The Pentagon’s DEI purge: Officials describe a scramble to remove and then restore online content

The Pentagon’s DEI purge: Officials describe a scramble to remove and then restore online content
Navajo Code Talker Thomas Begay salutes during the national anthem at the Arizona State Navajo Code Talkers Day celebration on Aug. 14, 2022, in Phoenix. (AP Photo/File)
Short Url
Updated 23 March 2025
Follow

The Pentagon’s DEI purge: Officials describe a scramble to remove and then restore online content

The Pentagon’s DEI purge: Officials describe a scramble to remove and then restore online content
  • Overall, tens of thousands of online posts that randomly mention dozens of key words, including “gay,” “bias” and “female” — have been delete
  • Overall, tens of thousands of online posts that randomly mention dozens of key words, including “gay,” “bias” and “female” — have been deleted

WASHINGTON: Every day over the past few weeks, the Pentagon has faced questions from angry lawmakers, local leaders and citizens over the removal of military heroes and historic mentions from Defense Department websites and social media pages after it purged online content that promoted women or minorities.
In response, the department has scrambled to restore a handful of those posts as their removals have come to light. While the pages of some well-known veterans, including baseball and civil rights icon Jackie Robinson, are now back up on Pentagon websites, officials warn that many posts tagged for removal in error may be gone forever.
The restoration process has been so hit or miss that even groups that the administration has said are protected, like the Tuskegee Airmen, the first Black military pilots who served in a segregated World War II unit, still have deleted pages that as of Saturday had not been restored.
This past week chief, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a video that mistaken removals will be quickly rectified. “History is not DEI,” he said, referring to diversity, equity and inclusion.
But due to the enormous size of the military and the wide range of commands, units and bases, there has been an array of interpretations of what to remove and how as part of the Pentagon directive to delete online content that promotes DEI. Officials from across the military services said they have asked for additional guidance from the Pentagon on what should be restored, but have yet to receive any.
The officials, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity to describe internal deliberations, said, for example, they were waiting for guidance on whether military “firsts” count as history that can be restored. The first female Army Reserve graduate of Ranger School, Maj. Lisa Jaster, or the first female fighter pilot, Air Force Maj. Gen. Jeannie Leavitt, both had their stories deleted.




Maj. Lisa Jaster, center, the first Army Reserve female to graduate the Army's Ranger School, stands in formation with other Rangers during school graduation ceremony on Oct. 16, 2015, in Fort Benning, Gaeorgia. (AP Photo/File)

Some officials said their understanding was it did not matter whether it was a historic first. If the first was based on what Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth found to be a disqualifying characteristic, such as gender or race, it had to go, they said.
One Army team has taken a very deliberate approach.
According to the officials, the team took down several major historical heritage sites that had many postings about women and various ethnic or racial groups. They are now going through them all and plan to rework and repost as much as possible on a new website focused on Army heroes. The process, the officials said, could take months.
Overall, tens of thousands of online posts that randomly mention dozens of key words, including “gay,” “bias” and “female” — have been deleted. Officials warn that the bulk of those images are gone for good. Even as complaints roll in, officials will be careful about restoring things unless senior leaders approve.
The officials described the behind-the-scenes process as challenging, frustrating and emotionally draining. Workers going through years of posts to take down mentions of historic accomplishments by women or minorities were at times reduced to tears or lashed out in anger at commanders directing the duty, the officials said.
Others were forced to pull down stories they were proud of and had worked on themselves. They were often confused about the parameters for removal once a key word was found, and they erred on the side of removal, according to the officials.
Not complying fully with the order was seen as dangerous because it could put senior military service leaders at risk of being fired or disciplined if an errant post celebrating diversity was left up and found. Officials said the department relied in large part on a blind approach — using artificial intelligence computer commands to search for dozens of those key words in online department, military and command websites.
If a story or photo depicted or included one of the terms, the computer program then added “DEI” into the web address of the content, which flagged it and led to its removal.
Purging posts from X, Facebook and other social media sites is more complicated and time intensive. An AI command would not work as well on those sites.
So military service members and civilians have evaluated social media posts by hand, working late into the night and on weekends to pore over their unit’s social media pages, cataloging and deleting references going back years. Because some civilians were not allowed to work on weekends, military troops had to be called in to replace them, as the officials described it.
The Defense Department is publicly insisting that mistakes will be corrected.
As an example, the Pentagon on Wednesday restored some pages highlighting the crucial wartime contributions of Navajo Code Talkers and other Native American veterans. That step came days after tribes condemned the removal. Department officials said the Navajo Code Talker material was erroneously erased,
The previous week, pages honoring a Black Medal of Honor winner and Japanese American service members were also restored.




