Translation by George Hoskins

Since the first incident in 1967 some ten to twenty thousand domestic cattle have been found dead and mutilated, mainly in the United States. The animals have been found in fields with certain organs removed, cut open by a very sharp instrument or by laser. A rigorous investigation [JS90 p. 169-289] leads one to believe that the removal of the organs has taken place after the animal has been abducted by air: there are no traces of a struggle or of blood on the ground, animals are found in places inaccessible on foot, etc. Several theories have been put forward: predatory animals (the official version), the act of a satanic sect, abduction from space as UFOs have sometimes been sighted nearby, the work of the military since unmarked helicopters are often sighted at the scene. The difficulty in attributing this phenomenon to a human cause lies in its magnitude: what kind of organisation would be able to succeed in mutilating more than 10,000 head of cattle without ever being seen by witnesses or police investigators? The media offer no solution and local authorities attempt to suppress the matter.

One might attempt to put the puzzle together in the following way, although the outcome is uncertain, by imagining that the American military is behind these mutilations. It is important to note that the technique employed may have evolved since the start of the mutilations, and that it must vary from one case to another in such a manner as to produce confusion among the investigators.

Fig. 6-a: a mutilated cow in the northeast of Utah State, found on the 16th October 1998
Left: the eye has been removed with the help of a sharp instrument.
Right: enlarged view (x 20) of the cleanly cut hairs.
The cow was three months pregnant but the foetus was never recovered.
Photos NIDS (National Institute for Discovery Science)
NB: no connection exists between NIDS and the ideas expressed in this volume.

	The removal of organs or of skin is perhaps only a decoy serving to extract those parts which have absorbed chemicals or been burned by microwaves, so that the cause of death may remain unknown even if the animal is given an autopsy. This removal can also permit an examination of the degree of radioactive contamination of these organs (see below).
	When the situation is favourable with no nearby witnesses, the animals are moved by helicopter in order to suggest an aerial removal of the organs thus giving credence to the extraterrestrial theory. The helicopter can be quiet if equipped with the NOTAR system (No Tail Rotor). It is not necessary to use heavy equipment: after 1969, a light helicopter of the Aerospatial Lama 315B type, weighing one ton and 13 metres long would be capable of transporting by the sling method a cow weighing 700 kilos or a bull of more than a ton. One frequently finds marks left by crampons or steel wires on a leg, or of straps beneath the abdomen [JS90 p. 173-174 and 189-193, citing the research of Howard Burgess]. The animal is dropped at some height as evidenced by broken tree branches, broken legs or ribs, etc [JS90 p. 198-199]). The helicopter maintains sufficient height so as not to disturb the ground vegetation or trees.
	A deliberately staged UFO flight is sometimes used as a diversionary tactic and to give credence to the extraterrestrial theory. The operative can also produce fake landing marks on the ground, using suitable equipment, or else a heavy object is lowered and then raised again from the helicopter in order to create impressions on the ground, possibly radioactive ones [cf JS90 p. 186-187].
	These "UFOs" might also be remote-controlled reconnaissance systems (drones) allowing the operators to ascertain whether there are any witnesses present. The first drones of this kind appeared during the 60s.
	When, in rare cases, the ground operative or the helicopter are spotted by witnesses or when the police investigators are too efficient, the military enjoins them to secrecy. Some zealous investigators are put under surveillance [cf JS90 p. 212-213, about the research of Iona Hoeppner] or are subject to attempts of intimidation or threat of death, and others are relieved of their duties [JS90 p. 275-276]. Let us here praise the courage of John Paternoster, District Attorney for the 8th District of New Mexico, and of Sheriff Pat Oakley, for their tenacity in pursuing an elucidation of the mystery of the mutilations, which they chose to treat as carefully as cases of homicide.
	In order to rekindle public interest or to confuse investigations, colourful details may be added in certain cases. For example, a medical bag was found which contained the organs of a mutilated animal and which seemed to have fallen from a considerable height [JS90 p. 181]. A document, very likely to be a fake document by the fact that it is neither signed nor dated although coming from an official source, thus making any investigation into the newspapers of the time impossible, mentions humans who have been mutilated along the same lines [cf JS90 p. 219]. Etc.

