This was why the COVID mass murder was commited: https://t.co/xUUYGmHgOf
PDJ· Jun 20, 2026Journalism Revolution — Dystilling What Matters
"Then you will know the truth and the truth will set you free" John 8:32
— PDJ
BitcoinAI & MoneyQuantumTechnologyMarketsPolicy
8Followers
6Following
Vol. 1Edition
Today
3 / 9 Read
PDJ· Jun 20, 2026Continue reading
More from PDJ
General
Summation of Amusing Ourselves to Death
Below includes a very brief and unfair summation of the book "Amusing Ourselves to Death." It is an incredible book and a necessary resource for architecting what is Dystil and why Dystil needs to exist. Also attached are some resources that speak to examples that should influence Dystil's architecture. Amusing Ourselves to Death (Neil Postman, 1985) argues that television and entertainment culture haven’t merely changed what we know, but how we think—turning all serious public conversation into show business. Here are the most important takeaways: 1. Huxley, Not Orwell Postman’s most famous point is that Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World is a more accurate warning than Orwell’s 1984 . Orwell feared information would be hidden from us by a totalitarian state; Huxley feared we would be destroyed by what we love —endless distraction and pleasure. Postman argues America is living out Huxley’s vision: no one needs to ban books when a population is too busy watching television to read them. 2. The Medium Shapes Thought Building on Marshall McLuhan, Postman argues that the dominant medium of a culture acts as a metaphor for how truth is established. A print-based culture encourages logic, context, history, and sustained argument. A television-based culture encourages image, emotion, fragmentation, and instant gratification. 3. The Age of Show Business When television becomes the central medium, every institution must adapt to its demands. News, politics, religion, and education are all reshaped to be entertaining, fast-paced, and visually compelling—regardless of whether the subject matter is naturally entertaining. 4. “And Now, This…” Postman uses this phrase to capture how television news destroys context. A devastating war report is followed by a commercial, then a weather forecast, then a celebrity story. The result is a stream of disconnected, decontextualized information that feels important but leads to no understanding or action. 5. Politics Becomes Image Political discourse under television is judged not by the quality of arguments but by the attractiveness of candidates, the punchiness of sound bites, and the staging of spectacles. Policy becomes less important than persona. 6. Education as Entertainment When teaching is modeled on television (e.g., fast cuts, music, humor), students learn that learning must always be fun. This undermines the patience, discipline, and tolerance for boredom required for deep, complex thought. 7. The Epistemological Crisis A culture that can only process truth through entertainment becomes incapable of dealing with serious, long-term problems. If everything must be amusing, then nothing can be truly serious—and a society that cannot take itself seriously is in danger of collapsing under the weight of issues it refuses to think about. Bottom line: Postman warns that the threat to democracy is not censorship, but the trivialization of discourse. When a culture turns everything into entertainment, it loses the capacity for critical judgment.
PDJ
Politics
What happened to Charlie?
The Conspiracy Theories Swirling Around the Charlie Kirk Shooting — What's Being Claimed, and Why It Matters "A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on." — often attributed to Winston Churchill It is a story that has metastasized. It is a tragedy wrapped in rumor. It is the internet at its most combustible — a real act of political violence, a grieving public, and a vacuum where verified facts should be. It is, in the end, a case study in how conspiracy thinking works, and why understanding it is not optional. On September 10, 2025, conservative commentator Charlie Kirk was shot and killed at Utah Valley University. A suspect, Tyler Robinson, was taken into custody. And almost immediately, a parallel universe of competing theories erupted across social media — each one more elaborate, more certain, and more unsourced than the last. The Official Account — and Why Many Don't Believe It According to the official narrative, Kirk was struck by a rifle shot fired from a rooftop 130 to 200 yards away. Tyler Robinson was identified, arrested, and Mirandized by 6:25 p.m. on September 11. That, for a significant portion of the online right, is where the story ends — officially. But not in practice. The distrust is not coming from nowhere. Questions about evidence handling have been raised widely. One heavily shared account claims that crime scene sanitization was completed by the following Monday , with