Greg Valdez

[Randall]

I'm not sure but I think he said that at least some of the photos in which these "invisible planes" turned up were from the 80s and "if they had this technology back then you can imagine what they have now" or something like that.

And later, when asked about triangular craft, I think he said that that was the shape they were. Fits the Belgian triangles which turned up at the beginning of the 90s and have always been speculated to be American prototypes of stealth craft. But the alleged "zooming off", the soundlessness and "invisibility"... while I could imagine that some advanced ET might pull it off or maybe time travellers, I find it actually harder to believe that we should have had that technology back then.

All good points. Which suggests that the enhanced photo was faked as part of some disinformation or cover-up ... but of what? The real thing? That would take us back to actual aliens ... crazy as that sounds.

 

[nameless]

aarghh. listen to the `radio mysterioso' interview as it answers alot of the questions, plus re-read project beta, that way you wont be chasing your tail like a dog in a corn field.

 

[Randall]

aarghh. listen to the `radio mysterioso' interview as it answers alot of the questions, plus re-read project beta, that way you wont be chasing your tail like a dog in a corn field.

Sounds like you already have the answers, so maybe just help us clear it up without putting us through another couple of hours of audio. There is really only one main issue we're focusing on, these mysterious hi-tech aircraft, allegedly military, that are connected with the alleged enhanced photo provided by Los Alamos labs, and why this doesn't make sense, specifically:

1. If the military was responsible and wanted to keep it all under wraps, why would they permit one of their labs to perform an enhancement of a photo that would provide evidence against them?
2. Where is the evidence that the type of active camouflage technology that has been proposed was actually available during the periods in question?
3. Where is the evidence that the type of aircraft that could pull off UFO like maneuvers was available to the military ( or anyone else for that matter )?

So far, All we've heard is "buy the book" and claims of "scientific evidence", yet the evidence we've heard for cloaking technology isn't inline with historical scientific development, and there is no scientifically verifiable evidence of any manmade aircraft that can pull off UFO like maneuvers. There are also other problems with Valdez' answers ( listening to the Radio Mysterioso interview now ). I think I've heard enough. Not to dispute that something strange has been going on, but I still don't buy into the theory that it's all some covert domestic military operation.

It sounds to me like people saw UFOs and reported UFOs but he refuses to believe UFOs had anything to do with it. "Just take the UFO part out" he says, and we're left with a perfectly normal military Earth based explanation. Why arbitrarily take out the information that suggests UFOs? How do we know the military weren't there to investigate the UFOs, and that they had nothing to do with harming animals? It's like he's either dismissing or using or making up whatever evidence is needed to suit his theory, and the more one listens to it the less credible it sounds. That's not to suggest that aliens are necessarily a more credible answer, but at least it seems to fit with the observations.

 

[Jeff Crowell]

All I can say is that The Paracast is almost...almost responsible for me wrecking my car. When Mr. Valdez made the comment about the NM state police getting called on a little dwarf man beating up his wife...I lost it. Very funny, and perhaps a reason why I shouldn't listen to the show while driving.

I found it refreshing he shied away from the UFO explanation, though I disagree that a non-UFO explanation is 'boring.' The idea that these objects being seen are man-made and controlled is very exciting to me. As far as the cattle mutilations, has anybody asked the question; if the government is doing this to search for radiation levels, have they ever found anything 'bad' enough to justify a recall, or are we all eating irradiated beef?

 

[Randall]

All I can say is that The Paracast is almost...almost responsible for me wrecking my car. When Mr. Valdez made the comment about the NM state police getting called on a little dwarf man beating up his wife...I lost it. Very funny, and perhaps a reason why I shouldn't listen to the show while driving.

Perhaps a disclaimer at the beginning of the show warning people not to listen to the show while operating a motor vehicle would be a wise precaution .

I found it refreshing he shied away from the UFO explanation, though I disagree that a non-UFO explanation is 'boring.' The idea that these objects being seen are man-made and controlled is very exciting to me. As far as the cattle mutilations, has anybody asked the question; if the government is doing this to search for radiation levels, have they ever found anything 'bad' enough to justify a recall, or are we all eating irradiated beef?

