
Can pizza orders predict military action? One man keeps track.
Run by an anonymous software engineer, the social media account Pentagon Pizza Report tracks Google data for pizzerias around the military complex in Arlington. (The anonymous Google Maps data is aggregated from 'timeline' or 'location history' on phones, including visits made to establishments.) Often posting multiple times a day on X, PPR frequently singles out spikes in pizzeria activity, allowing its 200,000-plus followers to draw conclusions about what might be happening at the Pentagon. Mostly, it seems, these posts suggest little more than a busy (or slow) night at a pizzeria.
But occasionally, the tracker publishes a chart or two implying the Pentagon brass is burning the midnight oil just ahead of a military action, their offices littered with greasy boxes.
At around 7 p.m. on June 12, PPR noted that pizzerias around the Pentagon were booming; an hour later, Israel attacked Iran's nuclear program. At 7:13 p.m. on June 21, PPR pointed out the Papa Johns nearest the Pentagon was experiencing 'HIGH activity,' while Freddie's Beach Bar and Restaurant, a straight-friendly gay bar in Arlington with lots of Pentagon customers, was dead. Less than an hour later, President Donald Trump announced the United States had attacked three nuclear sites in Iran.
Since its founding in August, PPR has become 'a joke more than anything else,' former Pentagon official Alex Plitsas, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, said in an interview. 'There are people who are still really watching this thing seriously who don't really understand how things work.'
PPR has a presence on Bluesky, TikTok, Threads and Twitch but has found its audience on Elon Musk's X, where its fan base goes well beyond the tinfoil-hat crowd. Followers include members of the military and the open-source intelligence community, or OSINT; professors and podcasters; journalists and other information junkies. Edward Byers, a retired Navy SEAL who won a Medal of Honor in 2016, and Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, both follow the account.
A man who called himself PPR's founder responded to a direct message from a Washington Post reporter on PPR's Bluesky account and also messaged from its X account.
'I think a large reason for the rapid growth is the OSINT community sharing my reports the past few weeks, which is super cool,' he said in a direct-message chat over Bluesky. 'There also seems to be a lot of Crypto traders very interested in my reports which I didn't really expect.' (The founder agreed to chat on the condition of anonymity because his identity 'would tarnish the spirit of the pizza report.' 'I think people have all sorts of different assumptions about the kind of guy that sits and stares at Google Maps data all day long,' he wrote.)
He seems to approach the account with the open-mindedness of a scientist — and the perspective of someone who enjoys a good joke. He has no military background, and he can't even remember the first time he heard about the pizza index. He can be as enigmatic as his tracker: He won't be pinned down to a location other than the East Coast, and he won't reveal his age. But he's up-front about one thing: He understands that he's providing entertainment as much as information.
'I wouldn't be surprised if most people follow for the same reason I made the account,' he wrote on the Bluesky chat. 'It's stupid, it's funny, but you can't help but feel there's also something there.'
The theory that spawned PPR has been frequently traced back to the Cold War, when Soviet agents allegedly monitored takeout orders to the highest reaches of the U.S. government. Yet it isn't clear the KGB ever relied on such methods.
Simon Miles, an associate professor of history at Duke University who has studied Cold War-era spycraft, won't say that he's skeptical of the lore, exactly. 'You can't prove a negative,' he noted.
But Miles has seen records from the Stasi, the East German intelligence service that shared information with the Soviets and other Eastern Bloc nations, and nowhere is there a mention of monitoring takeout. 'That's one of these Cold War stories that never goes away,' he said. 'I've never seen documentation to that effect.'
Not that Russian spies weren't eyeing the streets around Washington for clues. Documents that Miles studied outlined some of the methods the KGB did use, including whether the government was moving founding documents from the National Archives into secure bunkers and whether many cars were parked past normal working hours at the White House.
'The idea was basically to create a list of indicators which, if enough of them started blinking red, so to speak, you would interpret that to mean that something was actually happening,' Miles said.
Pizza, he said, wasn't on the list.
Regardless, the 'pizza index' has fascinated people for decades, often fueled by media reports. In 1991, Frank Meeks, then the owner of 43 Domino's outlets in the D.C. area, told the AP that in the days leading up to Operation Desert Storm he had delivered dozens of pizzas to the Pentagon. Fifty-five pies, Meeks bragged, were sent to the White House in the hours before the U.S.-led coalition started an air campaign against Iraq over its invasion of Kuwait.
In December 1998, Meeks was quoted by a Washington Post reporter during impeachment hearings against President Bill Clinton and preparations for Operation Desert Fox against Iraq. The White House and Congress broke previous three-day records for pizza deliveries, Meeks told The Post.
