Monday, February 19, 2018

Inside The Mind Of A Lunatic Running A Higher Ed Asylum

By Professor Doom

     It’s no secret many of our institutions of higher education have a real problem with rabid, vicious, White-Hating Social Justice Warriors (or SJWs, or Leftists, if you prefer) overrunning campuses across the county.

     For “converged” institutions, that is, institutions where the takeover is complete, I see no solution beyond bulldozers. These guys have no tolerance for opposing views, and converged campuses can only seal themselves off into a bubble of hatred of everything else, ending in their eventual self-destruction as the hatred turns inward.

     Luckily, these guys have overplayed their hand, and many of them speak out, revealing their institutions as corrupted. A recent article on Inside Higher Ed contains the rant of a SJW. Lest the reader think I’m being unfair in the characterization, allow me to begin with a short bio of the author:

Nicole Truesdell is the senior director of the office of academic diversity and inclusiveness, and affiliated faculty in critical identity studies at Beloit College. Her general interests are in radical pedagogy, academic hustling and social justice.
--when did “academic hustling” become a hobby or personal interest?

     It wasn’t that long ago that no campus in the country had an “office of academic diversity” filled with commissars making $150k a year, like this “senior director.” The interested reader should consider the list of office staff for this fiefdom, to get even a slight idea of how much money is wasted in these places.     

     Anyway, it wasn’t that long ago that no institution had diversity fiefdoms. By no coincidence, it wasn’t that long ago race riots were nonexistent on campus, as well.

      The thing is, these Offices of Diversity wield scary power on campus, as faculty are forced to go to re-education meetings to have large volumes of ideological dogma crammed down their throats. Refusing to go participate in the brainwashing can lead to repercussions, as the Duke Divinity crisis highlighted in detail. Faculty are terrified of speaking out, as we know the consequences are dire.

      So let’s read what this self-admitted Social Justice Warrior has to say, as it very much highlights what’s going on in higher education today:

Recent events in Charlottesville, Va., and Shelbyville, Tenn., show us the modern face of American white supremacy. Rather than marching under sheets or lurking in the backwoods, today’s white supremacists stand proud in their tan khakis and white polos with tiki torches in hand.

     Of the thousands of the participants in Charlottesville, only a few dozen at most were arguably “white supremacists,” with the largest group there being Antifa terrorists. Our commissar above doesn’t care about such data, and instead simply repeats the narrative.

…we can also look to colleges and universities as sites that help both disseminate and normalize racist hate speech.

     Wait…what? How does this commissar not know that free speech is now discouraged on many campuses today, with enough incidents that it can be shown there’s a statistically significant negative correlation between free speech and tuition?

      Again, the commissar does not care about facts and reason, only pushing the narrative.

Alt-right/white supremacist speakers and organizations are choosing to use and abuse colleges and universities as locations at which to speak and recruit. Speakers like Richard Spencer, Milo Yiannopoulos and Ann Coulter…

     More pushing of the narrative. I assure the gentle reader, re-education seminars are much like this. Lies, and lies, and lies, are crammed down faculty throats. I would like to point out that Milo is a homosexual with a black boyfriend…and yet the narrative here is Milo is a “white supremacist.” I don’t claim to be an expert, but I’m pretty sure white supremacists are against homosexuality, and very confident they’re against people of different races having sex with each other. But the narrative must be pushed no matter how ridiculous it is.

      The author then slathers that label on Coulter and Spencer, but this is silly stuff.

     Ann Coulter was one of the very few to identify Donald Trump as not only legitimate, but as the winner of the presidential election long before he was even nominated as a candidate. She did so confidently and repeatedly, never backing down…I’m completely unaware of any “white supremacist” views she’s uttered, but with such a demonstrated track record of political insight, it’s clear what she has to say should be heeded.

     (I’ve never heard Richard Spencer speak, and so cannot comment on this other charge by the commissar, though I have little optimism it is accurate.)

      It’s so…infuriating that the commissars engage in this baseless name-calling. Why do the commissars get to define what “white supremacist” means, and why is their definition so vague as to include people like Milo who are the very opposite of any definition of white supremacist a sane person would use?