If you strip away all the high strangeness then the only possible explanation we're left with is human activity. But should we arbitrarily strip away or assign human values to the high strangeness aspects of the case just to suit our preferred theories? If you find the human involvement angle interesting, then why couldn't it be an additional factor rather than the only factor? If we accept that UFOs are a part of this mystery ( which they seem to be ) then an even more fascinating story emerges.

 

[flipper]

Great show, great guest, great questions from all, including form members and excellent comments from form members of the form. Five stars to all.

 

[flipper]

great interview but i feel it only scratched the surface. I recommend people listen to the Gregg Bishop Radio Mysterioso interview to get some more info from Greg Valdez.

The evidence provided by Greg and his father go some way to explaining the cattle mutilation mystery as being as clandestine as most people think it is. It makes total sense. While people are chasing aliens and UFOs and getting nowhere, the government/corporations are running wild over our human rights, stealing, breaking laws and making complete fools of us. Please see the alien smoke screen for what it is when it comes to any talk about the military, bases, crashes, military CE3s etc.. Its time people stop getting side tracked by the dog and pony show and he conjurers distractions and start getting behind some law suits.

Thank you I plan to follow your suggestion (Gregg Bishop Radio Mysterioso interview)

 

[Afishy1]

The Guy seemed very science minded and believes in thorough investigation. good guest.

 

[Burnt State]

Bishop's interview with Greg, like Project Beta, and as we saw recently through the thorough look at the Cash Landrum affair, demonstrates that the UFO meme is an excellent tool for gov't, or its higher powers, to pursue and manage multiple lines of inquiry i.e. testing new craft, keeping tabs on spies, and monitoring livestock for a variety of purposes. Not all these activities may be carried out by the same agency - some could be farmed out to various groups. The movie "Endangered Species" from the 80's is an excellent narrative that demonstrates the feasibility of cattle abduction with purpose.

Certainly the one thing that can be said about cattle mutilation is that it has helped to support a belief system of fear and paranoia regarding the existence of UFO's for generations and that's one prize worthy of the cloak and dagger routine carried out in the fields. The lack of paranormality in these discussions is speaking perhaps to a different audience but I find them fascinating.

Vallee used to talk about the UFO phenomenon as a control system. What we are seeing evidence of in these instances is of a control mechanism at work. The wiretaps, materials left in the field and entire Paul B. affair demonstrates terrestrial powers at work. Perhaps this was done for the benefit of the cold war, to cover asses, or protect assets. Either way, there's a lot to be learned about how UFO's are used to manage us.

 

[drudiak]

Questions & Comments

• The military being involved in surveillance doesn't mean they're responsible for the UADs.

Quite. They could be keeping track on the mutilations by some other agency and now and then "carelessly" leave behind evidence of military presence to confuse the issue.

• The cases for which non-natural evidence was found seem to require significant resources and planning indicating a well funded professional operation

• Chris' theory that some sort of WHO is involved has some merit, but also compounds the same problems described above.

The international scope of animal mutilations makes absolutely no sense if it was a U.S. military operation. It would be exponentially more difficult to carry off undetected and the repercussions even greater if caught. And what other international WHO-type organization is there other than WHO itself? Why would a civilian organization like WHO be involved in secretive animal mutilations? These are even grander conspiracy theories than "the aliens did it." Gene was trying to get at this with his questions, and Chris' response that these guys are really "slick" doesn't really answer the question. Such a world-wide, undetectable operation goes well-beyond "slick" to near-impossible and irrational.

• The responses to Gene's questions on why the government doesn't setup it's own testing facilities don't make sense. If you want control, it's better to have your own facilities.

Again, quite right, or simply buy the animals from the ranchers for testing if you need a more widespread sample. Or use wild animals in the area owned by nobody and would never be missed: deer, antelope, coyotes, mice, rabbits, etc.

• Chris' theory on big business compromising and terrorizing the competition would make the most sense if there had been overtures by big business to purchase their land.