roughly ten inches of soil removed from a twenty-by-twenty-foot radius around where Kirk was sitting, replaced with pavers. Security camera footage from UVU has reportedly not been released and does not appear on Tyler Robinson's evidence list. Kirk's shirt — a key piece of physical evidence — is said to have been destroyed. These are not trivial concerns. If true, they represent serious failures of evidence preservation. If false, they require rebuttal with documentation. Either way, the absence of transparency is feeding the fire. The Exploding Microphone Theory — The Most Viral Claim At the center of the conspiracy ecosystem sits one dominant theory: Kirk was not shot at all. He was killed by a shaped explosive charge — specifically PETN, a military-grade plastic explosive — concealed inside his RØDE wireless microphone transmitter. The argument, pushed most forcefully by accounts like @jonaaronbray and amplified by Candace Owens and others , runs roughly as follows: A 0.5-gram micro shaped charge of PETN could physically fit inside a RØDE wireless transmitter When detonated, it would produce a focused upward blast capable of creating a clean wound and snapping a necklace The visible "puff" of Kirk's shirt in slow-motion footage is consistent with an internal explosion, not an external bullet Shards found on the floor of the transport SUV allegedly match a RØDE microphone casing The mic was reportedly worn inside the shirt — unusual placement for media work, according to one account Supporting observations circulate: hair behind Kirk's ear appears to move before his necklace shifts , which some read as a blast wave. Security staff were seen passing objects to one another immediately after the incident. And acoustic analysis posted in a lengthy thread claims that multi-angle triangulation places the sound impulse within ten to twenty meters of the stage — far too close to be a distant rifle shot. What the Autopsy Says There is a direct problem with the PETN mic theory, and one account raises it plainly: the autopsy reportedly recovered one bullet jacket fragment and four lead fragments . That is the physical signature of a bullet, not a shaped charge. PETN demolition devices do not produce lead fragments consistent with rifle ammunition. This is not a minor discrepancy. It is the kind of evidence that, if accurate, substantially undermines the entire microphone bomb hypothesis. The theorists have not satisfactorily resolved this. Some suggest evidence was planted or swapped. That is possible, in theory. It is also unfalsifiable, which is precisely the problem. The "Inside Job" Layer — Security, Staff, and Zionist Conspiracies The theories do not stop at the microphone. They extend outward, drawing in Kirk's security detail, his wife, his staff, the Israeli government, and even a now-destroyed manufacturing facility. Several accounts allege that the security company present that day — identified as Shaffer Security Group , described as Zionist-owned — had ended its contract with Turning Point USA in 2022 before reportedly appearing for this single event. Kirk's own bodyguard, Dan Flood, is accused of suspiciously pushing Kirk to the ground rather than shielding him. Brian Harpole's lack of visible flinch at the moment of the shot is presented as evidence of foreknowledge. More disturbing in its specifics: video footage is being analyzed frame-by-frame for behavioral cues. One account claims to show Hunter Kozak rehearsing a shocked reaction before Kirk arrived , and separately, making a mock gun gesture toward Kirk that was then silenced by Mikey McCoy. Whether these interpretations reflect genuine anomalies or pattern-seeking in ambiguous footage is, again, impossible to adjudicate without the original video and context. The anti-Semitic dimension of these theories is overt and should be named directly. Multiple accounts assert Israeli and U.S. military involvement , cite Erika Kirk's uncle's connection to Jewish studies as incriminating, and describe the killing as a public execution for Kirk's "anti-Zionist views." One account even claims a manufacturing facility was blown up one week after the mic theory went viral to eliminate witnesses — and calls for executions by name. This is not investigative journalism. This is scapegoating dressed in the language of forensics. The Discord Message Problem — A Legitimate Question Not everything being raised is fantasy. One claim deserves serious scrutiny. An account alleges that Tyler Robinson was Mirandized at 6:25 p.m. on September 11 — but that Discord messages attributed to him were authored at 7:57 to 8:57 p.m. that same evening, more than ninety minutes after he was in federal custody. If accurate, this raises a real and serious question: who was authoring those messages? It would not be the first time digital evidence in a high-profile case has been questioned for timing anomalies. This is