Putting my foot in asses since 1945. Don’t follow me. Retired Navy vet, full-time grump. If you're looking for warm fuzzies, go hug a cactus. #DumbassDetector
If I had a dollar for every dumbass praising communism on here, I’d have enough to buy a one-way ticket to Moscow—for them. Pack a coat, cupcake. It’s cold in gulag country. ❄️👢 #DumbassAlert#RedFormanWisdom
BREAKING NEWS: Top U.S. Nuclear Chief Caught LEAKING Sensitive National Security Information to Stranger, Reveals Army Chemist Was Exposed to U.S. Chemical Nerve Agent, Confirms U.S. Strike Killed Children in Iran, Discloses U.S. Plans to ‘Kill Iran’s New Supreme Leader’
“If he [Mojtaba Khamenei] doesn't change his ways, yeah, they're [United States] going to kill him.”
“The easiest way to get intelligence…send a pretty girl, talk to the guy…I have to resist your eyes.”
“Your eyes have mesmerized me so much…Almost like you're an intelligence.”
Andrew Hugg, a U.S. Chief of Chemical Nuclear Surety, was caught on hidden camera casually revealing sensitive information to a stranger in a public restaurant. Andrew Hugg, Chief of Chemical Nuclear Surety, in charge of nuclear and chemical safety was caught on hidden camera releasing information regarding the U.S. Nuclear Information. He claims the U.S. still possesses nerve agents and says a U.S. Army chemist recently died from exposure.
He also acknowledges U.S. airstrikes have killed children in Iran, calling it “collateral damage,” and revealed to the journalist how nuclear launch decisions are made in real time.
Hugg described how the United States could assassinate Iran’s next leader if he “doesn’t change,” while admitting the U.S. has no plans to use nuclear weapons: “We’re not going to nuke anybody.”
All of this was casually revealed to an undercover journalist in a restaurant. This raises serious questions about this official's judgment, security, and what’s really happening behind closed doors.
We have reached out to the Pentagon and U.S. Army for comment and they are working on a response.
@USArmy@DeptofWar
Y'all remember that one time they locked you in your house and pretended the hospitals were full, all the while having so much downtime they could do elaborate dances in the halls?
Pepperidge Farm remembers.
@Mr__Righton In Genesis 14, Melchizedek (king of Salem, priest of God Most High) blesses Abraham. Hebrews 7 reveals him as a type of Jesus: a priest forever, without beginning or end.
@Mr__Righton First: The "Angel of the Lord." Shows up to Hagar, Jacob, Moses in the burning bush. Accepts worship, speaks as God Himself. That's pre-incarnate Jesus, morons! Not some random angel.Ex 3, Gen 16 – read it!
@Mr__Righton Listen up, you dumbasses! Genesis says 70 souls went to Egypt, Acts says 75. You think that's a contradiction? It's a textual variant, morons! Hebrew says 70, Septuagint adds 5 more grandsons. Stephen was quoting the Greek version. No error.
@UtopiaaDreamer@Snippy102 So no this isn’t “burning people.”
This is examining claims.
If God gave a perfect book, it wouldn’t need human correction, recension, or manuscript burning to survive.
Truth invites light. Error avoids it.
@UtopiaaDreamer@Snippy102 Christians aren’t afraid of textual history.
We openly show manuscript differences, developments, and textual criticism.
Truth stands up to scrutiny.
If Islam’s textual history can’t be discussed without offense, that’s revealing in itself.
@UtopiaaDreamer@Snippy102 When multiple companions (Ibn Mas’ud, Ubayy, etc.) had different readings and surah counts, Uthman’s solution wasn’t miraculous preservation.
It was standardization through elimination.
That matters to the claim of divine perfection.
@UtopiaaDreamer@Snippy102 If the Qur’an is claimed to be “perfectly preserved,” then it’s fair to ask:
Why did Uthman create a standardized recension and burn all competing manuscripts?
That’s not an insult . That’s documented Islamic history.
@UtopiaaDreamer@Snippy102 Snippy is not attacking Muslims.
He is addressing the textual history of the Qur’an. History preserved in your own sources like Sahih al-Bukhari.
Pointing out facts is not hate.
It’s simply seeking truth.
@UtopiaaDreamer@Snippy102 You quoted Matthew 7:3, but that verse is about hypocrisy, not avoiding truth.
Asking honest historical questions isn’t “scorching” anyone.
If a claim is divine, it should withstand examination not require deflection.
The pain of betrayal cuts deeper than the flesh.
It wounds the soul.
Even the Psalmist cried: “It is not an enemy who taunts me… it is you, my companion, my familiar friend.” (Ps 55:12-13)
Marriage should have been sanctuary,
but it became battlefield.