Why are colleges and universities prime and targeted sites for white supremacist speakers and their allies?

      It’s so tiresome listening to this idiocy. Speakers come to campus because they are invited. There’s no “targeting here,” certainly not by white supremacist speakers, assuming any exist who legitimately can even be called that.

Rather than address systemic and structural oppression and discrimination, faculty are being asked to take “neutral” stances and just teach our disciplines…Yet for many scholars, this is our work.

     Uh, no? This is one of the many things that makes ideologues so tiresome: belief that ideology is everything. A few years ago, our leaders in higher ed could only grunt how “leadership” was the purpose of higher ed, but on campuses where commissars have taken over, higher education is now about ideology.

       Honest, higher education is supposed to be about education, either of people or humanity. To assert higher education is all about looking for oppression, looking for ways to be offended, is even more inaccurate than thinking higher education is about leadership.

. I have been trained specifically to see and call out institutional racism through an intersectional lens.

      I bet not one reader in 10,000 knows what the author is talking about here. You’re missing nothing, I promise you, it’s just irrelevant navel-gazing, the training mentioned can be mastered and emulated quickly: just call anything you don’t like “RACIST.” Simply practice shouting that word until you can reliably spew spittle with every utterance, and you too can become a commissar.

It is on college and university campuses, and within our classrooms and through our programming, where resistance to this encroaching normalized white supremacist ideology must be challenged. 

     Wait…what? Again. “Normalized white supremacist ideology”? Imagine listening to this stuff for hours on end, to get some idea of what a re-education seminar for faculty is like. We’ve established the SJWs honestly believe everything is RACIST now…there’s no point in trying to please them by trying to remove whatever they consider racist, as this wouldn’t leave a square foot of ground to stand on.

      I’ve only touched on the highlights of the rant, above. As is so often the case, scholars roast this idiocy in the comments section. They do so anonymously, of course, since if any scholar openly challenged the above narrative, well, it’s off to the re-education seminar again.

      One comment points out the ultimate issue here:

I've read this article and the links provided, yet nowhere here or in those links is "white supremacy" clearly defined. As far as I can tell, what this author and those she links to call "white supremacy" is in reality simple white culture.

      With no definition, “white supremacy” does indeed mean whatever the SJW wants it to mean, and any look at their words and behavior make it clear: the SJW hates white people, hates white culture, and anything associated with either is “white supremacy.”

      It’s good that they’ve revealed their ultimate goal of killing everything white. But now that we know what they want, will anything be done about it?

Friday, February 16, 2018

Vice Provost Needed...Whites Need Not Apply

by Professor Doom

     Earlier I covered a position for a Kentucky physicist where the job posting made it perfectly clear that no white person could get the job, on account of being white.

      Admin made it perfectly clear that the posting was a mistake. Honest, they would consider any candidate, regardless of skin color, so they say (wink, wink). Now, I've mentioned before that these sorts of racist policies have been around in higher education for decades, and are second only to sexist policies.

      But, sure, if you want to believe I'm wrong, and admin somehow accidentally typed up and posted such a want ad, well, you can believe what you want to believe. 

     Thing is, I knew this type of ad would get posted again; these people live in such a bubble they don't have a clue what they do is wrong. Racist/sexist hiring policies have been so standardized that they really are starting to forget that it's supposed to be done with a wink and a nod...and not in writing.

     These policies are not restricted to the US, as even Canada, apparently, also believes the ethnicity of the applicant is important for scholarly positions. Consider this from a want ad for a vice provost (a position that could pay a few hundred thousand a year):

In keeping with the principles of employment equity and with an aim to address underrepresentation at Dalhousie, only applications from candidates who self-identify as racially visible and/or as Aboriginal peoples will be considered at this time.  

      Now, I don't know what, exactly, "racially visible" means but it's reasonable to suspect this is another (wink, wink) situation put into writing. Isn't it fascinating that "principles of employment equity" are being used to justify this inequitable hiring? 