the kind of specific, verifiable claim that prosecutors, defense attorneys, and journalists should be examining. It does not require believing in Mossad microphone bombs. It requires only a timestamp and a custody log. What We Are Actually Watching The theories synthesized across these sources share a common architecture. They begin with genuine anomalies — unusual evidence handling, a rapidly sanitized crime scene, unexplained behavior caught on video. Then they fill the interpretive gap with the most extreme available explanation: military-grade assassins, international conspiracies, coordinated silence from dozens of witnesses. This is how conspiracy thinking works. Not with pure invention, but with real unresolved questions pointed toward pre-existing narratives. Charlie Kirk spent years promoting the Cloward-Piven theory of deliberate systemic collapse. He built an audience primed to see intentional orchestration behind institutional failure. It is a bitter irony — and a structural one — that the community he cultivated is now the most likely to believe his death was a meticulously staged assassination by the deep state and foreign intelligence. Some of these claims will be resolved by a fair trial, transparent evidence disclosure, and independent forensic review. Others are specifically constructed to resist resolution — every answered question generates three new ones, every piece of contrary evidence becomes proof of a deeper cover-up. That is not investigation. That is religion. What You Should Do Do not dismiss every question. The evidence handling described — if accurate — is legitimately troubling and deserves accountability. The Discord timestamp claim deserves a factual answer from prosecutors. But do not mistake volume for proof. Certainty. The word keeps appearing in these posts: conclusively , unequivocal , 1000% . Real forensic uncertainty does not speak this way. Real doubt is quiet, specific, and open to being wrong. Read the autopsy. Follow the defense's discovery process. Demand transparency from institutions. Hold the powerful accountable — that is not conspiracy thinking, that is citizenship. What you must not do is let grief and distrust be weaponized into a story that ends with named individuals being called to execution by anonymous accounts with no verified expertise, no legal accountability, and no actual evidence — only the absolute, prophetic certainty of someone who has decided what happened and is now assembling the world to fit. That certainty is the tell. Always.
PDJ
General
Your soul is in your keeping alone
"When you stand before God, you cannot say, that I was told by others to do thus or that virtue was not convenient at the time. This will not suffice. Remember that."
PDJ
Technology
Get off of Google
Typical Steps for eSIM Setup on a Pixel Phone: Prepare Your Pixel Phone Ensure your device is updated to the latest firmware. Back up any important data. Cost: Free; time: 10-15 minutes. Verify eSIM Compatibility Confirm that your Pixel model supports eSIM functionality. Cost: Free; time: 5 minutes. Obtain eSIM Information Contact your mobile carrier or access their website for an eSIM activation QR code or information. Cost: Varies (some carriers may charge a fee for eSIM setup); time: 5-10 minutes. Access eSIM Settings Go to Settings > Network & Internet > Mobile Network > Add Carrier . Scan the QR code provided by your carrier. Cost: Free; time: 5 minutes. Configure Data Settings Set the preferred data network, ensure APN settings are configured correctly. This may also require entering manual settings based on carrier instructions. Cost: Free; time: 10-15 minutes. Test Connectivity Restart your phone and verify that the eSIM is functioning correctly. Make a call or access mobile data to double-check. Cost: Free; time: 5-10 minutes. Install GrapheneOS (Optional) If installing GrapheneOS, follow the official guide for installation, ensuring the eSIM is functioning before proceeding. Cost: Potential costs tied to any third-party software tools or hardware requirements; time: 1-2 hours. Total Estimated Time Depending on the speed of the steps and the user's familiarity with the process, the average time may range from 1.5 to 3 hours. Potential Costs Carrier Fees : Some carriers charge for eSIM services, which may vary significantly—typically between $0 to $30. GrapheneOS Installation : Generally free, but you may incur costs for any additional software tools or devices required. In summary, users should anticipate a timeframe of approximately 1.5 to 3 hours for comprehensive eSIM setup, while costs can vary based on carrier policies regarding eSIM services and any associated software or hardware for GrapheneOS installation. This experience demonstrates a blend of technical literacy and resourcefulness, reflecting again the intersection of art and science in our digital lives.
PDJ
Bitcoin
Spook Smoke at MSTR?