Navajo Code Talker Thomas Begay salutes during the national anthem at the Arizona State Navajo Code Talkers Day celebration on Aug. 14, 2022, in Phoenix. (AP Photo/File)

The restorations represent a shift from early, adamant denials that any deletion of things such as the Enola Gay or prominent service members was happening at all. At least two images of the Enola Gay, the plane that dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan, during World War II, are still missing.
“This is fake news and anyone with a pulse knows it!” the Defense Department’s new “Rapid Response” social media account asserted March 7. “We are NOT removing images of the Enola Gay or any other pictures that honor the legacy of our warfighters.”
Over time, the Pentagon has shifted its public response as more examples of deleted pages came to light.
On Thursday, Parnell acknowledged in a video posted online that: “Because of the realities of AI tools and other software, some important content was incorrectly pulled off line to be reviewed. We want to be very, very clear: History is not DEI. When content is either mistakenly removed, or if it’s maliciously removed, we continue to work quickly to restore it.”
But others have seen the widespread erasure of history.
“Most female aviator stories and photographs are disappearing— including from the archives. From the WASPs to fighter pilots, @AFThunderbirds to @BlueAngels — they’ve erased us,” Carey Lohrenz, one of the Navy’s first female F-14 Tomcat pilots, posted to X. “It’s an across the board devastating loss of history and information.” Among the webpages removed include one about the Women Air Service Pilots, or WASPs, the female World War II pilots who were vital in ferrying warplanes for the military, and the Air Force Thunderbirds.
Parnell, Hegseth and others have vigorously defended the sweeping purge despite the flaws.
“I think the president and the secretary have been very clear on this — that anybody that says in the Department of Defense that diversity is our strength is, is frankly, incorrect,” Parnell said during a Pentagon media briefing. “Our shared purpose and unity are our strength.”


New Royal Navy chief under renewed scrutiny over Afghanistan war crimes evidence

New Royal Navy chief under renewed scrutiny over Afghanistan war crimes evidence
Updated 29 sec ago
Follow

New Royal Navy chief under renewed scrutiny over Afghanistan war crimes evidence

New Royal Navy chief under renewed scrutiny over Afghanistan war crimes evidence
  • Gen. Gwyn Jenkins previously accused of failing to report evidence of war crimes committed by British forces
  • It is also alleged he oversaw rejection of hundreds of resettlement applications from Afghans who served alongside British troops against the Taliban

LONDON: The man chosen as the new head of the UK’s Royal Navy was previously accused of failing to report evidence of war crimes allegedly committed by British forces in Afghanistan.

Gen. Sir Gwyn Jenkins, who was appointed on Thursday, also faced allegations this week that he oversaw the rejection of hundreds of resettlement applications from former Afghan special forces members who served alongside British troops against the Taliban, The Guardian newspaper reported.

Jenkins replaces Adm. Ben Key, who stepped down last week over allegations of misconduct.

The new navy chief previously led UK Special Forces in Afghanistan during the war against the Taliban. That conflict is under renewed scrutiny in Britain following recent fresh allegations of war crimes involving members of Britain’s elite Special Air Service and Special Boat Service.

In 2023, it emerged that Jenkins had been warned in writing in 2011 that SAS troops had claimed to have executed handcuffed detainees in Afghanistan. Rather than refer this evidence to the Royal Military Police, the BBC reported at the time, Jenkins placed the documents in a safe. However, The Telegraph newspaper reported that Jenkins did pass the evidence up the chain of command at the time.

This week, an investigation by the BBC current affairs program “Panorama” revealed that Jenkins personally appointed an officer under his command to assess the Afghan resettlement applications. Thousands of former elite Afghan soldiers were rejected, despite credible evidence of their service alongside British counterparts.

The UK’s Ministry of Defence said it was “not appropriate … to comment on allegations which may be within the scope of the statutory inquiry,” referring to a public inquiry underway in the UK to investigate the war crimes allegations.