Lastly, the showy and frightening nature of some mutilations should be noted. In this regard we will here offer the testimony of Barbara, whose misfortunes we related in the prologue: "The people living on the lands behind our ranch also had a number of strange events to grieve over. The head of one of their herd was found mutilated just 50 metres away from their kitchen window! The incident occurred at the very time when someone was in this room but who did not manage to see anything. This happened in full daylight one morning. […] Many mutilated cattle were found near roads or dwellings. You could almost say that they try to find somebody who regularly travels along a particular road at a particular time, for example, and who will go past the same spot at a later regular time. At 2 o’clock, the person goes past and there is nothing there. At 4 o’clock, they come back, and there is the body of a mutilated animal. It’s not normal." [JS94 p. 173].

Apart from the American military’s will to maintain belief in extraterrestrials there must be other motives which the reader is free to imagine for him/herself: actual training of the commandos but also of the disinformation services, testing of chemical and bacteriological weapons [cf JS90 p. 188-189, citing the research of Howard Burgess and Sergeant Gabriel Valdez] or of microwave weapons, the discreet eradication of a bovine virus [cf JS90 p. 188], etc. However, the most plausible hypothesis as to the motive (following the research of David Perkins, and also of Richard Sauder…) is that of an evaluation by the American military of the radioactive fallout on the environment after hundreds of nuclear tests carried out since the 1950s. Some of these, it is known, were contaminating. The examination of certain organs taken from herbivorous animals would allow the evaluation of the degree of ground radiation in those regions where the wind had scattered gigantic radioactive clouds. In January 1993, a report by the American Agency for the Protection of the Environment confirmed the necessity of exercising some control over the animals destined for consumption which had been grazing near to the sites at risk from contamination such as former zones of nuclear testing, uranium mines and waste facilities. This control test needed to be done on blood and removed organs. Why not discreetly remove these organs in the abattoirs? It has been suggested that the animals should perhaps first of all be given an injection and be marked before proceeding with the removal of organs at a later time, but up to now that has remained speculative…

Here it is difficult to resist the temptation of connecting these animal tests with the taking of secretion samples carried out on victims of extraterrestrial abduction (CE4), although it is still premature to think that it is a matter of another series of radioactive contamination tests in which case these thousands of abductions would only be another staging of events by the American military. It seems very improbable, although it is clear that some CE4s were staged by the military [cf for example: JV90b chap. 5 for the French military, the case of Franck Fontaine]). The concept of MILAB (military abduction) has in fact appeared a few years ago as a result of the investigations of Helmut Lammer, who bases his research on abduction accounts implicating the military, sometimes working alongside the extraterrestrials. For once it seems that here the military are innocent of the crimes, worthy of the Nazis, of which they are accused, as we shall see later with the hypothesis of mental projections into a parallel universe.

If the number of 10,000 to 20,000 head of cattle mutilated over a period of 30 years or so seems large and leads us to wonder how the American military would dare to carry out this slaughter, one must nevertheless remember that lightning alone produces as many victims in a single year in the United States. In spite of this, in certain American States, discontented cattle-owners have formed self-defence militia groups armed with rifles and shoot at anything overflying their fields by night. Interdiction of night flying has therefore been introduced in some regions [JS90 p. 181-182].

In the same way that, in 1991, a crop circle was made in front of the British prime minister’s country residence, something which only the secret service would have been capable of doing, so, in October 1975, two mutilated animals were discovered near the entrance to the nuclear weapons factory in Rocky Flats, near Denver and, again, in August 1976, another animal was found at the entrance to the headquarters of NORAD (North American Defense Command) in Colorado [LDLN No. 351 p. 15, article by Gildas Bourdais]. Once again, no practical joker would have been in a position to carry out such a hoax within these areas under strict military surveillance, and the guilty parties are all ready-made and available (even if those who hold to the extraterrestrial hypothesis consider that, from their point of view, it is the extraterrestrials themselves who thus come to remind us of the secret pact they must have signed with the American military so as to be able to carry out without hindrance biological removals of animal parts…). If these facts ever came to light, how would the military be able to justify its scandalous activities in the eyes of American farmers and can it accept to take on its responsibilities as much in connection with the nuclear contamination of the population as in connection with its clandestine and illegal activities? It is clear that it may take decades of official denials before some tangible proof becomes available and until the military admits to its participation in the mutilations. Before that happens the military will have been careful to progressively reduce the number of mutilations carried out so as to lessen the importance of the matter in the eyes of the public, until in the end it is forgotten. Finally, the military will be able to call upon the discreet eradication of a bovine virus, mentioned above, displaying the "proof" that the last mutilation cases did involve contaminated cows, whereas actually it very often involves healthy animals. Of course, it will be impossible to verify that all the mutilated animals were indeed contaminated, and the media will have to content themselves with this explanation, which will permit the whole matter to be buried.