Cato was suspended from X for posting the following: Did you know that MSTR’s software business has a “shadow” board employing CIA and Homeland Security Veterans? And that its affiliate company Microstrategy Government Services (created after starting the BTC strategy) provides no info on its intelligence clients and revenues? Let’s dig in. Strategy does classified work and must submit to rules set by an agency under the Department of Defense - the Defense Counterintelligence & Security Agency. Strategy’s affiliate Microstrategy Government Services (MGS) is governed by a Security Agreement whereby Strategy surrenders governance and operational control of MGS to an outside board. Revenues of MGS flow up to the parent company, but MSTR’s financial statements provide no breakdown of government clients and their revenues, and classified contracts are handled by the proxy board. So who really runs MGS? The answer is Defense veterans. Rick "Ozzie" Nelson is an EVP at Strategy. He is a CSIS senior associate of Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, and has testified before the House Committee on Homeland Security. In 2022 he announced the engagement of two board members for MGS, (which had been incorporated in 2021 shortly after Strategy’s adoption of the BTC strategy), Karen Schaefer and Tom Atkin: Karen Schaefer is a CIA veteran of 26 years, who was chief of operations, deputy chief of counterintelligence, and managed covert action programs at the National Security Council (NSC). Is all that expertise needed for MSTR to sell only an estimated $50M in annual software revenues to the US Government? Why isn’t the overqualified Karen Schaefer employed at a top military contractor such as Raytheon or Lockheed instead? MSTR also engaged Tom Atkin for the same board. Tom has over 36 years of government experience and was Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Global Security. Contrary to how Strategy’s “legacy” business has been presented to retail investors, Strategy has deep ties to US intelligence, to which they sell software via a company controlled by intelligence veterans. Strategy’s government products can be seen as a back-looking Palantir, tools built to summarize, report, and analyze what already happened, instead of predicting the future. Was MSTR, a company authorized to access classified defense info, chosen to become a vehicle for holding BTC for the US in a plausible deniable manner? Check out their convenient HQ location along with the other supporting materials attached below:
PDJ
Politics
Friedberg explains what the Politburo is:“The Politburo is the leaders who elect themselves to d...
*AI written article When "Politburo" Becomes a Political Insult A sharp, provocative critique of progressive politicians is circulating online, with entrepreneur and investor David Friedberg using pointed Cold War-era language to describe what he sees as a dangerous consolidation of power among America's left-leaning political class. The Argument in Plain Terms Speaking in a clip shared by investor Arjun Khemani, Friedberg uses the word "Politburo" — the Soviet Union's elite ruling committee — as a metaphor for a group of U.S. politicians he believes are working to centralize control over the economy, education, and media. He names Senator Elizabeth Warren, Senator Bernie Sanders, and Representative Ro Khanna specifically. His core claim is straightforward: these politicians, under the banner of fairness and equity, are actually pursuing something closer to top-down economic control — deciding who can build businesses, how capital gets allocated, and what kinds of speech and activity are acceptable. In Friedberg's framing, the irony is stark. Those who talk most loudly about fighting oligarchs are the oligarchs. Why the "Politburo" Metaphor Lands With Some Audiences The Politburo comparison is deliberately provocative, but it taps into a real and longstanding debate about the proper role of government in a market economy . Critics of progressive economic policy argue that proposals like: Breaking up large tech companies Regulating algorithmic media content Expanding federal oversight of financial markets Student debt cancellation and tuition controls ...represent a creeping substitution of political judgment for market decisions. From this perspective, every new regulatory intervention narrows the space in which individuals and businesses can act freely. Friedberg's frustration is particularly directed at the rhetorical packaging of these policies. Words like equity , justice , and fairness , he argues, function as a kind of moral camouflage — making power grabs look like generosity. The Other Side of the Argument It's worth noting what critics of Friedberg's view would say. Figures like Warren and Sanders argue they are doing the opposite of consolidating power — they want to break up concentrated corporate and financial power that they believe already dominates ordinary Americans' lives. From that vantage point, large tech platforms, private equity firms, and billionaire-owned media outlets are the real "politburo" — unelected, unaccountable, and enormously influential over daily life. The debate, then, is really about who holds dangerous power and what mechanisms — markets or democratic government — best protect individual freedom . Why This Rhetoric Matters Whether you agree with Friedberg or not, the intensity of his language reflects something real: trust in institutions, on all sides, is eroding fast. Comparing American politicians to Soviet-era rulers is a significant rhetorical escalation. It signals that some in the business and tech world no longer see progressive politicians as simply misguided — they see them as fundamentally threatening to the foundations of a free society. That framing — liberty vs. control, builders vs. bureaucrats — is increasingly shaping how economic and political debates are being fought, particularly in Silicon Valley circles where Friedberg is a prominent voice. Understanding the argument, and its limitations, matters. The stakes being described on both sides of this debate couldn't feel higher to those making the case.
PDJ