As almost everyone knows, the Navajo Code Talkers were a group of WWII Marines who provided secure communications by the simple expedient of transmitting and receiving orders in their own language. This procedure was much faster than conventional encryption / decryption methods, and the Navajo language was apparently so little-known and so complex that the Japanese were never able to read such messages.
Someone at the Department of Defense (or more likely some set of someones) apparently interpreted President Trump’s executive order on DEI as meaning that it would be improper to refer to the Navajo Code Talkers as…Navajos, and at least 10 articles mentioning the Code Talkers have been removed from DoD websites.
There have been many other questionable deletions made on counter-DEI grounds, such as the deletion of items about Ira Hayes of Iwo Jima fame. The Navajo Code Talkers deletions I find particularly bad because their being Navajo–specifically, being speakers of the Navajo language–was an inherent enabler of the work that they did. To refer to their accomplishments without reference to their language (and hence, their tribal background) would be as silly as banning a post on codemakers and codebreakers of the more conventional sort from disclosing that many of them had mathematical or linguistic backgrounds.
I don’t know if this is malicious compliance, or arrant stupidity, or just robotic bureaucratic behavior, but I think it is really, really bad. It reminds me of the Left’s destruction of statues. It’s harmful to the country and also harmful to the political future of Republicans/MAGA. It’s not at all consistent with an intelligent narrative of American patriotism and identity.
There’s a similar story about removing pages dealing with Jackie Robinson’s military career
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/44316899/defense-department-removes-story-robinson-military-service
I don’t have the link but I do remember a month or so ago there was a similar act of intellectual vandalism
I find it curious regarding the timing of these stories and how fast they showed up in the media. It’s always possible that they were taken down by somebody who thought they were simply following orders correctly. However the speed of which this showed up in the media and their willingness to jump on it suggests to me this was a plant.
Another clue is what you suggest regarding the Navajos and ira Hayes. Haze was part of the most iconic picture in Marine Corps history and the Navajos are also treasured and Marine lore
I don’t buy it…. Just on the Marine angle alone. Plus if you look at the information at the link from Axios it’s a good example of gotcha journalism. I think the leading theory in the clubhouse is that this was done as internal sabotage and then somebody leaked it to the press
Mike…”the leading theory in the clubhouse is that this was done as internal sabotage and then somebody leaked it to the press”…that would be what I mean by Malicious Compliance.
But see this, from the Pentagon press secretary:
https://x.com/DanLamothe/status/1902436368896143753/photo/1
“ I don’t know if this is malicious compliance, or arrant stupidity, or just robotic bureaucratic behavior…”
Embrace the power of “and”.
I imagine stupid woke (but I repeat myself) GS types in charge thinking “I’ll show those MAGA flyovers…” and GS web page-maintaining underlings doing as they are told. The stupid-in-charge playing at being the resistance no doubt thinking their obscurity protects them from discovery, while the underlings are saving copies of all communications and firing up their vpn to submit all of it to the DOGE “turn in your boss” account. Then one day the guys in t-shirts arrive asking for a little talk…
Hey, one can hope.
David: “But see this, from the Pentagon press secretary:”
Okay and Ullyot said what exactly? Ill summarize it as “We love Jackie, Ira, Navajos and rest. We don’t like DEI. In the rare cases that things like Jackie and all were removed it was out of line with the clear intent of the directive.”
You can say it could have been a bit stronger, certainly since Trump would have taken a flame thrower to it, but that’s as close as you are going to get to traditional DC spokesman speak saying that some malicious person with R/W access to the site decided to put his keffiyeh on and join the resistance
My guess as to why this wasn’t done denied as crisply as Trump 47 seems to do is that they got caught completely flat-footed by media who were fed this story, perhaps by the same people/groups that committed the act.
Take the story “DOD says it ‘mistakenly removed’ Jackie Robinson, other content from website amid DEI purge” (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dod-mistakenly-removed-jackie-robinson-content-website-amid/story?id=119955477)
From the head line you would infer that the DOD admits to deliberately removing the Jackie Robinson material and has now said it was a mistake. However the headline doesn’t match the article which leads with the basics of the statement from what Ullyot said to this:
“A DOD official told ABC News that the Robinson webpage, among other content recently removed from Pentagon websites, was “mistakenly removed” due to the search terms used to scrub DEI terms from platforms.”
Uh huh. That’s classic DC bureaucratic warfare with a complicit media. The writers took a press statement and decided to manufacture their own spin on it by using a pull quote from an anonymous DOD official that they had on Rolodex who probably had no idea what happened but is happy to give his views. From there the story is off to the races. Get a quote from a descendant about his great ancestor was defamed.
That’s the gist of many anti-Trump stories in the media. Sometimes the pull quote is from an anonymous source who acts like he’s a whistleblower, sometimes it’s a professor somewhere who lends an air of expertise.
Technically the story is completely true. That is what the press secretary said (in part), they quoted the DOD guy accurately as with members of the Robinson family. However it doesn’t match
I would be shocked if this story lasted more than a day or two because then it would get Trump or better yet Vance or Hesgeth to respond. They would provide the more crisp respond needed… especially Vance being a Marine
Strictly speaking anything possible, I could be wrong, but this story has a familiar Beltway stench to it.
Obvious malicious compliance, and no doubt pre-arranged with the media to create a damaging news headline. The people involved should be fired.
My vote is on malicious compliance.
Remember when government was shutdown during Obama’s term so as a consequence, they shut down national parks? (Even though it takes more money, personnel, and effort to close those areas than leave them open.)
My go to metaphor is imagine you gave someone $10 a month to feed the homeless. During an audit, you discover that the guy is keeping $9 and only spending $1 on actual food.
Normal people would think you could cut the man’s budget in half. They could still spend the $1 and keep $4 for themselves. But in practice the subject in question just keeps all $5 and starts telling the press that you are heartless and taking food away from homeless people.
Same concept here.