Cattle Mutilation 6
Chapter 2, Part Three
Cattle Mutilation - The Unthinkable Truth
© 1976 by Fredrick W. Smith, Freedland Publishers
Chapter 2, Part Three
Blueprint for Confusion
"HELICOPTER MENACES GIRLS," 7:10 PM,
July 24, 1975, Ranchland Farm News, Simla, Elbert County, Colorado.
Photograph © 1975 by John Hines, Editor and Publisher.
"At 6 PM, the chopper had hovered over three teenaged girls and followed them as they ran. When it returned, and the above picture was taken, it was observed through binoculars and identified as the same machine: 'Very dark green, without a mark on it.' Then it came back at 11 PM when, 'It hovered over the barn and had a brilliant light shining underneath.'
- John Hines, Ranchland Farm News, Simla, Colorado, July 1975
T he helicopter theory has some serious drawbacks. A Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI) spokesman has observed that the helicopters to do what's required would cost between a quarter and a half million dollars, cost $90/hour for fuel alone, and have only a 150 mile working range. That's not even to mention the upkeep, and the NOISE!! If whoever's doing this did not care to get an almost unlimited supply of all those organs for little or nothing at any one of a thousand packing plants, they could easily afford to keep large herds of their own for a fraction of the cost of their helicopters.
Also, from many points of view, those helicopter flights would be extremely dangerous. by this time, one would have crashed. And the operations are known to cover many hundreds of miles at the same time. Where could all those vehicles be kept hidden? Could a noisy chopper swoop down time after time unerringly on cattle without spooking them? Could it do that even once? Helicopter noise comes primarily from the rotor rather than from the engine or exhaust. The silent ones haven't been invented yet. They aren't even theoretically possible.
Still, because of the widely reported fact that unexplainable helicopter activity seems to accompany cattle mutilations not only in Colorado, but also in other states where the phenomenon occurs, a connection can't be summarily dismissed as impossible. Extremely powerful ground lights moving from one point of the sky to another aren't necessarily helicopters.
The same phenomenon has long been associated with UFOs. In Montana, when mutilations were also occurring, those lights were shutting down automobile ignition systems, something helicopters don't do. (The Billings Gazette, Billings, Montana, October 1975.)
And if they are as silent as many witnesses have reported them to be, that could be extremely intriguing. Maybe helicopters, especially silent ones, could be linked to mutilations, but in a more or less diversionary sort of way. If those choppers were being supported from above instead of merely by their rotors, then the rotors could freewheel and make almost no noise. It would look like a normal helicopter, but not fly like one. Its home base could be a hangar hundreds of miles up in the sky. Range could be unlimited because there would be no need of refueling, landing, or getting caught. That's not nearly as far out as it might seem at first glance. One important aspect of cattle mutilation is appearance, the "calling card" part, and pseudo helicopters would fit into that very neatly.
Where would the (animal mutilators) get the choppers? What most people have not grasped yet is that cattle mutilation is only one very tiny aspect of an immense operation, the biggest, most complex and important operation this world has ever seen. Where would they get the choppers? They are parked in long lines at Ft. Carson, for one very handy place. The mutilators would simply help themselves to one, or to several, or to all of them whenever they wanted to do that. They'd just lift them up into the air where they'd disappear into the blue.
Fantastic? Maybe not. Strange things are happening in the world today. How do you know that hasn't happened? If the truth were known, it probably has. For example, a five ton wrecking ball belonging to the Dowling Construction Company in Indianapolis was left hanging 200 feet in the air one night and the next morning, it had mysteriously disappeared. Five tons of solid steel hanging high in the air in the city of Indianapolis that no one has ever accounted for or even known who would have wanted it. In Scranton, Pennsylvania, a huge disabled bulldozer vanished one night without leaving a track. (Saga Magazine, New York City, November 1975, "The Space Vandals" by John A. Keel.)
Hundreds of thousands of cars are stolen every year and airplanes are even easier to take. A major part of the lost vehicles is never accounted for. True, the overwhelming majority of them end up in somebody's very mundane garage or hangar. But are we sure they all do? The same with cattle. A thousand head are slaughtered surreptitiously and end up in someone's locker for every one that's mutilated. Still, the fact is that a few ARE being mutilated for show purposes and for a few economically worthless organs rather than rustled for resale or for the meat.
Whoever follows the news has heard of whole houses being stolen. The owners get home and there's only a vacant lot waiting for them. How could anyone expect to get away with a house? Yet, it's not uncommon. Stone houses and barns have been taken, according to John Keel's article.