     I grant that there can be some positions where skin color/gender/ethnicity might be relevant (for example, I have no problem with Hooters only hiring female waitresses that can wear the uniform), but nothing in the extensive job description makes skin color relevant. Besides, this position is so far up in the hierarchy that she would never actually deal with a student (this position, if I worked at this university, would be my boss' boss' boss' boss' boss...perhaps only 3 more layers of bureaucracy until the Poo Bah is reached!)'s nuts.

     Yes, I used the pronoun "she" in the previous paragraph, even though it's clear the job description doesn't specify female.

Nominations and/or applications should be submitted, in confidence, to Jane Griffith or Dania Zargaran...

     Perhaps it's just a paranoid delusion on my part, so I won't go there but...we really, really, need to start asking hard questions about what's going on in our institutions of higher education, because it's very clear that they're being taken over by racists.

      (I know I'm posting a bit early here, but I wanted to get this up before they take down that racist job advertisement.)

Thursday, February 15, 2018

Math Meritocracy Is “Tool of Whiteness”?

By Professor Doom

     Once again we have a professor saying something ridiculous and getting press coverage, but once again the real detail is being missed:

     Now, I’m citing Fox News above, a widely reviled news source. As per Wikileaks, it is one of the very few large audience news outlets that shouldn’t be viewed as completely fraudulent. I concede they’re not very good but they do look good on the curve, at least. They manage to screw up the news here right away:

“A math professor at Brooklyn College wrote…”

     A math professor? Oh really? The professor being referenced here is Laurie Rubel. Let’s take a look at what she’s teaching:

Before coming to teach in Brooklyn College's mathematics education program…

      She’s a teacher of math education. Her Ph.D. is also in Math Education. She publishes in Math Education. It really, really, drives me nuts that we have these people, these Educationists, posing as scholars in different fields. I’ve written extensively of the fraud, and it simply drives me nuts that time and again these people continue to represent themselves as something they are, most definitely, not. It’s infuriating.

     Ok, just because she’s been misrepresented here, it may not be her fault (it’s Fox News, after all), and even though her Ph.D. isn’t in mathematics, I’m still quite willing to hear what she has to say about mathematics. Of course, she’s not talking about mathematics, she’s talking about identity politics.

Rubel reportedly recommended that math teachers use more social justice issues during lessons. Rubel, however, warned that teaching “social justice” can also be a tool of whiteness if teachers are ignorant to the experiences of their minority students...

     I should point out that this professor has won some pretty hefty awards for believing in these things. I tend to disagree with such beliefs, of course, and I want to point out a big difference between disagreement here as opposed to disagreement in an academic field. It’s always puzzling when I hear Educationists make these kinds of statements to explain why “minorities” don’t do well in math class, as though Whiteness is the problem. China has plenty of people who are not white, and yet do fine in mathematics, after all.

     Anyway, the difference between academics and Education is I can actually formulate an argument explaining why the professor is wrong, whereas the Educationist simply just says stuff without justification. Let’s take an example:

Rubel wrote that math teachers who claim to be color-blind are not doing the minority students any favors.

      Please understand the teacher here is really addressing fairly basic mathematics, not advanced, esoteric topics she neither teaches nor researches in.

      I’m pretty color blind about “2 + 2 = 4” and other basic mathematical ideas because none of the mathematics makes an assumption about the color of the skin of the person making the calculation. The burden is on her to show me in the definitions where such assumptions exist, because I know no skin-color-related definitions are in mathematics.

      As far as “doing the minority students any favors” goes, I maintain that mathematics is not under any obligation to do any students, minority or otherwise, any favors under any circumstances. I again put the burden on her to show where mathematics makes any such claim.

     Now, I grant a Fox News article isn’t going to show her full arguments, just her (odd) conclusions but as luck would have it, her whole research paper is online.

     This research is published in the Journal of Urban Mathematics. I’m still scratching my head over the title of this journal; I know I don’t know all mathematics, but can’t hazard a guess what “urban” mathematics could be. To the best of my understanding, mathematics is the same whether you’re in a rural or urban or cosmopolitan setting…even in outer space, mathematics doesn’t change.

