Pentagon removes web pages about Holocaust remembrance, 9/11 to comply with Trump DEI order
The Defense Department has taken down or plans to delete thousands of websites to comply with Donald Trump 's order eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) work from the federal government, including removing pages dedicated to topics like remembering the Holocaust and the September 11 terrorist attacks.
Pages already taken down include an article about the experience of Holocaust survivor Kitty Saks, who later immigrated to the U.S., and an Air Force Academy cadet majoring in history describing his experience taking scholarly visits to concentration camps in Europe, according to a CNN analysis.
Another page, from an Air Force sergeant, mentions the concept of 'diversity' explicitly, but in an article for Holocaust Remembrance Week about the importance of protecting religious diversity and stopping discrimination.
'Let us strive to be honest about what things we need to change to ensure that we are not silent bystanders, and therefore, participants in the evil deeds that lead to such devastating crimes against humanity,' the article reads.
Despite the Defense Department deleting pages about religious tolerance and Holocaust remembrance, the Trump administration has made fighting antisemitism a major priority in its opening months.
The White House has threatened to permanently sever financial support to Columbia University unless the school submits to a series of sweeping changes, including by adopting a definition of antisemitism used by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance.
Trump has also spoken in recent months about the importance of Holocaust Remembrance.
'Between 1940 and 1945, more than one million Jews, religious leaders, disabled persons, and other innocent victims were viciously and mercilessly executed in Auschwitz at the hands of the evil Nazi regime — culminating in one of the darkest chapters in human history,' the White House wrote in a statement in January, commemorating the 80th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp. 'On this solemn day, America joins the Jewish community, the people of Poland, and the entire world in mourning the lives lost, the souls battered, the heroes forgotten, and the countless men and women who gave their lives for the cause of freedom.'
Other Defense Department takedown targets bear little obvious connection to DEI, including pages about 9/11, veterans suicide prevention, and stopping sexual assault.
Many of the up to 24,000 pages that could be purged were not submitted by individual units but rather identified using automated scripts, according to an email obtained by CNN.
The erased websites have been a continued source of controversy for the Pentagon, including an outcry over eliminating information about Jackie Robinson, who served in the Army in WWII before his boundary-breaking career as a professional baseball player and civil rights activist integrating the major leagues during the era of Jim Crow racial segregation. (The military has since said the page on Robinson was mistakenly taken down.)
Others have taken issue with takedowns like the removal of pages about the Native American code talkers, units that used indigenous languages to pass high-value military communications across the battlefields of WWI and WWII.
'Who could possibly be pleased by an effort to erase the history of a group of native men who were vital to the success of every major Marine Corps operation in the Pacific Theater of World War II, particularly America's victory at Iwo Jima,' EJ Montini, a columnist in Arizona, a state with a large Navajo population, wrote in the Arizona Republic.
The Defense Department has defended the changes
'As Secretary Hegseth has said, DEI is dead at the Defense Department. Discriminatory Equity Ideology is a form of Woke cultural Marxism that has no place in our military,' Pentagon press secretary John Ullyot told The Independent. 'It Divides the force, Erodes unit cohesion and Interferes with the services' core warfighting mission. We are pleased by the rapid compliance across the Department with the directive removing DEI content from all platforms.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
35 minutes ago
- The Independent
Watch: Trump reacts to news that actors are boycotting his attendance at Kennedy Center
Donald Trump says he is unbothered by actors boycotting his attendance of Les Misérables at the Kennedy Center Wednesday night (11 June). Several 'Les Mis' cast members are expected to sit out the performance fundraiser after news broke that the president would be in the audience. As Trump walked the red carpet with Melania ahead of the show, a reporter asked him how he felt about the actors' protest. 'I couldn't care less, honestly, I couldn't,' Trump said. 'All I do is run the country well.' The president proceeded to list off some of his perceived accomplishments from his second term.