How could things like that be taken and not easily traced? It seems incredible, but it happens. Keep things like that in mind because they'll be happening more and more often. An article some years ago in Readers' Digest told of an orange helicopter removing weathervanes from houses and barns in New England. Helicopters are expensive to buy and to operate. How could that illegal, dangerous and enraging activity be made to pay off? Have the cases ever been solved? Were the culprits brought to justice?
Another common phenomenon is the toppling of gravestones, whole lines of them. Kids? Vandals? Kids have been around a long time, so modern gravestones are rebarred into concrete footers. A truck or a bulldozer might topple them, but hardly kids. Yet, hundreds of graveyards have been vandalized like that. Is this another form of calling card? Authorities usually try to hush things like that up. As with cattle mutilations, the theory is that if the calling cards are kept from the public, then our visitors will go away. That may turn out like the plagues that were visited on Egypt. We can be sure Pharaoh and his advisors did everything in their power to keep the facts from their people. They finally received calling cards that could not possibly be overlooked or hidden. (The Bible, Exodus, Chapters 5-14) The Lord had something bigger than Egypt in mind then, and something far bigger even than that for the whole world now.
In the news now, as the reader might have heard, is the removal of huge trees from homes and from parks. Lumber, of course, is valuable these days. But is it worth that much? How can ordinary folks expect to get away with huge trees, often from the middle of town? Watch to see if those tree snatchers are brought to justice. Strange things like that, and like cattle mutilation, are happening all the time now. But unless they are fitted into a pattern, they can't be comprehended and slip quickly out of mind. For the most part, police are ashamed to even record such things, let alone think seriously about them. If someone looked closely at weathervane snatching, he'd probably discover it's as mystifying as cattle mutilation. but as long as we absolutely refuse to look at a thing, it's impossible to really see it - unless we come home some evening and find a mysterious vacant place where our house used to be.
Accepting the far out explanation that our former home is now parked inside a huge aerial ship 500 miles up in the sky, what possible reason could there be for that? The same basic reasons there are cattle mutilations. those people, and there are many of them, are coming from very far away. They are extremely interested in examining and analyzing every minute detail of our homes. They can learn a great deal from that very easily. And there's the idea of their calling card, making us aware that they can do things like that. Shaking us out of our stupidity. Trying to wake people up, if possible.
One explanation that has been forwarded, and that will be ultimately accepted if the CBI authorities in other states can have their way, is that the cattle mutilation phenomenon can be attributed almost entirely to predators. That's by far the most convenient theory for whoever is willing to turn his back on the facts and refuse to see what should be obvious. Predators are like the poor that we have with us always. People who tend livestock have lived with predators from time immemorial. It should be apparent to city folks that those who have seen coyotes, foxes, skunks, badgers, hawks, buzzards, crows and magpies all their life are at least equally familiar with what various predators can do. Cattlemen, by the way, tend to regard coyotes as more beneficial than detrimental.
Experienced stockmen have seen many animals die. City folks may spend large sums of money and go to ridiculous lengths to keep death out of sight and out of mind. But to ranchers and farmers, even as children, seeing things die is a commonplace experience. To help put these facts in perspective for city readers we might consider another cattle story in the Canon City Daily Record. It was not in any way related to cattle mutilation, and no rancher or farmer could ever get the two very different phenomena mixed up in his mind.
Natural Predators Won't Eat Mutilated Animals
The headline of the story is: "AREA RANCHERS LOSE SEVERAL HUNDRED CATTLE TO OAK POISON." Accompanying the story is a picture of several dozen cattle lying dead in a little meadow. This happened, we are told, because of the unseasonably cold wet weather. Snow covered the grass while the oak brush was retarded by cold weather and became unusually toxic. Many ranchers fed extra hay, but still the losses were heavy. One rancher lost 70 head and expected to lose over 100. Another lost 30 and expected at least 10 more deaths. So, dead animals aren't an oddity. Those who have been in business a long time or in a big way have seen hundreds of carcasses and they inevitably attract predators.
It would be redundant to present more evidence here that what stockmen are talking about in cattle mutilations is a very different phenomenon than the common feeding of various kinds of birds and animals on carcasses. That might sell in the city, but it won't among those who can see the situation with their own eyes and experience it in their pocketbooks. In fact, the predator theory of cattle mutilation does not even rise to the level of normality because it has been observed that in many cases, the birds and animals that have always fed on other carcasses refuse to touch mutilated ones.
That's how it was with Jim and Roma Lee Russell's heifer. She was left where she was found, an obvious place beyond the barns and corrals and in sight of the house. But no predators, not even magpies, were ever attracted to the carcass and finally insects devoured her, a most unusual circumstance they had never heard of before. Other references to this predator avoidance have already been quoted in examples such as bears in Idaho and even maggots in Gunnison County. Do bears, coyotes, skunks, magpies and even maggots avoid carcasses just because they've been touched by humans? That's ridiculous.
