‘My dad didn't go to war for nothing': Pentagon scrubs Native American heroes from website
Navajo Code Talkers and their family members met with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace at the Pentagon, Aug. 10, 2007. Photo by U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. D. Myles Cullen | Public domain
Prominent Native American figures in U.S. military history have been erased from the U.S. Department of Defense's website as part of the sweeping effort stemming from President Donald Trump's executive order banning diversity, equity and inclusion.
The Department of Defense website removed articles featuring details about the Navajo Code Talkers — Navajo men who served during World War II and used their language as a secret code in battle — along with U.S. Marine Ira Hayes from the Gila River Indian Community, who helped raise the flag during the Battle of Iwo Jima in World War II.
'Navajo code has absolutely nothing to do with DEI because Navajo code was a weapon,' Navajo Code Talker Peter MacDonald said in response to the removal during an interview with the Arizona Mirror.
MacDonald, 96, is one of two living Navajo Code Talkers. He served in the South Pacific as a Code Talker and in North China with the 6th Marine Division.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
MacDonald said that dismissing the Navajo Code Talkers as DEI is a 'terrible misinterpretation by the United States.'
The complex Navajo language was used as a weapon in World War II against the enemy because the Japanese were breaking every military code that U.S. troops were using in the Pacific theater.
It took the Navajo people to develop a whole new code in the Navajo language, he added, and 'it became the only military code in modern history never broken by an enemy.'
In a general keyword search on Tuesday of the Department of Defense's website for the Navajo Code Talkers, only eight results appeared, but none related to information or articles detailing their role in World War II.
Zero results appeared in a search for Ira Hayes.
'The Navajo Code Talkers earned their place in history through their courage and sacrifice, giving their lives in defense of this nation,' Navajo Nation Council Speaker Crystalyne Curley said in a press release. 'Erasing their extraordinary contributions from formal military history is not only disrespectful, it is dishonorable.'
Having articles and information about the Navajo Code Talkers on the department's website is the right thing, MacDonald said, because it provides education for everyone that weapons do not just include guns but language.
He added that their weapon helped preserve America's freedom, and 'we were happy to use that weapon to help.'
'It's important for the entire nation to know that the Navajo Code has absolutely nothing to do with DEI,' he said. He hopes the Pentagon will return all the content so they can learn.
In an email response to the Arizona Mirror, a Department of Defense spokesperson who wouldn't provide their name said the DOD is in the process of restoring the content about the Navajo Code Talkers, which had been removed during the auto-removal process.
No time frame was provided for restoring the content, and the spokesperson did not respond to questions about the deleted content related to Ira Hayes.
Ronald Kinsel, the son of the late Navajo Code Talker John Kensel, Sr., said he was shocked to learn that all articles featuring the Navajo Code Talkers had been removed.
'My dad didn't go to war for nothing,' he said, adding that the United States wouldn't be the country it is now if it wasn't for the Navajo Code Talkers.
The Navajo Code Talkers participated in all assaults led by the U.S. Marines in the Pacific from 1942 to 1945, including Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Peleliu and Iwo Jima. The total number of Navajo Code Talkers who served in the U.S. Marines is unknown, but it is estimated to be between 350 and 420.
MacDonald's daughter, Charity, said she wasn't shocked by the removal. It is merely a new form of erasure of Indigenous people, something the United States has done throughout its history.
'You can not erase an entire history of people,' she said, especially today when information can be accessed in various ways.
'Our federal government is doing this purposely,' Charity said, adding that it's an action they're taking to show people that they can.
'The federal government is making a statement, saying that this is how they feel,' she added.
Charity said Indigenous people have given a lot to the federal government, and during World War II, the military came to the Navajo people and asked them for help.
'They used the Navajo language to help them win the war,' she said.
Leaders from the Navajo Nation and the Gila River Indian Community sent letters to the Department of Defense to ask why the details about the Navajo Code Talkers and Hayes were deleted.
Gila River Indian Community Gov. Stephen Roe Lewis said removing information about Hayes and the Navajo Code Talkers due to the scrubbing for DEI initiatives is 'misguided' and 'irresponsible.'
Lewis said his tribe sent a official letter to the Department of Defense on Tuesday but have not received a response.
'Sadly, we're no strangers to being erased,' Lewis said, noting it has happened to Indigenous peoples throughout history.
'All the stories of Ira Hayes and all Native veterans, including the code talkers, have to be rectified ASAP,' he said.
Lewis said Hayes is a significant figure in military history, and members of the Gila River Indian Community learn about him from a very young age.
Hayes, alongside five other Marines, raised the U.S. flag on the island of Iwo Jima at the summit of Mount Suribachi on February 23, 1945. He was part of the 5th Marine Division and fought in the Battle of Iwo Jima until the island was secured on March 26, 1945.