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
In defence of the Trump playbook
The standard explanation for why charges for plastic bags reduced waste is economic. People were reluctant to pay 10p for a bag and so brought their own instead. This is partly true. But it would still be highly effective if the charge for a bag were merely 1p. That's because charging any amount, however trifling, was sufficient to change the implicit assumptions about normal retail behaviour. Previously, if you went into Boots and bought, say, a toothbrush and a tube of Anusol, the default was for the cashier to put them in a new bag – it would have seemed rude not to do so. Suddenly, however, the imposition of a charge meant that shopkeepers had to ask whether you wanted a bag or not. Often the answer was 'no'; you had one already, or, if you were a chap, your clothing was miraculously equipped with things called 'pockets'. There are many ways in which you can achieve large changes in behaviour without imposing large economic penalties. For instance, I contend that you could significantly reduce intergenerational inequality simply by the imposition of a property tax of 0.1 per cent annually on all homes. The relatively small amount raised could be hypothecated to fund child benefit, or to reduce the income tax burden on the young. For the purposes of comparison, the typical property tax levied by those well-known leftists in the State of Texas is slightly over 1.8 per cent. Bear me out. I am borrowing here from the Donald Trump playbook. This is an under-rated approach to legislation where you impose taxes not for their direct effect, but for their symbolic value. By sending a surprising signal, you can change behaviour by unseating the unthinking assumptions people hold about the future. You don't necessarily have to do anything massive – you simply raise the possibility you might. Most human behaviour runs on implicit deterrents of this kind. By sending a surprising signal, you can change behaviour by unseating the unthinking assumptions people hold Before The Donald, it had become an axiomatic assumption in all businesses that no democratic government of any political stripe would ever deviate from the smug Davos neo-liberal globalist consensus in any shape or form. This artificial certainty meant that for decades you could offshore employment with abandon and treat your native staff fairly shabbily, without fear of any adverse consequences. Today it's different: even if you later reduce many tariffs to near zero and stop randomly abusing Canada, the signal has been sent. I hate to say this, but this approach could work well to solve many other problems. For instance, Britons have been lulled into planning for their future on the assumption that three unwritten rules underpin the tax system. 1) If you actually get up in the morning and do some useful work for which you get paid, you'll be taxed to buggery; 2) If you acquire wealth and then ride the wave of asset-price inflation (i.e. you have more money than you need 'cos you're old), you will be treated very generously; 3) If the asset in question is your own home, you won't be taxed at all, and nor will your good-for-nothing kids when they inherit it all. A large part of the reason why young people cannot afford to buy homes is nothing to do with the use value of a home – it is driven by the as-yet-unshaken belief that residential property has been sanctified as an asset class. It is this belief which possibly accounts for 25 per cent of the price of a home and a similarly large part of oldsters' pathological reluctance to downsize. Residential property is seen as Britain's only tax haven. To unseat this assumption, you don't need to rewrite the whole tax code, or go full Henry George – much as I would personally support this. You just have to make the unthinkable suddenly thinkable.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Fears Trump could sink US-UK nuclear subs deal after President ordered review into pact intended to secure the Pacific against Chinese aggression
Royal Navy chiefs voiced concerns last night after Donald Trump ordered a review of the nuclear submarine pact between the UK, the US and Australia. Aukus, as the joint project is known, is intended to secure the Pacific against Chinese aggression and involves multi-billion-pound commitments to build new nuclear-powered submarines. The Ministry of Defence announced its intention to build up to 12 submarines for Aukus and other operations as part of last week's Strategic Defence Review. But these plans have been thrown into doubt after the US defence department announced a review to ensure Aukus meets the President's 'America First' agenda. Relations between the US and Australia have soured over tariffs. America has also demanded Australia increase defence spending and wants to sell older submarines to Australia on favourable terms. Another cause for concern is the review is being led by Aukus sceptic Elbridge Colby, who is close to President Trump. Last night former head of the Royal Navy, Admiral Lord West said: 'Aukus is extremely important for the strategic situation in the Pacific and very important for Britain as a way of us moving into our next generation of submarines. 'The US had had concerns about selling its submarines to Australia, so it is not entirely unexpected that President Trump would want to look at this. Hopefully this can be resolved and we all move on together as part of the alliance.' The deal is regarded as a pillar of security co-operation. But concerns have been raised in the US over the rate of submarine production and Australia's reluctance to commit to a 'no holds barred' response to a Chinese attack on Taiwan. The US is committed to selling up to five boats to Australia, vessels which many in the US believe should be retained by the US Navy.
