriminate against others. It was disheartening to watch a political party descend into unchristian and uncharitable legalese, all with the aim to exclude others based solely on their faith or nationality. Mormon Women for Ethical Government was born in response to these efforts. At the outset, MWEG's founders envisioned a small group of women working together through peaceful, faithful, nonpartisan and proactive ways to counteract the unbelievable turn the government was making. But these women were not alone in their desire to take action. They were quickly joined by thousands of other women of faith who were ready to work for a more peaceful, just and ethical world. Over time, MWEG has become a strong voice in advocating for compassionate and moderating forces in government. The organization continues to attract women who want to proactively and peacefully support systems rooted in constitutional principles and the rule of law. We now have women in all 50 states engaging in the political arena as informed and principled citizens. Though much has changed since the formation of MWEG eight years ago, immigration remains a central and divisive issue. Immigrants, including refugees and asylum seekers, have been victims of dehumanizing language and unfair stereotyping. The current administration has invoked the Alien Enemies Act to deport people without due process. It has detained students without cause, deported a man by mistake and refused a Supreme Court order to facilitate his return, attempted to end birthright citizenship, revoked student visas, ended temporary protected status for many, and suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP). This week, President Trump signed another proclamation that bans citizens from 12 countries from entering the U.S. In comparison to eight years ago, the large-scale response has been muted or even resigned. As the world has changed and political rhetoric has become ever more extreme, have we changed with it? Do things that were once the source of personal outrage and deep concern still concern us? Has our once-strong commitment to love our neighbor as ourself weakened? And, if we cannot love them, are we at least as committed to maintaining their claim to Constitutional protections as we were eight years ago? As an organization, MWEG is committed to amplifying the best aspects of our Christian faith. That faith is rooted in a gospel of generosity. We are also committed to preserving the Constitution that, among other things, protects our ability, as members of a minority faith, to participate freely in civic life, to express our views and to practice our religion without fear of repercussions. Actions like this ban seem directed at a particular group, but they actually undermine the constitutional rights that protect all of us from government overreach. As citizens of a free nation, we can and should speak out when we see those rights being violated. In 2017, the threat was widely recognized by leaders and citizens from both parties. It is worth contemplating why this is no longer the case.

Trump loyalty is now part of job application
Trump loyalty is now part of job application

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Trump loyalty is now part of job application

More than six million Americans are still looking for work, according to the latest data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Amid ongoing economic uncertainty, the federal government remains one of the country's most active employers, with open roles for nurses, actuaries, physicists, engineers and IT professionals listed at But prospective applicants may notice something different about the application process in 2025. Alongside typical questions about experience and qualifications, some federal job forms now ask about an applicant's alignment with presidential policy priorities, raising concerns about political screening in what are supposed to be nonpartisan civil service roles. Under guidance issued by the Chief Human Capital Officers Council (CHCOC), part of a broader federal hiring overhaul, applicants may be asked to explain how they would help implement specific executive orders or initiatives. One question currently being used reads: 'How would you help advance the President's Executive Orders and policy priorities in this role? Identify one or two relevant Executive Orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you, and explain how you would help implement them if hired.' This directive is connected to an executive order President Donald Trump that emphasizes 'merit-based' hiring over previous diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) considerations. The administration stated that these changes are intended to root out political bias and ensure a more ideologically aligned workforce. Critics argue that these practices resemble loyalty tests, particularly as questions of commitment to the Constitution and the President's policies appeared in job applications. Earlier this year, multiple government agencies experienced layoffs of employees who were seen as insufficiently aligned with current leadership, even in traditionally apolitical roles. Historical parallels have been raised. During the McCarthy era in the 1950s, public servants and private citizens alike were pressured to prove their loyalty to the U.S. government to root out suspected communists. Accusations and investigations often targeted personal beliefs rather than actions, leading to widespread firings, blacklisting and surveillance. Civil service roles in the U.S. were originally designed to serve the Constitution and the public, not individual officeholders. Federal employees take an oath to uphold the Constitution, a foundational distinction meant to separate American governance from monarchic or authoritarian systems. Whether the latest hiring guidelines are a temporary shift or a lasting transformation of the federal workforce remains to be seen. For now, job seekers interested in federal positions may want to prepare answers not just about their skills but about their stance on presidential policy.

Czech president calls for efforts to end Ukraine war and safeguard Europe
Czech president calls for efforts to end Ukraine war and safeguard Europe

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Czech president calls for efforts to end Ukraine war and safeguard Europe

Czech President Petr Pavel has called for every effort to be made to end the war in Ukraine and prevent its spread to Czechia. Source: Pavel in his remarks at memorials in the Šumava Mountains honouring US soldiers who died in World War II on 7 June 2025, writes České Noviny, as reported by European Pravda Details: The president paid tribute to US soldiers in two former Šumava villages, Zhůří and Gruberg, where one of the final battles of World War II occurred on 5 and 6 May 1945 between Hartmanice and Železná Ruda. Reflecting on the past, Pavel noted the absurdity of young lives lost in the war's final days: "And unfortunately, it's happening today as well." He stressed that peace is not guaranteed and requires active effort to maintain. "If there is a war in Ukraine today and people are dying just as senselessly, as absurd as it was here, for reasons many of us don't even understand, that is why we must do everything in our power not only to end the war in Ukraine but also to prevent it from reaching us as it has in the past." In Gruberg, Pavel added that the causes of World War II serve as a reminder: "If we are not vigilant enough, if we do not respond to these signals in time, then perhaps our successors will wonder how it is possible that we did not see this happen. Just as we can be surprised today when we look at the 1930s and ask ourselves how it's possible that they didn't see it then." Background On 2 June 2025, EU Commissioner for Defence Andrius Kubilius shared the assessment of Western intelligence services that a Russian attack on European Union states could happen within the next few years. Germany's Federal Intelligence Service (BND) and the country's armed forces estimate that Russia views the West as a systemic enemy and is building up its military power and preparing for a large-scale confrontation with NATO. Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store