The photograph of the flag raising during the Battle of Iwo Jima is one of the most iconic images of World War II, taken months into the battle by Associated Press photographer Joe Rosenthal.
Lewis said Hayes' story and the image of the Marines raising the flag at Iwo Jima is historic for Native military service.
'Native Americans have always served in our country's military, in all branches, at the highest levels of any other group,' Lewis said.
Indigenous people across the United States serve in the armed forces at five times the national average, according to the National Indian Council on Aging, and have served with distinction in every major conflict for over 200 years.
Lewis said that recognizing the patriotism and courage of Native American soldiers has nothing to do with any type of DEI initiative.
'It's simply an offering of respect for extraordinary service and bravery in the line of duty,' he added.
Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren sent a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Tuesday asking him to explain the removal of the Navajo Code Talkers' information from military websites.
'Appropriately recognizing the work of the Navajo Code Talkers is profoundly significant to the Navajo Nation,' Nygren said in his letter, requesting the rationale behind the removal.
In the letter, Nygren wrote about how Trump welcomed the Navajo Code Talkers to the White House in 2017, during his first term in office, and praised their contributions to the country.
'We sincerely appreciate this recognition and believe it highlights the importance of preserving the history and legacy of the Navajo Code Talkers,' he wrote.
'Given the profound impact and historic importance of these American heroes, it is imperative that their legacy remains visible and accessible to all Americans,' the letter stated.
The Navajo Nation Council voiced its disappointment in the removal of the Code Talkers, emphasizing that the Navajo Nation is not a racial group but a distinct political entity.
'The Navajo Nation Council is deeply concerned by being conflated into DEI initiatives that fail to recognize our unique political status,' Curley said in a press release. The Navajo Nation Council is engaging with the administration to clarify the reasoning behind removing articles.
'The United States would not be the nation it is today without the bravery and service of the Navajo Nation Code Talkers,' Curley said. 'Their legacy is a cornerstone of American history, and it is essential that their contributions be honored and recognized.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Trump is forcing US allies to cobble together a post-America world order
As President Trump and his allies dismantle the global system America once championed, the rest of the world faces a choice: either brace for chaos and kiss the ring, or forge, at least temporarily, a new order that promotes democratic principles but largely excludes the U.S. while leaving the door open for a future, less-bullying America to return. This would have been unthinkable not long ago. But Trumpism's assault on two essential pillars of the postwar global consensus — multilateralism and liberal democracy — is making it necessary. These pillars helped expand prosperity, reduce war, and uplift billions. They were indispensable in facing challenges like pandemics, cyberterrorism, and climate change. Trump and his imitators seek to replace them with something cruder, based on the reasoning that America is the strongest: economic nationalism and elected autocracy, with each country fending for itself and every man for himself. Multilateralism means sovereign nations working together, within rules-based institutions, to address problems. Trump has rejected this outright. His administration undermined the World Trade Organization, the United Nations, the Paris Climate Agreement, and NATO, the very embodiment of the alliance — not to mention the World Health Organization, from which he withdrew against all logic. Though the U.S. dominates NATO militarily, it contributes just 16 percent of the common budget — about the same per capita as Germany — and does not unilaterally control the alliance. This has irked Trump, who has declared NATO 'obsolete,' lied about the U.S. share and shown disdain for its collective commitments. With respect to world trade, Trump's tariff war rests on the notion that imports are somehow inherently harmful. The Peterson Institute for International Economics estimated his tariffs on China, Canada, and Mexico would cost the average U.S. household over $1,200 per year. Historically, tariffs have caused major damage. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 worsened the Great Depression by triggering retaliation. Only after World War II, with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and later the World Trade Organization, did global trade recover. Today, international trade exceeds $25 trillion annually and average tariffs are down to 2.5 percent. Trump's unilateralism has threatened all this. These global institutions are part of a bulwark against a return to nationalist chaos. They were created after World War II to prevent World War III. One should recall the maxim about forgetting the lessons of history. Trumpism also redefines democracy as a contest of popularity: You win an election, and you rule without constraint. It dismisses civil liberties, judicial independence, and press freedom. This mirrors the ideologies of Viktor Orban in Hungary, Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey, Narendra Modi in India, the Law and Justice Party in Poland, and increasingly, Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel. According to Freedom House — which Trump has undercut by slashing foreign aid — 2024 marked the 19th consecutive year of democratic decline, with rights worsening in 60 countries. This worldview sees rules as weakness and ideals as naïveté. Trump's America doesn't want to lead the world — it wants to dominate or isolate from it. That's a dereliction of the American role in promoting liberty and truth. The appeal of illiberalism is no mystery. Across the world, fascist forces have weaponized wedge issues amplified by social media and simplistic populism. Immigration, for instance, is both an economic necessity and a cultural flashpoint. Progressive overreach, inequality, and instability have fed public anger. But liberal democrats have