There was “no evidence” that Afghan resettlement applications were rejected to prevent the former soldiers from giving evidence to the war crimes inquiry, it added.

Defence Secretary John Healey on Thursday described Jenkins as a “proven leader with a distinguished career in both the military and at the core of government.”

He added: “I know he will deliver in this pivotal role, making Britain secure at home and strong abroad.”

Sarah Atherton, a former Tory MP who sat on the Defence Select Committee, told The Telegraph: “Military personnel, especially senior leaders, are held to high ethical and behavior standards.

“If somebody is facing an allegation … I know it’s alleged, but it’s just very strange to appoint someone who is in this position, given the circumstances. That is bizarre.”

Jenkins said after his appointment that he wanted to “accelerate” the Royal Navy’s return to a “war fighting force that is ready for conflict.”


US Supreme Court grapples with Trump bid to restrict birthright citizenship

US Supreme Court grapples with Trump bid to restrict birthright citizenship
Updated 2 min 38 sec ago
Follow

US Supreme Court grapples with Trump bid to restrict birthright citizenship

US Supreme Court grapples with Trump bid to restrict birthright citizenship
  • Trump order targeted children of certain immigrants
  • Three judges issued orders blocking policy nationwide

WASHINGTON: The US Supreme Court wrestled on Thursday over Donald Trump’s attempt to broadly enforce his executive order to restrict birthright citizenship, a move that would affect thousands of babies born each year as the Republican president seeks a major shift in how the US Constitution has long been understood. The court’s conservative justices, who hold a 6-3 majority, seemed willing to limit the ability of lower courts to issue nationwide, or “universal,” injunctions, as federal judges in Maryland, Washington and Massachusetts did to block Trump’s directive. None of the justices, however, signaled an endorsement of Trump’s order and some of the liberals said it violates the Constitution and the court’s own precedents.
The justices heard more than two hours of arguments in the administration’s emergency request to scale back the injunctions blocking Trump’s directive, which is a key part of his hard-line approach toward immigration. Three judges found that Trump’s order likely violates the Constitution’s 14th Amendment citizenship language. Trump signed his order on January 20, his first day back in office. It directed federal agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of US-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a “green card” holder.
Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor said she believes Trump’s order violates multiple Supreme Court precedents concerning citizenship. Sotomayor said the court should weigh the order’s legality “if we are worried about those thousands of children who are going to be born without citizenship papers that could render them stateless” and leave them ineligible for government benefits.
More than 150,000 newborns would be denied citizenship annually if Trump’s order takes effect, according to the plaintiffs who challenged the directive, including the Democratic attorneys general of 22 states as well as immigrant rights advocates and pregnant immigrants.
The case is unusual in that the administration has used it to argue that federal judges lack the authority to issue universal injunctions, and has asked the justices to rule that way and enforce Trump’s directive even without weighing its legal merits. Sauer focused on this issue, calling the increasing use by judges of universal injunctions a “pathology.”
In potentially restricting the ability of lower courts to issue universal injunctions in certain instances, the conservative justices raised the idea of requiring plaintiffs to funnel claims seeking broader relief into class-action lawsuits, which are filed on behalf of a group of people who suffer similar legal injuries.
Some of the conservatives also signaled that at least for the states that sued, relief might properly extend beyond their borders, as a universal injunction does.
Complicating matters, some justices — conservatives and liberals alike — also seemed reticent to rule without further delving into the underlying legal merits of Trump’s directive. It remained uncertain whether the court would order further briefing, which would further delay resolution of the case.
Conservative Justice Samuel Alito asked Kelsi Corkran, a lawyer for some of the plaintiffs, “Should we decide or make up our minds on the underlying birthright citizenship question without briefing and argument and deliberation?“
Corkran said the justices should take up the case specifically on the merits of Trump’s order, adding, “The government is asking the court to allow it to ignore this court’s precedents ... and to upend 100 years of executive branch practice.”
The plaintiffs argued that Trump’s directive violated the 14th Amendment, which long has been understood to confer citizenship on almost anyone born on US soil. It was ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War that ended slavery in the United States.
The 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause states that all “persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”
The administration contends that this citizenship language does not extend to immigrants in the country illegally or immigrants whose presence is lawful but temporary, such as university students or those on work visas.