      One of my many issues with Education as a field is how they’ve isolated themselves from academia. Their students don’t take math courses taught by mathematicians, instead Education students take Math for Education courses, taught by Education professors. Similarly, they take Art for Education majors, Chemistry for Education majors, and so on. It’s bizarre that what are general academic topics for the rest of humanity are “specialized” for Educationists. Perhaps this weird education is why these people never consider China in their thinking, since they’re unaware it even exists?

      Now, journals absolutely tend to be specialized, but I can’t help but suspect this isn’t so much a research journal as an Identity Politics journal, where any article that simply supports the narrative (such as the famous Penises Cause Global Warming research) gets publication.

     With her paper freely available, I can see with my own eyes what her arguments are regarding her claims. It’s a 40 page paper, so it’s good that it starts with a summary:

In this article, the author synthesizes four equity-directed instructional practices: standards-based mathematics instruction, complex instruction, culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP), and teaching mathematics for social justice (TMfSJ).

      Oh no, “teaching mathematics for social justice”? If there was even remote doubt that we’re dealing with a Social Justice Warrior here, it’s gone in the first sentence.

I foreground “race” in this literature review because of the significance of whiteness in the United States in reproducing subordination and widening society’s opportunity gaps in and through mathematics education…

     While the professor does cite her sources for the above, I’m still puzzled at why the research always forgets about Asians; many Asian groups have come to this country and done quite well. Again, this mountain of empirical evidence destroys the “it’s white people’s fault” narrative, and so is simply ignored. (But if anyone knows an argument or research explaining it, feel free to comment below.)

More generally, whiteness tacitly positions White people, their experiences, and their behaviors as superior…

     There are many statements like the above, and while it is cited, it’s not at all clear what any of this has to do with mathematics, or student success. In any event, there is extensive discussion and review of literature before getting to the research, which is statistics based. I note her sample size is 12 (or “N = 12,” as they say in statistics).

      Hey, anyone else remember that “horrible” Wakefield study relating vaccines and autism? It was considered complete garbage because of the small sample size. Guess what it was? That’s right, 12. Such a small sample doesn’t actually destroy a study, it just means it should be viewed as preliminary. But I digress.

     In any event, the vast results of the statistics here are based on qualitative interpretations of what’s going on in the classroom. There are, of course, no controls, either.  As such, there’s no way to put any stock in any of the results. You can pretty much get any result you want from this kind of study, which is little more than a collection of case studies; I’m more than a little puzzled at the long preamble at the beginning of this research. I honestly thought something was going to be shown here, but…no dice.

Whiteness as blinding. Mary and Molly avoided addressing issues of power and social justice in the content of their mathematics lessons, even though…

     Even in the case studies, there’s a theme here that is unpleasant. Instead of commending teachers for sticking to mathematics in their mathematics classes, there’s chastisement for not spending time on social justice. What’s up with that?

      Getting back to the point: we as a nation are pouring huge sums of money into this “research,” and calling it “mathematical research.” We really need to stop doing that, and seeing as the main source of that money is the student loan scam, shutting that down would be a fine place to start.




Monday, February 12, 2018

Lesbian Provost Fired For Corruption

By Professor Doom

     In earlier essays I mentioned how once a Social Justice Warrior gets control of hiring, it’s a lockdown: all further hires are SJWs, or Progressives, or Leftists, or whatever you want to call them.

    Now, as evidence for my claim I could simply point to the strong Leftist leanings of the admin/faculty/staff on our campuses: seeing as about half the country (as per the last election) doesn’t subscribe to this ideology, the best explanation for 90% or more of our campus professionals being adherents is a chokehold on hiring.

      But a specific example is really worthwhile.

Rumors have been going around ever since her appointment to the Provost office of her playing favorites when it came to hiring or promotion of employees under her department. A complete investigation needs to be done and she and her wife need to be placed on leave without pay until such time as it is complete.

     The article I’m quoting from is a news article about a Provost caught in a corruption scandal, and as per the reference to “she and her wife” above, we’re talking about a married lesbian couple. The news piece does the best it can to tiptoe what a mess she was caught in, and I assure the gentle reader what was going on here was far more than what’s presented as news.

