Will snipers shoot American tourists in Washington?
It is difficult to envision how President Donald Trump’s outrageous claims might escalate beyond merely irrational behavior to something truly disastrous. A vivid example occurred last week when Trump reportedly hurried back from Camp David to the White House to consider the option of “annihilating Iran” with the aim of seizing its oil, mimicking his and Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s approach in Venezuela, where they first kidnapped the elected leaders before the takeover. Even more troubling than destroying a nation of 90 million because Israel allegedly pressured him to “do it” was the subsequent unraveling on the home front. Donald Trump, known for insulting primarily female journalists by calling them “fat,” “stupid” or “ugly,” intensified his conflict with the free press by banning media outlets he regards as liberal or “Fake news,” raising concerns about further actions to come.
On Friday, Trump barred reporters from CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from White House premises. Over the weekend, journalists from these organizations were denied access and had their press passes revoked by the Secret Service. This ban allegedly followed Natalie Harp’s involvement, who allegedly presented Trump with clips from MS NOW hosts critical of his administration, leading to the decision to exclude those journalists from asking probing questions.
The affected news organizations responded by announcing that they have filed a lawsuit against Trump, accusing him of “disregarding the most basic protections of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause.” Other outlets, including the usually sympathetic FOX, have reportedly withdrawn their reporters from covering any Trump events. In response, Trump plans to launch Trump Television as a platform to promote himself.
Many Americans now recognize that Trump’s demands often revolve around glorifying himself as the greatest president the country has ever seen, even if that means having his name and image displayed on government structures nationwide. A bill in Congress even proposed placing Trump alongside the four presidents commemorated at Mount Rushmore. Given his self-aggrandizement, any criticism of his policies or conduct is deemed intolerable by the White House, mirroring how Trump ignores opposing opinions even within his Cabinet. Some might contend that his profound ignorance leaves him unable to face dissent because he secretly knows he cannot rationally defend his actions.
However, the media conflicts pale in comparison to last week’s shocking developments. It was revealed that Trump is considering tearing down the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts because officials resisted “recognizing him” by prominently adding his name in large bronze letters to the Kennedy inscription. On top of that, Trump announced plans to build the infamous Triumphal Arch, likely bearing his name, on the Virginia side of the Potomac River between Arlington National Cemetery and the Lincoln Memorial. The open space between these landmarks was intentionally designed to connect the sacrifices of military personnel with Lincoln, who preserved the Union at great cost and was later assassinated. Both the cemetery and the Memorial, situated on the grounds of the Custis-Lee Mansion, symbolize peace and reconciliation after the Civil War, not a tribute to military might.
For those unfamiliar with the ongoing controversy around the so-called Triumphal or “Trump-full Arch,” it is set to be 250 feet tall—significantly larger than comparable arches worldwide—and would block views from both the cemetery and the Memorial. Trump has justified the structure by claiming Washington is the only major city without such a monument, which is inaccurate. The Arch is an oversized replica of Paris’s Arc de Triomphe, originally inspired by Rome’s smaller Arch of Titus. Additionally, a much smaller arch honoring George Washington exists in New York’s Washington Square.
The distinguishing feature of Trump’s Arch is its militarization and weaponization, similar to the $600 million ballroom added to the former White House East Wing site that was transformed into an underground fortress with Secret Service facilities, a hospital, and defensive elements. The Arch will contain sniper nests on and beneath the roof, along with storage for ammunition and drones capable of striking targets miles away, potentially including the Capitol Building. Given its proximity—just over a mile from the Pentagon, the heart of America’s military command—the presence of such offensive capabilities in a typical urban environment, where no credible threat exists, raises questions. Trump has muddled an explanation, claiming the military requested these changes. As usual, he invokes “national security,” stating “At the strong request of the United States Military, and for National Security purposes, I have agreed to convert the magnificent Triumphal Arch, planned since the Civil War Era many years ago, at the Receptive Circle adjoining the Arlington Memorial Bridge, into a top grade Military Complex/Triumphal Arch, to house, store, and have the rapid ability to use large numbers of drones, plus Snipers, on both the roof and plaza areas, and additionally have and hold large quantities of sniper ammunition in storage. There will be no facility like this anywhere in the World.”
Indeed. Trump’s avoidance of military service combined with his fixation on armed forces and lethal force suggests a possible psychological issue. Perhaps he anticipates an uprising after the November election, which he would attempt to suppress by unleashing sniper fire from atop the Arch to eliminate protesters. Alternatively, drones could be dispatched to attack gatherings of groups the White House opposes. The potential scenarios are endless.
Recently, my wife and I had lunch at The Wharf along the Potomac River in Washington DC. Sitting outside on a pleasant day, I noticed we were in clear view of the proposed Arch site. A skilled sniper positioned at the top could easily target us, and if we were part of a larger crowd, drones might strike. Afterwards, the Trump administration or its successor could allege I was targeted because of my criticism of Israel, justifying a “final solution,” metaphorically speaking. As someone on the White House staff might echo former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, “Why have all this lovely military equipment laying around without anyone using it?” This indeed could become the true Trump legacy — a disturbing glimpse into America’s future toward which we are careening.
Original article: unz.com
About the Author