Also the math doesn't make sense. Do the small guys represent any serious competition to the big ones? What percentage of all cattle lost are lost to unnatural mutilations compared to disease or predators? If the figure of 10,000 mutilations over the last 40 or 50 years is correct, that is only about 200 per year, compared to how many lost each year to disease or predators? The figure is probably a thousand times greater for natural causes. Mutilations may be a hardship to the small rancher, but are unlikely to drive them out of business unless only a few ranchers are affected. Also 200 cattle per year out of over 30 million head in the U.S. is nothing.

• Is there evidence of land compromised by UADs being bought up by competitors or the military? If so can we see a map of it?

Probably doesn't exist because I suspect there is nothing to the theory.

During above-ground A-bomb testing in the 1950s and early 1960s, all sorts of ranches downwind of the tests were dusted with fallout, and I don't recall any reports of mutilations then or ranches being bought out by the government on some grand scale. The public reports of mutilations began AFTER the above-ground testing stopped. You can monitor the effects of fallout on wild and domestic animals without resorting to something as totally irrational and dangerous as mutilating the animals in the field.

Here are some other questions I have:

How did the U.S. military have the technical capability to pull off such things over 40 years ago? I am not a subscriber to the theories that the U.S. military is always decades ahead of the civilian sector. The military gets its technical gadgets FROM civilian contractors, who will always want to commercialize even classified technology ASAP for profits if they can. Thus the first jet airliners followed only about one decade after the first military jet planes. Same with helicopters. In the case of the mutes, highly precise, bloodless surgical cuts were being made on the animals over 40 years ago, which would be a boon to medicine in general. The mutilations sound like they were done with much later laser scalpels or the plasma scalpels currently under development. But they didn't exist way back then.

Similarly Chris brought up the case of a cow that was half cooked by microwaves. I would like more details on this, but at face value, how exactly do you cook half a cow in-the-field with microwaves? That would take one very large microwave oven or other microwave generator like a high-powered radar transmitter powered off the grid. It is not something a helicopter, stealth or not, can just casually fly in. And what's the point? On the other hand, many physicists and engineers who have tried to figure out UFO technology note that it seems to involve high-powered microwaves as part of the propulsion system. Baking of soil, plant roots, through EM induction associated with UFO sightings has been part of the physical trace evidence going way back, such as Ruppelt's description of the Florida scoutmaster case.

 

[Jeff Davis]

Bishop's interview with Greg, like Project Beta, and as we saw recently through the thorough look at the Cash Landrum affair, demonstrates that the UFO meme is an excellent tool for gov't, or its higher powers, to pursue and manage multiple lines of inquiry i.e. testing new craft, keeping tabs on spies, and monitoring livestock for a variety of purposes. Not all these activities may be carried out by the same agency - some could be farmed out to various groups. The movie "Endangered Species" from the 80's is an excellent narrative that demonstrates the feasibility of cattle abduction with purpose.

Certainly the one thing that can be said about cattle mutilation is that it has helped to support a belief system of fear and paranoia regarding the existence of UFO's for generations and that's one prize worthy of the cloak and dagger routine carried out in the fields. The lack of paranormality in these discussions is speaking perhaps to a different audience but I find them fascinating.

Vallee used to talk about the UFO phenomenon as a control system. What we are seeing evidence of in these instances is of a control mechanism at work. The wiretaps, materials left in the field and entire Paul B. affair demonstrates terrestrial powers at work. Perhaps this was done for the benefit of the cold war, to cover asses, or protect assets. Either way, there's a lot to be learned about how UFO's are used to manage us.

The bottom line with cattle mutilations is that IMO it makes zero sense for the military or special intelligence operations to hit up local farmers livestock when they could just as easily have their own and go thoroughly unnoticed. I have never understood that angle.

I fail to see how promoting the UFO subculture of paranoia or delusion could serve to "manage" us, or benefit those perpetrating such C&D tactics. I just don't get it really.

 

[Jeff Davis]

The military gets its technical gadgets FROM civilian contractors, who will always want to commercialize even classified technology ASAP for profits if they can.