Texas A&M’s outgoing Provost and Executive Vice President Karan Watson has been removed from her position after an internal audit found significant conflict of interest issues tied to business dealings her spouse had with the university,

     Once again I see we have a title well past twice as long as the holder’s name, and I remind the gentle reader of my easy guideline for restoring sanity to our campuses: simply eliminate all positions whose titles are more than twice as long as the holder’s name.

      Once you get high up in the admin, you start to have control over the vast loot from the student loan scam. Now, there are rules about spending this loot, and one of those rules is “Thou Shalt Not Do Business With Family.” I’ve seen plenty of institutions violate this rule, which naturally includes one’s spouse. Thing is, as this was a lesbian marriage, the safeguards against violating the rules in this manner weren’t really in place, which is why it took years before the conflict of interest was unearthed.

Over the last seven years since Karan Watson took over as provost, Nancy Watson — owner of a conflict resolution company in Bryan-College Station — was paid $438,733 by the university for training services…. 

     At least, that’s one explanation for why it took years, although it seems whenever I cover a scandal, it’s something that had been going on for quite some time. That said, 7 years is a long time to get away with this, even as I acknowledge by the standards of our Poo Bahs, looting not even half a million bucks is hardly noticeable.

     A “conflict resolution company”? How is it that this was not obvious fraud on the face of it. I’m sure this campus has many Psychology professionals in their Psychology department, could they have not helped? This is a campus, not the Middle East, how could you possibly justify spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on conflict resolution training?

…a whistleblower’s complaint made in May, marking the third grievance accusing the Watsons of similar possible ethics violations connected to Nancy Watson’s business…

     Another thing that’s striking about scandals, despite it seeming to occur every time, is how everyone knew about it. This was the third complaint regarding an obvious conflict of interest. When I was at a fake community college, we all knew of the frauds going on, though only a handful of us complained...not that anything was ever done, of course.

      Much like the horrific sex scandal at Penn State, the clear academic fraud at UNC, and, well, every other time I examine a scandal, it’s very clear that people knew something quite wrong was going on. It’s well documented that people made formal complaints regarding the obviously foul activity…and nothing happens. Only after repeated complaints about obvious issues does anything finally get done, and it takes years.

     I grant that our higher education system is very slow to change, slow to respond, and to some extent it’s designed to be that way and I’m fine with it. But far too often are we finding frauds or “whatnot” going on for nearly a decade before something is finally done about it.

For those who are wondering why it took so long (after 2 other complaints and many years) to come to this point, I can tell you that Watson was the consummate bully. You did not cross her. There are bullies everywhere but what do you do when the #2 person at the university is a bully. Just put up with it. Watson didn't have to ask folks to use her spouse’s services - they were afraid not to.

      I’m quoting from the comments section here, because these people are often quite nasty. I certainly have known fear when dealing with admin, as they wield too much undeserved power, which they commonly use to pour money on themselves and their cronies, leading to more power.

Not just a bully. A bullet-proof bully. Nobody dared expose her for fear of being called an intolerant homophobe or worse. She knew what she was doing and did not care if it was a clear conflict. She dared anyone to stop her. Only when she had decided to retire did anyone say something. Now, she feigns surprise and concern for her reputation. Give us a break. This scandal must be fully aired and exposed.

     Another comment worth consideration. Part of the SJW takeover of our campuses is that whenever anyone complained about the actions of an SJW admin, that person was labeled RACIST and ostracized. In this case, the label was doubtless more along the lines of HOMOPHOBE…it’s a tough, tough, battle to fight, and one of many reasons why we need to escort identity politics off campus (and over a cliff, truth be told).

      Even in light of this scandal, the provost is playing the gay card (how’d that work for Spacey?), and perhaps she’s right. Bottom line though, every aspect of this story rings true to me, from the repeated complaints, the clear conflicts of interest, the bullying, and everything else. It’s all stuff along the lines of what I’ve seen with my own eyes, elsewhere.

      Would be worth looking at several departments where faculty spouses report to department heads.

     The provost maintains she and her wife did nothing wrong, and I’m certain from her point of view, it’s true. It might even be true, legally. And, absolutely, I’m sure there are husband/wife conflicts of interest to be found in quantity on our campuses…but the point I wanted to make here is that it’s not tough to find evidence of my claims regarding how these people operate.

