Cattle Mutilation 10
Chapter 3, Part Three
Cattle Mutilation - The Unthinkable Truth
© 1976 by Fredrick W. Smith, Freedland Publishers
Chapter 3, Part Three -
Bounty On Devil Worshipers
"O ne of the more colorful and enigmatic figures in Colorado's great cattle mutilation siege was Dane Edwards, a slight intense man who edited a weekly newspaper in Brush, Colorado, a small agricultural community on the open prairie ninety miles northeast of Denver. Edwards moved up from Texas to start The Brush Banner at about the same time the Colorado cattle mutilations began and he threw himself into the story like a gosling into a rushing river. He got carried away with the thing, figuratively and perhaps, even literally.
More than any newsman in Colorado, or perhaps anywhere, he involved himself in the mutilations, spending long nights out with ranchers waiting to greet the intruders with high powered rifles, spreading pictures of mutilated animals across the front page, excoriating lawmen, even printing and distributing witches symbols in an attempt to ward off the scourge. In one editorial reflecting his frustration - and which drew a sharp rebuke from on high - he said our "Prince Charming Governor was not an enraged bear after all. ...he was only a Lamm." (The Brush Banner, Brush, Colorado, September 10, 1975.) Edwards told an interviewer he was flattered to be known among law enforcement officials as "their worst antagonist."
For one thing, Dane Edwards had a book on his mind. Besides wanting to be an author, he chaffed at the misery of the small time. Cattle mutilations needed an extensive investigation and nationwide publicity. The CBI's work was "unimaginative" and most sheriff's departments were beneath his contempt, but still within easy reach of his caustic pen. His book, The Mutilators, was to have been published in January of 1976 and would be part of the solution to the vicious phenomenon. "The solution is general public outrage that can only be created by a widely distributed book and coverage by the major press of this country." (The Gazette Telegraph, an interview with Dane Edwards, October 24, 1975.)
Anger is what he said interested him in cattle mutilations, plus the fact that the public would take the word of law enforcement officials from whom "I expect only varying degrees of ignorance. The sad thing is, it's on the part of the highest individuals." Those who worked with him said he was a talented man, but easily angered. But an anger with his neighbors was nothing compared to his anger with those committing "atrocities" on cattle. Those "demonic acts" could only be done by "human vermin" for whom no punishment would be too great, and against whom any weapon fair or foul was justified. When he learned that mutilating a cow that no one could tell whether it had died naturally or not was only a misdemeanor, or possibly no crime at all, but shooting at a person would be a felony, his rage at the stupidity and injustice of the law was boundless.
Besides stirring things up, or maybe as a part of that, as well as laying the groundwork for his projected book, Edwards developed his "Three Major Theories" of cattle mutilations. These ran as articles in the Banner.
The "predator" theory that began coming more and more into vogue in high places as the summer and fall went by without producing a single lead, he looked at and dismissed contemptuously.
The "cult" theory that had been more prominent earlier, is analyzed with a great deal of insight. But he presents six objections to it. First, the area of operations is too large. Second, there is no known connection between this mutilation "cult" and any others current or historical. third, why no defections or slip-ups? Fourth, cults are short-lived and this phenomenon is at least 15 years old. Fifth, think of the skills needed for the operation. Sixth, its budget staggers the imagination. He concludes that finding the "cult" is like finding the end of the rainbow.
The "UFO" theory - as the year advanced, he came more and more to favor the UFO theory, which became more convincing the longer lawmen failed to produce suspects or evidence. He also cites at least two northern Nebraska sheriffs who stopped their investigations "because they became personally convinced of UFO participation." (The Brush Banner, Brush, Colorado, September 10, 1975.)
UFO's he believed, could account for all of the unusual and uncanny aspects of mutilations. But that theory, like all the others, has drawbacks. First, aliens would not be using the unidentified helicopters that have been seen so often. Second, how could a saucer be hidden in a wide field? Third, why would such an advanced technology be carving up animals at night? Fourth, helicopter reports are common, but UFO reports are not. Fifth, why would they need so many specimens? Sixth, no government study has ever given evidence of the reality of UFOs.