'The Pentagon Pizza Index has been a surprisingly reliable predictor of seismic global events — from coups to wars — since the 1980s,' Alex Selby-Boothroyd, head of data journalism for the Economist, wrote in a recent LinkedIn post. 'On the night of August 1st 1990 for example, the CIA ordered 21 pizzas in a single night just before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait (a new record). Who says pie charts aren't useful?'
But Pentagon ex-workers say times are different now than in the 1980s and '90s. Since the launch of Uber Eats, Grubhub, DoorDash and other delivery services, a new universe of food options has opened up for workers at the Pentagon, White House or CIA. Why would anyone limit themselves to chain pizza?
Besides, as multiple people pointed out, the Pentagon already has plenty of food options inside, including Lebanese Taverna, McDonald's, Moe's Southwest Grill, Panda Express, Panera Bread, Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen, Potbelly Sandwich Works, Subway, Taco Bell, Hissho Sushi and SmokeDatt Barbecue. There's even a pizzeria — Mosaic Pizza Company — but like many of the eateries there, it closes in the afternoon, catering to a rank-and-file staff that's often out the door by 5 p.m. The late-night options are pretty much limited to vending-machine sushi and the Market Basket Basement Cafe.
Besides, leaders may not even want to break for food, said a U.S. Army reservist who regularly works in the Pentagon. 'It's just how we're wired,' said the reservist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because she wasn't authorized to talk to the media. 'We're just trying to work so we can get it done.'
None of the Pentagon workers contacted for this story had ever ordered a pizza at work — cell service is notoriously bad inside the building, one said — nor had they ever seen pizza boxes on a conference room table or in the trash. Which raises the question: Can pizza even be delivered to one of the most secure structures in the country?
The Pentagon declined to comment for this story. But the Pentagon Force Protection Agency, its law enforcement agency, said all visitors must pass a background check and have authorized credentials; they and their belongings are also physically screened. All deliveries must be screened and inspected at the Pentagon Remote Delivery Facility just north of the complex. And anything perishable is 'confiscated and discarded,' spokesman Chris Layman noted in an email.
But, Layman said, employees may bring in food that they've gotten directly from a restaurant. This appears to include food a staffer might pick up from a delivery driver at, say, the Pentagon Metro. These meals must also be screened and inspected.
'I can see having pizza delivered to a spot outside, but I don't recall we ever did it,' said Philip Greene, a retired U.S. Marine Corps attorney who had an office inside the Pentagon for 12 years. 'It's very anecdotal, but it makes sense. We're going to be burning the midnight oil. Let's get some pizza or Chinese food or whatever.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
11 minutes ago
- The Hill
NewsNation now basic cable's fastest-growing channel
Just months after marking its 4-year anniversary, viewers have made NewsNation the fastest-growing channel among basic cable networks, according to Nielsen, which tracks ratings across the television industry. According to Nielsen, NewsNation grew nearly 50 percent among total day viewers and 67 percent among adults aged 25-54, ranking #1 among all 112 ad-supported cable networks in year-over-year growth. The milestone comes just one year after expanding its news programming to 24/7. 'NewsNation set out to offer an alternative to the polarized cable news landscape, and we are extremely gratified that viewers are validating our approach,' said Sean Compton, President of Nexstar's Networks Division. 'As we continue to grow, we remain committed to earning viewers' trust each and every day.' Nielsen data shows NewsNation saw a 24 percent gain in primetime total viewers compared to June of last year. The network's daytime programming also saw significant viewership gains, with each program from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. ET experiencing triple-digit growth among viewers aged 25-54. Propelled by viewers seeking fact-based coverage of the stories of our day, including the Israel-Iran war, U.S. intervention in the Middle East, anti-ICE protests on the streets of Los Angeles, and the debate over President Donald Trump's budget bill, every program also was up double-digit percentages in total viewers. The NewsNation app (available for download on Apple and Android devices) is also rapidly growing, with a 230% increase in visits in the past year. Here's just how much each NewsNation weekday show increased in just the past year, according to Nielsen: In Prime Time, CUOMO continues to rank as NewsNation's top-rated show. Since last year, the program has increased its viewership by 30 percent. At 7 p.m. ET, Elizabeth Vargas Reports saw 18 percent growth overall and a 22 percent increase in the 25-54 younger demographic, while On Balance with Leland Vittert (weeknights, 9 p.m. ET) was up 11 percent in total viewers.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Jim Cramer Says 'You Want to Get In Front of DoorDash'
DoorDash, Inc. (NASDAQ:DASH) is one of the 14 stocks Jim Cramer recently looked at. While discussing the company, Cramer said that it can become an 'advertising powerhouse,' as he commented: 'DoorDash, up as usual 2%… Unlike most of the people around here, the older people I talk to, I pass no judgment about these people. You know why? Because they are buying very good companies… These are top-notch businesses that might have gigantic earnings power someday. You want to get in front of DoorDash, which may turn out to be an advertising powerhouse.' A shot of a delivery driver zooming down a busy street, symbolizing the company's quick and efficient delivery services. DoorDash, Inc. (NASDAQ:DASH) runs a platform that links customers with local businesses for deliveries, and provides services like food ordering, memberships, and tools to help merchants manage online orders and deliveries. On June 9, Cramer called the stock a winner and said: 'There's no real theme to the other stocks on the list. DoorDash, that's been a winner from the get-go. And we know from Campbell's… conference call and by Dollar General too, that people like to eat at home these days. That could mean DoorDash, which is remarkably well run and has a deservedly strong reputation if indeed you don't want to cook at home.' While we acknowledge the potential of DASH as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you're looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: The Best and Worst Dow Stocks for the Next 12 Months and 10 Unstoppable Stocks That Could Double Your Money. Disclosure: None.