‘All kinds of abuses’
Without a universal injunction blocking Trump’s order, it could be years before the Supreme Court finally decides its constitutionality, liberal Justice Elena Kagan said.
“There are all kinds of abuses of nationwide injunctions,” Kagan told Sauer. “But I think that the question that this case presents is that if one thinks that it’s quite clear that the (executive order) is illegal, how does one get to that result in what time frame, on your set of rules without the possibility of a nationwide injunction?“
Sauer noted that after the dispute percolates in lower courts, the Supreme Court can ultimately pronounce on the legal merits of the policy, prompting conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett to express skepticism.
“Are you really going to answer Justice Kagan by saying there’s no way to do this expeditiously?” Barrett said.
Sotomayor compared Trump’s directive to a hypothetical action by a president taking away guns from every American who owns one despite the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
Sauer said that since Trump returned to the presidency, federal judges have issued 40 universal injunctions against his administration’s policies.
“This is a bipartisan problem that has now spanned the last five presidential administrations,” Sauer said.

Variations by state
The administration is seeking to narrow the injunctions to apply only to the individual plaintiffs and the 22 states, if the justices find the states have the required legal standing to sue. That could allow the policy to take effect in the 28 states that did not sue, aside from any plaintiffs living in those states.
Jeremy Feigenbaum, the lawyer arguing for the states, said states face high and costly hurdles in managing difficulties in distributing government benefits if the order takes effect and citizenship is applied in a patchwork fashion, adding that class-action cases are “not available for state litigation.”
Feigenbaum suggested that the justices could limit universal injunctions to a narrow set of cases, including in this case where alternatives to such broad relief “are not practically or legally workable.” Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, a critic of univeral injunctions, expressed some agreement with Feigenbaum on that point.
Feigenbaum said the legal issue surrounding Trump’s executive order was resolved by the Supreme Court 127 years ago.
An 1898 Supreme Court ruling in a case called United States v. Wong Kim Ark long has been interpreted as guaranteeing that children born in the United States to non-citizen parents are entitled to American citizenship. The administration has argued that the court’s ruling in that case was narrower, applying only to children whose parents had a “permanent domicile and residence in the United States.”
The 14th Amendment overrode an infamous 1857 Supreme Court decision called Dred Scott v. Sandford that had denied citizenship to enslaved and free Black people and helped fuel the Civil War.
“This order reflects the original meaning of the 14th Amendment, which guaranteed citizenship to the children of former slaves, not illegal aliens or temporary visitors,” Sauer told the justices of Trump’s directive.
The case is the first involving a Trump policy to be argued at the top US judicial body since he returned to office, though the justices have acted on an emergency basis in several other challenges to his policies. Three of the justices were appointed by Trump during his first term as president.

 


Trump says urged Apple to manufacture in US not India

Trump says urged Apple to manufacture in US not India
Updated 21 min 37 sec ago
Follow

Trump says urged Apple to manufacture in US not India

Trump says urged Apple to manufacture in US not India

DOHA: US President Donald Trump said on Thursday he urged Apple to manufacture its products in the US instead of India, where the US tech giant has said it would be shifting production after US tariffs on China.

“I had a little problem with Tim Cook,” Trump said, referring to Apple’s CEO, during a multi-day tour of the Gulf. 

“I said, Tim, we treated you really good. We put up with all the plants that you built in China for years now.”

The president told Cook: “We’re not interested in you building in India ... we want you to build here and they’re going to be upping their production in the United States.”

Apple announced in February it would invest more than $500 billion in the US over the next four years and promised to hire 20,000 people in the country.

“Apple’s already in for 500 billion, but they’re going to be upping their production, so it’ll be great,” Trump said in Qatar.

On Monday, the US and China announced an agreement to suspend tit-for-tat tariffs for 90 days, de-escalating a trade war that has spooked financial markets and raised fears of a global economic downturn.

Before the agreement between Beijing and Washington, Cook said Apple was “not able to estimate the impact of tariffs precisely.”

When presenting the tech company’s firstquarter profits in early May, Cook said he expected “a majority of iPhones sold in the US will have India as their country of origin”.

He warned of the uncertain impact of the 145 percent US tariffs on products from China — the company’s long-time manufacturing hub — despite a temporary reprieve for high-end tech goods such as smartphones and computers.

Although completed smartphones are exempted from Trump’s tariffs for now, not all components that go into Apple devices are spared.