Could you substantiate this statement please? I don't personally think it's even in the least bit true. Personally, with respect for technological r&d, I KNOW many cases where there has been ZERO activity outside those directly employed by the government. Many of these projects are scrapped and done away with prior to the public ever even being aware they existed. Please cite some legitimate sources and examples of classified technologies that have "gone commercial" in a hurry, or if ever, for that matter. Please do not cite things like the internet either. The Internet is nothing like it was in the days when it was being developed and employed by the US Army in the late 60s. Nothing whatsoever.

 

[drudiak]

Could you substantiate this statement please? I don't personally think it's even in the least bit true. Personally, with respect for technological r&d, I KNOW many cases where there has been ZERO activity outside those directly employed by the government. Many of these projects are scrapped and done away with prior to the public ever even being aware they existed. Please cite some legitimate sources and examples of classified technologies that have "gone commercial" in a hurry, or if ever, for that matter. Please do not cite things like the internet either. The Internet is nothing like it was in the days when it was being developed and employed by the US Army in the late 60s. Nothing whatsoever.

I already gave two examples: jet aircraft and helicopters, initially all military, but quickly commercialized within a decade. Nuclear reactors were of course highly classified initially, but the first commercial one to generate electricity was operational in 1951. The first electronic computers used vacuum tubes and were developed during WWII and afterward for military applications, like code breaking. However, the first commercial civilian computer was UNIVAC that came out in 1951. These are all examples of relatively rapid commercialization of originally classified military projects.

The first simple integrated circuits were developed in 1958 and again the first customers were the U.S. military. I don't think those were classified, but widespread civilian use probably didn't occur for another decade when they became more affordable for the commercial mass market.

In the case of the mutes, I already made it clear it clear I was talking about the strange, bloodless, surgical precision that even the earliest mute cases exhibited. The carbon dioxide laser was invented in 1964 but surgical use as "laser scalpels" didn't begin until the 1970s and didn't became more generally used until the 1980s and 1990s with more advanced units. None of these early CO2 lasers would have been portable. Some history: Surgical CO2 Laser History

The latest high precision, self-cauterizing scalpel is the plasma scalpel. First described publicly in 1982, but only recently getting buzz in surgical circles. See, e.g., June 13, 2013 Scientific American.

Again, none of these electronic scalpels would have been portable enough or advanced enough in the early mute cases. Also, again, what is the point? Why not kill or anesthetize the animals first and use a good, old-fashioned steel blade to excise tissues? And why do this in the field where the conditions are very rushed, uncontrolled and the possibility of exposure great? And how can these mutilations take place so quickly without making a sound and leaving no tracks? Sometimes the ranchers report being very close by and finding a mutilated cow less than an hour after the animals was alive and healthy. How do you microwave cook half a cow in-the-field as Chris mentioned on the show?

The technology seems beyond what the military had 40+ years ago and also completely pointless if not stupid as an operation when much simpler methods would do just as well if not better, if the point was to monitor radiation poisoning or something like biological agents. How could such an operation be international in scope? The questions against a super-secretive, high-technology military operation just go on and on.

 

[Muadib]

Similarly Chris brought up the case of a cow that was half cooked by microwaves. I would like more details on this...

I would also like to hear, or more specifically, see more details on this. Is there somewhere we can go to view photographs of this? Are there veterinary pathology reports to read? How do we know that it was, in fact, microwaves that cooked half of this cow and not something else? Is there forensic evidence that is presented somewhere to that effect? I'm not saying I doubt the story, far from it, I'd just like to see more on it.

 

[Burnt State]

The bottom line with cattle mutilations is that IMO it makes zero sense for the military or special intelligence operations to hit up local farmers livestock when they could just as easily have their own and go thoroughly unnoticed. I have never understood that angle.

I fail to see how promoting the UFO subculture of paranoia or delusion could serve to "manage" us, or benefit those perpetrating such C&D tactics. I just don't get it really.

Perhaps there are needs to sample specific cattle herds, at specific times that require a more clandestine approach. Much of the history of gov't experiments on humans, on weather etc. was carried out in conjunction with corporations and both processed data for their mutual benefit and would then destroy data and all traces of activities to avoid any future responsibility. The mute situation fits very nicely into those previous patterns.