"Kenny Blake frowned. 'It was a young heifer missing both ears, the left eye, its sex organs and its rectum' Blake figured it had been dead maybe three days. But he thought it was odd how maggots ate right up to the areas that had been mutilated and then stopped. He'd never seen anything like that before." (The Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, California, September 11, 1975.)
What might be much less ridiculous is that mutilated carcasses, and especially the cut areas, are sometimes sprayed or coated with something to repel predators. Why would that be done? To make sure the mutilations are recognized for what they actually are. The repellent would be another form of calling card. Have any labs checked for that? We doubt it, and also doubt that labs would know what they had after they had found it. Can we conclude from this that predators are inherently smarter than scientists?
The story now is that all but a tiny fraction of the so-called mutilations are in fact only the normal damage caused by common predators. Here is the latest and perhaps final bit of CBI wit and wisdom obediently delivered nationwide to the gullible public by the big time news services: "DENVER (AP) - An extensive investigation by the Colorado Bureau of Investigations indicates that humans were responsible for only a few cattle mutilations in the state. A CBI report indicates that of the 203 suspected cases of cattle mutilations, only eleven could definitely be attributed to humans. The rest were caused by predators." (The Grand Junction Sentinel, Grand Junction, Colorado, December 14, 1975.)
Now there is a beautiful leap of logic for you by the man who says he "only deals with the facts." Ah! Very true!! But HOW does he deal with them? There have been lots of those dealers in high government positions lately. A few did time in the pen for dealing that way with facts before grand juries. Yet, this is what goes out over the wires of the news services and settles like a pall of ignorance over the whole land, showing, among other things, how naive, gullible, self-serving and downright dumb big time reporters can be.
Let's analyze that Associated Press news release a little. "203 suspected cases," means 203 cases reported to the CBI. Not all sheriffs reported their cases to them, and many more ranchers and farmers did not report mutilations even to their own sheriffs. Some mutilations were probably never found or recognized as mutilations if they were found. It's a big country out there. So "the suspected cases" must be twice or maybe three times the number stated.
"Eleven could definitely be attributed to humans. The rest were caused by predators." But how does that conclusion follow from those premises when it isn't even related to them. Couldn't they see that? We can be sure they could. They just wanted to flim flam the public, who they must think is too dumb to see through their shell games.
Let's see what this AP story says the CBI bases its remarkable conclusion on. It continues,
"He (Carl Whiteside, Director, CBI) said veterinarians at Colorado State University conducted animal autopsies on 19 animals and discovered 9 had been mutilated by humans." (The Grand Junction Sentinel, Grand Junction, Colorado, December 14, 1975.)
In other words, about half of their tiny sample had been unmistakably mutilated by humans. What about the hundreds of cases they did not examine and therefore, could not possibly have evaluated? Just because the CBI has not examined a thing does that mean it had not existed? One Elbert County woman thought "predators" might someday attack the CBI.
Furthermore, "He (Whiteside) said of the many cases reported in five other states, only one was laid to a human. And that case, in Wyoming, was qualified with the word 'possibly,' Whiteside said.
Hasn't he ever heard about Watergate? A lot of politicians have not, but the American people, fortunately, have.
Let's consider other aspects of that "predator" theory, since there is more to it than meets the eye. We can begin with what is obvious and then work our way gradually to the subtle. First, its timing is all wrong. It's not in midsummer, but in midwinter that predators really get voracious. the mutilations in Colorado happened at exactly the wrong season for it to have been unusual predator activity.
Second, how did the predators get to the carcasses and do all that mischief without leaving any tracks, not in soft sand, or in dust, or in mud, or in snow?
Third, why did the mutilators, in almost every case, make off with large patches of hide? It's true that all predators will eat hide. But they have to be hard up to do it. Yet, here they've very carefully removed the hide without ever touching the choice meat that the mutilation operation exposes. Very unusual predators.
Fourth, why don't the mutilators ever eat any of the choice meat? Whenever meat has been taken from a carcass it is not considered to have been a mutilation.
fifth, why do they almost invariably take ears? It's true that predators sometimes chew the ears off newborn stock. But old ears are not the least succulent, and they have wax in them which nature has designed to repel insects. Predators do not relish that wax either. Nor is tongue a choice item on the predator menu. They are rough, touch, harden quickly and are generally left till last. Steaks, when available, are always preferred and in these cases, steak is always available but is never taken."