Man is charged in fires targeting properties linked to UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer

Man is charged in fires targeting properties linked to UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer
Updated 24 min 34 sec ago
Follow

Man is charged in fires targeting properties linked to UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer

Man is charged in fires targeting properties linked to UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer
  • Metropolitan Police said Roman Lavrynovych was charged with arson with intent to endanger life
  • Lavrynovych, a Ukrainian national, is due to appear in court on Friday

LONDON: A 21-year-old man was charged Thursday with three counts of arson for fires that targeted two properties and a car linked to British Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

The Metropolitan Police force said Roman Lavrynovych, who was arrested Tuesday, was charged with arson with intent to endanger life.

The charges are linked to three incidents over the past week — a car fire on May 8, a fire Monday at Starmer’s private home that damaged the door of the house, and a fire Sunday outside a north London house converted into apartments connected to the UK leader. No injuries were reported from any of the fires.

Lavrynovych, a Ukrainian national, is due to appear in court on Friday. After he was arrested, Lavrynovych has remained in custody after warrants of further detention were obtained, the police said in a statement.

Starmer moved with his family to the prime minister’s official Downing Street residence after taking office in July.

The investigation was led by counterterrorism detectives as it involves the prime minister. Authorities are also probing whether there was state involvement as well as looking at other potential motivations.

Earlier this week, Starmer said the recent arson attacks represented “an attack on all of us, on democracy and the values that we stand for.”

The attacks were condemned by leaders across the House of Commons, including by the Conservative Party’s Kemi Badenoch, who described them as “completely unacceptable.”

Starmer’s former house has attracted protesters in the past. Last year, three pro-Palestinian activists were arrested and charged with public order offenses after unfurling a banner covered in red handprints outside the building.


EU foreign policy chief proposes further loosening of Syria sanctions

EU foreign policy chief proposes further loosening of Syria sanctions
Updated 31 min 48 sec ago
Follow

EU foreign policy chief proposes further loosening of Syria sanctions

EU foreign policy chief proposes further loosening of Syria sanctions
  • Prominent human rights lawyer says lasting peace depends on country building strong judicial system

BRUSSELS: EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has proposed a further loosening of European sanctions on Syria to allow funding for Syrian ministries in areas including reconstruction and migration, according to a document seen by Reuters.

The move comes after US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday he would order the lifting of sanctions on Syria.

EU foreign ministers are expected to discuss the relationship with Damascus at a meeting in Brussels next week.

The EU has already eased sanctions related to energy, transport, and reconstruction, as well as associated financial transactions, but some member states have pushed for further relief to help smooth Syria’s transition.

French President Emmanuel Macron said this month, after hosting Syrian President Ahmad Al-Sharaa, that Paris would push the EU to end its sanctions when they come up for renewal.

The bulk of sanctions imposed since 2013 are renewed annually on June 1.

With the World Bank estimating Syria’s reconstruction costs at more than $250 billion, Syria’s new authorities have been lobbying European countries for relief from the tough Western sanctions imposed on the former government of Bashar Assad.

Under the new proposal, dated May 14, the EU would allow member states to provide funding to Syria’s ministries of defense and interior for cooperation “in the areas of reconstruction, capacity-building, counterterrorism and migration,” the document said.

A special provision would allow EU member states more room for maneuver in dealing with Syrian state-owned entities when it comes to the destruction of chemical weapons.

The new proposal would lift sanctions on the Commercial Bank of Syria, while retaining measures targeting individuals linked to Assad’s former administration.

Officials are also discussing whether to lift sanctions on Syria’s central bank, three diplomats said.

Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Austria have circulated a joint document, seen by Reuters, calling for lifting sanctions on Syria’s central bank and financial institutions.

“The objective is to provide additional space for socio-economic recovery,” the four countries wrote.

Prominent Syrian human rights lawyer Mazen Darwish said lasting peace in Syria depends on the country building a strong judicial system, giving justice to the victims of all crimes committed during the Bashar Assad era.

“We believe that the Syrians who paid the heavy cost to reach this moment will not accept changing one dictatorship into another,” Mazen Darwish said in an interview in Stockholm.

He is one of the most high-profile rights advocates for Syria.

Darwish was in Stockholm with his wife Yara Bader to receive an award for their work running the Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression.