Tested well with 6-year-olds': Pentagon buried for 'embarrassing' name for Iran attack

Feb 28, 2026Far Left

While the Trump administration’s unprecedented attack on Iran has received a wave of scrutiny, so too did the name the administration had given the operation – Operation Epic Fury – which was dogpiled on Saturday morning by critics as childish.“It's called Operation Epic Fury because it tested well with a panel of 6 year olds and Steven Seagal,” wrote author Russ Jones in a social media post on Bluesky Saturday.“More like Operation Epstein’s Fury,” wrote prominent political commentator and social media influencer Jackson Hinkle in a post to his more than 3.6 million followers on X, referencing the Trump administration’s ongoing fallout from its botched investigation into Jeffrey Epstein.Operation Epic Fury began early Saturday morning after President Donald Trump authorized a series of strikes on Iran targeting its military assets. However, civilian infrastructure appears to have also been hit, including a strike on an elementary girls’ school that killed at least 85 people, according to Al Jazeera.The juxtaposition between the brutal images of deadly U.S. strikes with the name of the operation continued to be widely mocked throughout Saturday morning.“Operation Epic Fury sounds like [an] energy drink that gives you heart palpitations and bad decisions,” wrote X user "Crypto Intel Plug,” a cryptocurrency commentator with more than 1,600 followers.“I love how these operation names are like the ones I used to give my little plastic soldiers when I was 5-6 yrs old,” wrote another, X user “Wonky Donkey,” a U.K.-based user and frequent commentator on British politics.It's called Operation Epic Fury because it tested well with a panel of 6 year olds and Steven Seagal.— Russ Jones (@russincheshire.bsky.social) February 28, 2026 at 3:34 AM

'Perverted little fantasy': Stephen Miller instantly buried after bizarre post

Raw Story

1 hour ago

'Perverted little fantasy': Stephen Miller instantly buried after bizarre post

White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller kept up his attacks on birthright citizenship with a far-fetched hypothetical on Friday, and critics lined up to ridicule it.Days after the Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship in a 6-3 ruling that struck down President Donald Trump's executive order, Miller posted on X that if you believe a foreign government could sail a hospital ship to the edge of US waters, "deliver a hundred babies to foreign moms, then promptly sail back," and that each child "is American for life, you don't believe in nationhood at all." The rant echoed the birth-tourism case he made on Fox News, where he floated a "hard look" at barring pregnant women from the country.Miller's post predictably led to quick backlash. Former Rep. Adam Kinzinger asked sarcastically, "What about our hospital ship that we sent to Greenland? It happened right?" Bulwark journalist Sam Stein quipped, "Well. When you put it that way." Internet personality Damin Toell pointed out that under the 1898 Wong Kim Ark precedent, and still after this week's ruling, babies born aboard foreign government ships in US waters are already exempt from birthright citizenship.Others flipped Miller's logic back on him.National security journalist Marcy Wheeler called his "perverted little fantasy" no more real "than it was for the century and a half since birthright citizenship was codified." Academic Alonso Gurmendi argued that "any citizenship rule can be made to sound absurd like this." And journalist Zaid Jilani went furthest, sarcastically asking: "What if a mom catapults over the US Mexico border and from 500 feet in the air pops a baby out, ties a parachute to it and lets it fall gently to the ground. Does that baby deserve citizenship, lib?"The administration has vowed to keep fighting, though some analysts say the ruling nearly went the other way. Independent estimates put actual birth tourism at a tiny fraction of U.S. births.

Far Left

Read →