failed to explain how autocrats actually harm the very people they rally. If Trump's America walks away from its postwar responsibilities, the world should call his bluff. Done wisely, this could help Americans recognize the strategic failures of the populist right. Trump's global strategy involves supporting anti-democratic takeovers around the world. Now, core NATO countries are boosting defense spending and cooperation, anticipating that U.S. leadership can no longer be counted on. If Trump pulls out, a new alliance may emerge. But other possibilities — economic and political — are just as vital. One idea is a broad, low-tariff economic bloc of countries committed to not weaponizing trade. They could cap tariffs at 10 percent, resolve disputes through arbitration, and signal that interdependence still matters. This bloc wouldn't need to exclude non-democracies. It might include the EU, UK, Japan, Canada, Mexico, Chile — even China or India, if they play by the rules. When Trump abandoned the Trans-Pacific Partnership, its remaining members formed the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, now covering 15 percent of global GDP. Although the U.S. alone accounts for about 10 percent of global exports and 13 percent of imports, it is not irreplaceable. A united bloc would render bilateral extortion tactics ineffective. The message: we will not be divided and conquered. Another option is an alliance of liberal democracies committed not just to trade, but to civil liberties, press freedom, and minority rights. Think of it as an expanded EU — or what America used to represent. This would exclude countries like Hungary, Turkey, India, and Israel under its current coalition — and possibly also the U.S. under Trump. The alliance could support election security, regulate social media, encourage academic exchanges, and promote joint infrastructure and cybersecurity. It would be a sanctuary for truth in an age of disinformation. It would affirm that democracy is about values, not just elections — and that those values lead to prosperity and legitimacy. This is the fight we are in. If clarity requires sidelining the U.S. for now, so be it. Dan Perry is the former Cairo-based Middle East editor and London-based Europe-Africa editor of the Associated Press, former chairman of the Foreign Press Association in Jerusalem, and the author of two books. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
A Different Kind of D-Day, Laden With Anxiety Among Old Allies
It was the first trip to Europe since he called America's allies there 'PATHETIC' in a private Signal group chat, and said that he shared the vice president's 'loathing of European freeloading.' So there was some anxiety and nervous trepidation about Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's visit to the French beaches of Normandy on Friday to commemorate the 81st anniversary of D-Day. But on this day, delivering a speech before the 9,389 graves of American soldiers lying beneath rows of white crosses in the Normandy American cemetery, all of whom died after the June 6, 1944, assault, Mr. Hegseth offered no offense. He described the successful assault on Nazi-occupied France, which proved a turning point in the war, as a victory of many allied countries, including even the French resistance. 'The enemy underestimated the strength of the Allied war cause,' he said from a podium before a modest international crowd and about two dozen American World War II veterans, most around 100 years old, watching from wheelchairs nearby. 'Without the sacrifices of American, French, British and other Allied powers, we would not have a free world,' he said. To many, the speech came as a relief. But still, there was an elephant on the perfectly kept cemetery lawn. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
The Supreme Court's decision could lead to a new era of ‘reverse discrimination' lawsuits
Good morning! A Supreme Court decision yesterday on a case of workplace discrimination could have major impacts on the employment landscape and will affect HR departments across the country. In a unanimous decision, the court sided with Marlean Ames, a former Ohio state government employee who sued her employer after she was passed over for two promotions that went to gay coworkers instead. Ames argued that she was discriminated against for work opportunities because of her heterosexuality. The case first appeared in the sixth circuit court, which ruled against Ames citing the higher standard of proof for discrimination that must be met by members of majority groups, such as men, white people, or heterosexual people. That higher standard is referred to as 'background circumstances,' and plaintiffs must show additional supporting evidence that they were the victims of discrimination. But the Supreme Court's ruled that the additional burden for people from majority groups is unconstitutional, and violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The decision wasn't a surprise, and had been anticipated by legal experts. But they tell Fortune that the ruling will likely lead to more reverse discrimination cases against employers in the near future. 'We should expect to see this trend continue, and see an uptick in these so-called reverse discrimination claims brought by men who are not members of historically disadvantaged groups,' Michael Steinberg, a labor and employment attorney at firm Seyfarth Shaw, tells Fortune. The case comes at a particularly fraught time when it comes to the legal landscape of the workplace in general. A combination of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn affirmative action and Trump's executive orders targeting affirmative action have made companies extra cautious about their programs and protocols around diversity initiatives. The Ames case was not centered on DEI policies, but two Supreme Court Justices, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, specifically referenced DEI in their opinions. David Glasgow, executive director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging at New York University, says it's the first instance, since Trump took office, that justices have put their stances around DEI in writing. And he adds it could 'encourage potential plaintiffs to see shifts in the wind and then follow them right to bring future claims.' You can read more about yesterday's Supreme Court decision here. Brit This story was originally featured on