Politico
19 minutes ago
- Politico
Inside the Dysfunction at Rubio's Shrunken National Security Council
The sun rises over a Royal Australian Navy submarine berthed at HMAS Stirling in Garden Island, Australia, on Jan. 21, 2021. The AUKUS agreement involving Australia, the U.S. and the United Kingdom — which the Pentagon has put under review — includes selling nuclear-powered submarines to Australia. | Yuri Ramsey/Australian Defence Force via Getty Images Nahal Toosi is POLITICO's senior foreign affairs correspondent. She has reported on war, genocide and political chaos in a career that has taken her around the world. Her reported column, Compass, delves into the decision-making of the global national security and foreign policy establishment — and the fallout that comes from it. When the Pentagon recently launched a review of a landmark security pact with Australia and the United Kingdom, the move blindsided many key officials elsewhere in the U.S. government. The decision, it turns out, was a unilateral move by the Pentagon championed by its policy chief Elbridge Colby. The official goal of the review is to see if the pact, AUKUS, which involves selling nuclear-powered submarines to Australia, is in line with President Donald Trump's 'America First' agenda. But many officials at the State Department, the White House-based National Security Council and others who are tasked with making the many-layered agreement a reality weren't told in advance that the review would happen or what its parameters were. Many of their counterparts in Canberra and London were caught off guard, too. The episode — described to me and my colleagues Jack Detsch and Paul McLeary by three people familiar with the situation — is an example of how dysfunctional the national security policymaking process has become under Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who in early May became acting national security adviser. Since Rubio took over the NSC, he has shrunk its staff by more than half. It now has fewer than 100 people, according to a person familiar with the NSC process. Arguably more importantly, Rubio has imposed changes to what's called 'the interagency process' — a key function of the NSC that involves coordinating policy and messaging across government agencies and departments. That process, two people told me, is now one in which important meetings aren't held, career staffers are often in the dark about what's expected of them and some people or their institutions try to take advantage of power vacuums. I granted many of those I spoke to anonymity to discuss internal administration dynamics. Some U.S. diplomats and other national security professionals are worried that the current structure means small crises will explode into big ones because they don't get early attention, and that key officials who deal with priority issues, such as Ukraine, are being iced out of important conversations. One of the people familiar with the AUKUS situation said the broken process was already fueling turf fights, such as with Colby, a man known for challenging status quo thinking. 'It's Game of Thrones politics over there,' the person said. The White House took issue with such characterizations. A White House official told me changes to the process were designed to promote the president's priorities while intentionally leaving out career staffers who may leak and endanger operations. 'The White House — and the president — has more visibility now into what the NSC is working on than ever,' the official said. The official also downplayed the Pentagon's AUKUS review, stressing it wasn't a change in policy and that 'agencies often review the nature and scope of agreements.' Colby didn't reply to my requests for comment. In theory, the National Security Council is a nerve center. Its staff coordinates policymaking across various parts of the government to ensure everyone is in sync, not only on what to do but also on how to publicly talk about it. In reality, the NSC can get too big, too powerful and micromanaging. Its staffers often wind up creating policy instead of coordinating the ideas that emanate from departments and agencies. This is a common complaint about the NSC over multiple administrations. President Joe Biden's much larger NSC exercised so much power, especially on Middle East matters, that it infuriated the State Department. When Rubio first took over as secretary of State in January, he made clear he wanted the State Department to lead on U.S. foreign policy. Trump, meanwhile, has long viewed the NSC with suspicion because some of its staffers at the time testified against him during his first impeachment. He and many of his top aides see the NSC as an exemplar of an untrustworthy government bureaucracy. At Rubio's leaner NSC there are now far fewer meetings of the various NSC-led interagency bodies. That includes the Principals Committee (consisting mainly of Rubio and Cabinet chiefs), the Deputies Committee (usually Rubio's deputy and the No. 2s at the agencies) and, in particular, Policy Coordination Committees (NSC senior directors and officials such as assistant secretaries from across the government). Traditionally, national security advisers give leeway to their senior directors to convene the lower-level PCC meetings, even though they may want a readout of what happened. Under Trump, Rubio or a deputy of his has to approve whether a PCC meeting can be held, and that's often contingent