As suggested by Nameless, a read through Project Beta might make things more clear, but we do know that there is a rich history of the obfuscating of truth regarding the UFO mystery and that there have been many occasions where the truth was not made clear, or where experimentation could be called UFO's by the public which would satisfy the powers that be. I think the list provided above: asset protection, cold war strategies etc. work well wit the cattle mutilation phenomenon.

We know that North American gov'ts practice social paranoia for their own benefit, just as the Russians did before them. Keeping UFO mythology alive in the populous works as a very important approach to hiding more critical plans.

If you were in power what story would you rather spin for the masses: that our meat is diseased, is being used as a barometer for the effects of nuclear waste, germ warfare etc. or that it must be aliens? It serves a massive purpose in the way that all forms of propaganda and social control work to manage the population. Is it really that much of a stretch?

 

[Jeff Davis]

I already gave two examples: jet aircraft and helicopters, initially all military, but quickly commercialized within a decade. Nuclear reactors were of course highly classified initially, but the first commercial one to generate electricity was operational in 1951. The first electronic computers used vacuum tubes and were developed during WWII and afterward for military applications, like code breaking. However, the first commercial civilian computer was UNIVAC that came out in 1951. These are all examples of relatively rapid commercialization of originally classified military projects.

The first simple integrated circuits were developed in 1958 and again the first customers were the U.S. military. I don't think those were classified, but widespread civilian use probably didn't occur for another decade when they became more affordable for the commercial mass market.

In the case of the mutes, I already made it clear it clear I was talking about the strange, bloodless, surgical precision that even the earliest mute cases exhibited. The carbon dioxide laser was invented in 1964 but surgical use as "laser scalpels" didn't begin until the 1970s and didn't became more generally used until the 1980s and 1990s with more advanced units. None of these early CO2 lasers would have been portable. Some history: Surgical CO2 Laser History

The latest high precision, self-cauterizing scalpel is the plasma scalpel. First described publicly in 1982, but only recently getting buzz in surgical circles. See, e.g., June 13, 2013 Scientific American.

Again, none of these electronic scalpels would have been portable enough or advanced enough in the early mute cases. Also, again, what is the point? Why not kill or anesthetize the animals first and use a good, old-fashioned steel blade to excise tissues? And why do this in the field where the conditions are very rushed, uncontrolled and the possibility of exposure great? And how can these mutilations take place so quickly without making a sound and leaving no tracks? Sometimes the ranchers report being very close by and finding a mutilated cow less than an hour after the animals was alive and healthy. How do you microwave cook half a cow in-the-field as Chris mentioned on the show?

The technology seems beyond what the military had 40+ years ago and also completely pointless if not stupid as an operation when much simpler methods would do just as well if not better, if the point was to monitor radiation poisoning or something like biological agents. How could such an operation be international in scope? The questions against a super-secretive, high-technology military operation just go on and on.

drudiak,
This is the statement I would like to see substantiation for. I have not yet.

The military gets its technical gadgets FROM civilian contractors, who will always want to commercialize even classified technology ASAP for profits if they can.

This statement is not really true IMO. I am NOT calling you a liar or just giving you an egotistical hard time either. There was never a time in the USA's history that the concept of "jet engine technology" was classified. They wern't even invented by us, and the military in the country where that patent was originally filed had little or nothing to do with it's design or design's purchase. Certainly some new types of X vehicles and their propulsion systems are classified as they are developed, but assuredly not the concept itself which would have been impossible to do since it was introduced publicly some 30 years prior in Europe. Same with helocopters whose designs go back for hundreds of years. Where do you get this stuff? Could you please provide substantiation in the form of factual links?. I want to see where the civilian sector develops the military's secret classified project tech and then scoots the same out to market just as fast as they can, if they can, whatever that means.

This is not to state that the civillian sector is not contracted by the government, of course they are. It's just that when they are contracted, guess who they are working for? Guess who makes ALL the rules. There is no going to market with the military's new tech. Maybe a scaple, but certainly not a plane or aircraft or anything pertinant to national security. The government OWN the stuff THEY have built and designed. Lock stock and barrel. They buy it before it's designed and built. The intellectual property is theirs before it's concieved provided they don't just steal it to begin with. They work in extremely tight and uncompromising circles that are not open publicly whatsoever apart from surface level reporting to the media.