      A word to the wise, is all.

Friday, February 9, 2018

Pizzagate Rabbithole: Who Feeds The Pigs?

By Professor Doom

     A recent “suicide” leads me to write again of things besides higher education, and seeing as it’s Friday, let’s have a little thought experiment:

     This is the second Glee actor to commit suicide. This particular guy was under investigation for pedophilia, and was mere days away from providing a list of names regarding how he got his pictures and stuff. Man, what a lucky break for those other pedophiles. In following these types of stories, I see these kinds of lucky breaks where people commit suicide right before testifying against the bad guys happen often.

It had earlier been revealed that the man's corpse had been found in a riverbed.

     Wait…what? Apparently, after hanging himself, he decided to take a walk, eventually coming to a riverbed where, realizing he was dead, he stopped. And, yet, this is a suicide. I’m not a doctor, but my understanding of how death works is you generally don’t go for walks after you die. But since it’s ruled a suicide, there won’t be much of a murder investigation.

      The site I’m quoting from doesn’t allow comments, so I can’t get a feel for how other readers are buying this story, but I do find myself wondering just how many times the public will get the “we’re calling this a suicide and there’s nothing you can do it about because we’re the law…IN YOUR FACE!” line before a large segment of the public outright riots at the insult to their collective intelligence.

     I have a different sausage to fry today, if you’ll forgive the mangled metaphor.

He was arrested in December 2015 and was found to have downloaded more than 50,000 images and videos of child abuse to his computer and another 4,000 on his flash drive.

    The gentle reader should understand that this “suicide right before turning state’s evidence” is very common, so common that it’s very difficult to understand why these important witnesses to horrific crimes are not provided some measure of protection…almost as though those who should be providing that protection are the same as those who keep deciding these are suicides are the same as those who are involved in the crimes, somehow.

     Ok, that’s a little conspiratorial and it’s considered bad form to do much beyond worship law enforcement, so let’s just call the consistently strange suicides and consistent lack of prudent protection coincidental.

     So, enough theorizing, let’s consider a quantitative detail:

…50,000 images…

     The above is the part that I want to address. In many pedo cases, the suspect is found to have tens of thousands of pedophilic pictures and videos on his computer.

     Tens of thousands. Even the most famous porn stars with long careers only have hundreds of videos, and one would suspect the career of a child in this situation to be very brief.

     This suicide had a typical stash compared to other, similar arrests, and it’s a safe bet that he didn’t have a complete collection of every single pedo pic/video in existence.

    Maybe it’s just a wild conspiracy theory about the suicides, but you don’t produce tens of thousands of videos from some guy with a Polaroid camera molesting his kid in a garage. You don’t distribute tens of thousands of videos by word of mouth, selling one copy at a time in the alley behind the adult bookstore.

     It’s very, very clear that there must be an infrastructure, a large and professional industry, manufacturing and distributing these. Now, in order for tens of thousands of these things to be manufactured and distributed, you must get a large supply of child victims. Where are they getting the kids?

According to the FBI, in 2016 there were 465,676 NCIC entries for missing children. Similarly, in 2015, the total number of missing children entries into NCIC was 460,699.

     Now, only a fool takes government numbers at face value. The above numbers are almost certainly inflated—a kid runs away twice in the same year, and you have two reports, for example. Many of the above are likely “kidnapped” by family members in court disputes…there are many reasons for a missing person report that don’t have anything to do with the sex industry. Let’s get a better feel for what’s going on:

Of the nearly 25,000 runaways reported to NCMEC in 2017, one in seven were likely victims of child sex trafficking. Of those, 88 percent were in the care of social services when they went missing.

--hmm, 88% of child trafficking sex victims are provided by the same government that determines the suicides of people about to turn state’s evidence. A coincidence, I’m sure.

     So here was have a “small” sample of about 25,000 runaways, and over 3,000 of them were likely involved in sex trafficking, and that’s just in one year. So, absolutely we have enough kids right here in this country.

      These pics and videos were on the computer so almost certainly relatively recent. That said, for there to be tens of thousands of such videos, it’s safe to assume it’s been going on for years.