on if the topic the PCC will discuss is deemed a priority of the president. When there's a major crisis, such as the Israel-Iran war, the truly important meetings take place in the West Wing. They tend to include a handful of top Trump aides, including Rubio and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, and of course, those aides often meet with Trump, the two people said. Such gatherings are sometimes outside the formal NSC process, and they are where Trump's intentions are best divined. The White House official insisted this is perfectly normal: 'The president is the chief executive and commander-in-chief and makes his own determinations at the time and setting of his own choosing.' The official has a point. At the end of the day, the president can choose how he wants to craft policy. And Rubio may still be adjusting the process. But the president has only so much bandwidth and a limited number of priorities, while the changes Rubio has made so far at the NSC seem to underestimate the complexity of the challenges facing the U.S. PCCs have previously been the place to discuss weedy topics often not on the president's radar. Those meetings can help prevent small crises from ballooning into ones that require higher-level attention. PCCs have also been a setting where proposals from lower ranks are first discussed before potentially being sent upwards. PCC meetings can further be a diplomatic tool for the U.S. to show it cares about topics that are rarely presidential priorities but whose representatives appreciate whatever attention they get. This can be important for building relationships with countries that may be attracted to offers of friendship from U.S. rivals such as China. By limiting PCCs and higher-level meetings only to the president's priorities, a tremendous amount of diplomacy never gets done, ideas are ignored and little fires are left to grow. 'Having fewer meetings isn't necessarily a bad thing. But you need to find the right balance, and if you cut too many people out of the loop, then it gets harder to solve problems before they turn into major crises,' said Josh Black, a former senior NSC official in the Biden administration. A U.S. government that doesn't pay enough attention to, say, global health, could soon find a pandemic on its shores. An administration that ignores the growing extremism in a rarely prioritized Central Asian country may risk a terrorist attack. And ultimately, such an administration is likely to be more reactive than proactive on policy. The Trump administration has said it views the NSC instead as a vehicle to implement Trump's ideas from the top down. But telling the NSC to implement an idea without first letting it vet the idea bottom up is a recipe for roadblocks. Lawyers may point to legal constraints, or the plan may run headlong into another policy goal. And let's be real: Trump is constantly shifting his positions, confusing his staff as to what his goals actually are. Foreign affairs analysts I spoke to pointed to Trump's determination to impose tariffs as a case study in how implementation without proper vetting and coordination can backfire. For example: America's European allies are among Trump's tariff targets. Trump also wants those allies to spend more on defense. His tariffs, however, could damage their economies, making it harder for them to increase defense spending. A more dynamic NSC process — one that simultaneously works bottom-up and top-down — usually involves people across the government knowing what the president cares about, evaluating his ideas and their own, coordinating among each other, and producing plans that fulfill his goals without undercutting them. The same White House official, unsurprisingly, said the administration is effectively implementing policy, noting that now even 'the White House counsel's office is embedded within the NSC and functions in unison.' But others argued to me that the Rubio approach undercuts the administration's internal communications. Key NSC staffers often are left off of phone calls between the president and foreign leaders, or are at times excluded from Trump's face-to-face meetings with such leaders. They often don't know if Trump has made a promise or demand until it's too late to raise flags. The White House official cast the invitations to such conversations as being intentionally limited for operational security reasons, adding: 'Action items are always relayed.' At the same time, the vacuum in conversations, in part due to the small number of meetings, has left staff in some agencies and departments unclear about what they can do. Others, such as Colby, are apparently willing to press forth with reviews that in a past administration would be coordinated with others. I asked Biden administration officials how the White House would have reacted if the Pentagon in their time had launched an AUKUS review without telling other parts of the government. One said senior White House aides would have 'lost it.' Another said, 'I can't comprehend it.' The status of the Trump administration's AUKUS review, the existence of which was first reported by the Financial Times, remains unclear. How the administration handles revealing the results of the review will be a test. Will the Pentagon tell other agencies and departments in advance so they can prepare their own answers to questions from worried British and Australian officials? It might help to have an NSC meeting about it.