I think the point you were attempting to make is that we were not capable of the type of cattle mutilations currently documented in the 40s. Introducing a generalized statement that the military's tech comes from the civillian sector which is white hot for commercialism is not the way to do it because I really don't think that's the case at all.

This is a very critically important issue inUfology which is extremely important to me. Muddying up the waters with the false notion that the military gets it's "technical gagets" from the civilian realm may be true in some cases, but certainly not most classified projects as a whole. IMO, there are many UFOs flying around up there that are in fact owned by various global government powers, or even the United Nations.

It's VERY interesting to note that the man credited with the first patent of the Jet engine concept from Romania also designed a flying saucer! Hmmm...

 

[Jeff Davis]

Perhaps there are needs to sample specific cattle herds, at specific times that require a more clandestine approach. Much of the history of gov't experiments on humans, on weather etc. was carried out in conjunction with corporations and both processed data for their mutual benefit and would then destroy data and all traces of activities to avoid any future responsibility. The mute situation fits very nicely into those previous patterns.

As suggested by Nameless, a read through Project Beta might make things more clear, but we do know that there is a rich history of the obfuscating of truth regarding the UFO mystery and that there have been many occasions where the truth was not made clear, or where experimentation could be called UFO's by the public which would satisfy the powers that be. I think the list provided above: asset protection, cold war strategies etc. work well wit the cattle mutilation phenomenon.

We know that North American gov'ts practice social paranoia for their own benefit, just as the Russians did before them. Keeping UFO mythology alive in the populous works as a very important approach to hiding more critical plans.

If you were in power what story would you rather spin for the masses: that our meat is diseased, is being used as a barometer for the effects of nuclear waste, germ warfare etc. or that it must be aliens? It serves a massive purpose in the way that all forms of propaganda and social control work to manage the population. Is it really that much of a stretch?

I will look into project beta. Can you help me out with some specific substantiation of what is emboldened above? The only "fitting" critical plans I can think of off hand would be literally hiding the technology that is what many UFO reports represent. Or, are we talking FEMA Camps and the NWO?

 

[Jeff Davis]

Perhaps there are needs to sample specific cattle herds, at specific times that require a more clandestine approach. Much of the history of gov't experiments on humans, on weather etc. was carried out in conjunction with corporations and both processed data for their mutual benefit and would then destroy data and all traces of activities to avoid any future responsibility. The mute situation fits very nicely into those previous patterns.

As suggested by Nameless, a read through Project Beta might make things more clear, but we do know that there is a rich history of the obfuscating of truth regarding the UFO mystery and that there have been many occasions where the truth was not made clear, or where experimentation could be called UFO's by the public which would satisfy the powers that be. I think the list provided above: asset protection, cold war strategies etc. work well wit the cattle mutilation phenomenon.

We know that North American gov'ts practice social paranoia for their own benefit, just as the Russians did before them. Keeping UFO mythology alive in the populous works as a very important approach to hiding more critical plans.

If you were in power what story would you rather spin for the masses: that our meat is diseased, is being used as a barometer for the effects of nuclear waste, germ warfare etc. or that it must be aliens? It serves a massive purpose in the way that all forms of propaganda and social control work to manage the population. Is it really that much of a stretch?

Got it! Burnt State, I really can't thank you enough for herding me, in the very provocative direction of Project Beta. Bishop is one of my top 10 favorite "regular" UFO journalist/columnist's/people, so, immediately the air is FILLED with a new lust of devouring another UFO book ASAP. With respect to PB, obviously there is too much there to comment on in the ignorance of my present state, that's for certain.

Lets get back to that sinsationalistic (sic) "paranoia" suggested breeding, and social engineering stuff, if that's OK? I truly, and humbly, do want to learn about this mass scale society, field implemented, paranoid delusion causation tactics, perpetrated on the public at large. That's insanely intriguing. And more importantly, how it serves to control and forward whatever agenda might be taking place. Is this also contained in the PB book?