    I think it likely many of these sorts of pics and videos were created in the last 5 years, or at least have been around for 5 years, and with thousands of kids involved, we should have loads of witnesses, victims of this sick sex industry, who have aged into adulthood, or at least too old to be of much value to the pedo-industry.

     But we don’t have nearly so many survivors. Oh, there are a few people saying they were victimized by a system when they were children…but I could find only a handful when poking around online. There should be thousands. I don’t reckon they all commit suicide, but I’ve been to enough rodeos to guess the physical status of these victims who are telling no tales.

     Where might the bodies go? We’re talking thousands of victims here, I just don’t accept someone’s digging many graves or burning them all. Simply dumping them randomly in the countryside or ocean just wouldn’t work, as those bodies would turn up eventually (we already regularly find bodies in the woods, and body parts washing ashore)…and we’re talking thousands here, with no reports of a bunch of kid’s bodies found in the woods or at low tide.

     Let’s summarize:

First, it’s absolute fact that pedos are being caught with large quantities of pedophilic material, so large that there must be industrial level production of that material.

Second, we’re missing so many kids that it’s quite reasonable, and supported by data, to assume that thousands of them are involved in the industrial level production of that material.

Third, this has been going on long enough, with enough kids involved, that we should have hundreds, more likely thousands, of victims, if they were alive, coming forward to say they were victimized.

Fourth, we don’t even have dozens of victims coming forward.

      We definitely have an industry, we definitely have thousands of victims. The most straightforward explanation for the lack of living witness is they aren’t living any more so, again, where might the bodies be?

     The above report made the rounds a few years ago, and the evidence was passed off as “skin flakes.” Yeah, maybe. If this explanation held true, then we’d have similar studies for chicken and beef.

    We don’t. And the bodies are disappearing somehow.

     Now, hot dogs and sausages are ground up meat, typically pig meat, so it’s possible that the meat packing plants are part of a big conspiracy here—the workers would absolutely notice a shipment of dead kids coming in to be made into sausages. Besides, the percentages found were pretty low…I don’t buy this.

     But the bodies are disappearing somehow. How else might human DNA be getting into our sausages and hot dogs? Cows and chickens have no real chance of eating human beings, but pigs might…maybe it’s just coincidence that we’re only finding human DNA in pig meat products.

      Can pigs really eat humans?

Hungry hogs eat Oregon farmer in grisly scene

     Most people think of pigs as cute little pink things waddling around, but they can easily grow quite large. They’re quite capable of eating vulnerable humans, and there are a number of criminal examples of bodies being fed to pigs.

-theoretically, I hope. From the above estimate, you’d only need around 50 pigs to get rid of a 1,000 bodies a year.

     Now, obviously this is all speculation on my part, and, sure, Pizzagate investigators have made similar guesses:

What do Alefantis, Pig Farms and Podesta all have in common?

     Now, absolutely, it’s possible that mainstream media is right about Pizzagate just being a huge hoax—considering how many things they’ve been dead wrong about, I concede they’ve got to be right about something, at some point.

      But I again want to look at the big picture. There must be a huge industry, there must be thousands of victims, these victims are disappearing. It’s clearly possible to check to see if a pig has been eating humans, and it’s clearly possible that one way to get rid of a human corpse is to feed it to pigs. It seems prudent to check the pigs.

      We have hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on the Trump-Russia collusion investigation. Mainstream media assures me repeatedly this collusion is not a hoax, despite the lack of evidence or even coherent arguments explaining why this collusion must exist.

      On the other hand, we have evidence and a reasonable argument to lead us to believe that a huge industry exists which kills off large numbers of children…why is there no money to investigate the pig farms and see if anything can be found?

      Something worries me even more. I’m not particularly bright, I managed to connect the dots of “40,000 pics/videos,” “thousands of victims,” and “insufficient living witnesses” to arrive at “where are the bodies?”…and yet we have police detectives and Federal investigators by the tens of thousands across this country.

      Why have none of them been able to see that there’s something wrong on a large scale here? Are they the same ones that keep telling us a man can hang himself and then go for a walk?