Hold on, am I reading a bit too much into this? Are you referring to those tactics which were specifically applicable in Bennewitz's case alone, or something possibly on a much larger scale?

Forgive me, I just have a sincere problem with the effective grasp, or understanding of just how, keeping the public UFO crowd (the ufo diehard subculture fan population not being one consisting of huge numbers as juxtaposed with society at large, btw) fed premeditated misdirecting information on matters UFO, as being those intentionally consisting of, covertly divisive, scary if not evil in nature, aliens, could do to forward any agenda other than someone's new book. There is shamefully terrible sarcasm here, and I do ask you to forgive me Sir, I'm just jaded at this point, and skeptically trust so little. Certainly NONE of this is directed at Greg Bishop's awesome efforts, or motives. Which, I not only applaud daily, I will be purchasing shortly.

I can of course understand the Bennewitz case as being exceptionally clear due to it's overt military national security investment aspects, but only from the breaking and entering forward. How does Bennewitz accumulate the initial information that the Fed familiarized themselves with via their espionage? Darn it! There goes the need to read that book again.

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

The bottom line with cattle mutilations is that IMO it makes zero sense for the military or special intelligence operations to hit up local farmers livestock when they could just as easily have their own and go thoroughly unnoticed. I have never understood that angle.

To me its fairly obvious that what is important is where the cow is located in the environment. And the government does routinely buy cattle, raise cattle and experiment on all kinds of livestock for a variety of reasons. The reason why the animals are left is also fairly obvious to me. If you take the animal, its grand theft and the crime generates an official law enforcement investigation. If they leave it, it provides plausible deniability and forces the rancher to choose between dragging it off to a bone pile (out-of-site/out-of-mind) or calling investigators or the media to make a big deal out it it thus placing a potential bulls-eye (pardon the pun) of ridicule and snide remarks on their backsides. There appears to be a sub-cultural stigma that comes with being targeted by the "mutilators." Most ranchers hide them and don't let anyone know they had been victimized. The one's that don't often are prompted to come forward because they have witnessed helicopter activity and this indicates to them that somehow the government is involved and it often pisses them off enough to go public.

In case it isn't obvious to you yet, this is a very complicated, kaleidoscopic subject with no easy One-size-fits-all answer. I don't care what LMHowe says. There are multiple groups with various agendas involved. The agenda/rationale to perpetrate these cases appears to have shifted over the years, as Greg pointed out, but regardless: cases still continue to be reported to this day.

Nebraska: August 10, 2013
Argentina: August 6, 2013
Missouri & the UK: August 3, 2013

 

[Muadib]

To me its fairly obvious that what is important is where the cow is located in the environment. And the government does routinely buy cattle, raise cattle and experiment on all kinds of livestock for a variety of reasons. The reason why the animals are left is also fairly obvious to me. If you take the animal, its grand theft and the crime generates an official law enforcement investigation. If they leave it, it provides plausible deniability and forces the rancher to choose between dragging it off to a bone pile (out-of-site/out-of-mind) or calling investigators or the media to make a big deal out it it thus placing a potential bulls-eye (pardon the pun) of ridicule and snide remarks on their backsides. There appears to be a sub-cultural stigma that comes with being targeted by the "mutilators." Most ranchers hide them and don't let anyone know they had been victimized. The one's that don't often are prompted to come forward because they have witnessed helicopter activity and this indicates to them that somehow the government is involved and it often pisses them off enough to go public.

In case it isn't obvious to you yet, this is a very complicated, kaleidoscopic subject with no easy One-size-fits-all answer. I don't care what LMHowe says. There are multiple groups with various agendas involved. The agenda/rationale to perpetrate these cases appears to have shifted over the years, as Greg pointed out, but regardless: cases still continue to be reported to this day.

Nebraska: August 10, 2013
Argentina: August 6, 2013
Missouri & the UK: August 3, 2013

Hey Chris, since you're here can you tell us if there's anywhere that we can go to see some of the pictures or accompanying reports about the mute case where the cow was half cooked by microwaves? I have to admit being intrigued by it and I'm wondering if there's any more info floating around out there. Thanks.