As a comment on Dane Edwards' thinking here, why wouldn't extraterrestrials use planes and helicopters for their close-up surveillance? That would be very convenient, simple and safe for them to do and who would suspect it? They could go wherever they wanted without attracting the least attention, just as we'd naturally expect them to go by car on the ground and wear ordinary clothes while among us. As the situation tightens, we can expect them to be harder and harder to recognize. Who looks even twice at a strange plane or helicopter? Everybody knows it is not a UFO. But who knows for sure what's in it, where it came from, where it's going, or what forces are supporting it? It could be based far up in the sky and never have to land at all. If a plane or a helicopter is silent, it can't be just a common run of the mill vehicle. But even noise is not proof. Noises are easily simulated and take very little energy.
Strange things began happening to Dane Edwards. By September, he was receiving long distance threatening calls that the FBI, at the request of Senator Haskell, investigated. Some pups he had were threatened and soon were missing. Blood was thrown against his door. He was a person to attract enemies. Come of his editorials were strange and most were abrasive. He made one up about the CIA murdering people, carried on a running feud with the local police for allegedly harassing people and called prisons advanced crime universities.
He seemed to have been the conspiratorial type. "In fact," said Edwards, leaning a little closer, his voice dropping, he believes he actually knows where the mutilators are from - as well as their motivation - and they are not Satan worshipers either. But he can't divulge his theory just yet, he said, because "the CBI has asked me to keep it quiet until they check it out." Not that Edwards has much faith in the CBI. (The Los Angeles Times, California, September 11, 1975.)
As a precautionary measure, after he was threatened, a complete summary of the Banner's probe was placed in safe keeping in Denver. (The Brush Banner, Brush, Colorado, September 3, 1975.) He finally became "convinced that the original theory that mutilations are caused by a cult is a falsehood, a purposeful act of deceit." (The Gazette Telegraph, Colorado Springs, Colorado, October 24, 1975.)
"On and on the confusing web of mystery continues. And yet, the sequence is there. The bulk of the evidence points in a specific direction. Lawmen shun it and even the most astute followers of the mutilations somehow fail to detect it. But it is there and the time and place will be chosen for its exposure. In the meantime, as with all mysteries, the tale continues to unfold..." (The Brush Banner, Brush, Colorado, September 24, 1975.)
With those three enigmatic dots, the tale of Dane Edwards' pursuit of the cattle mutilation mystery seems to have ended. On December 5, 1975, Mrs. Edwards filed a missing person report on her husband, whom she hadn't seen for four days. He had gone to Denver to contact someone interested in publishing his book. The meeting did not take place and he called his wife to tell her the meeting would be the next day.
There's a great deal of interest in the case throughout eastern Colorado. 'EX-BANNER PUBLISHER PRESUMED MISSING," was the headline in the December 10 issue that carried the story of Edwards' disappearance. "While in the Banner's employ, Mr. Edwards expressed concern for his well-being on various occasions." (The Brush Banner, December 10, 1975.)
What happened to Dane Edwards? Apparently he was not estranged from his wife. The people he worked with believe he is now living in Denver with his family and working somewhere there. When I visited the Banner, I did not know that story, but was interested in the book he was publishing. His colleagues did not think there ever was a book. Apparently Edwards had other problems that might have precipitated his leaving. His background was very unclear to them. That was their feeling, but after studying his story there could be much more to it than they suspect. At least it looks strange and unusual to many people, including me.
I'm a light-hearted person and not at all paranoid. Yet, I can see a clear and present threat latent in this situation, not from UFOs, but from the UFOs' enemies. I'm ready to take off in a UFO instantly myself. But there is a war going here on this planet and we'll have to stay and fight until relief comes. Heaven and hell are locked in a death struggle among us, so if we're somewhere in the middle, we'd better keep a low profile or we might get zapped.
Perhaps the most remarkable thing Edwards did was contact some witchcraft groups through the Denver Public Library and and get two symbols they claimed would effectively thwart the mutilators. Those symbols were distributed widely, not only in the Brush Banner, but in other Colorado papers. They even went out in a big way over TV from Denver. There must have been some feedback from his Christian neighbors, but he apologized by saying, "The symbols are but a mirror of the sickness motivating these 'persons' in their atrocities. while offensive to accepted Christian standards, it becomes a matter of fighting fire with fire. Obviously, cattle mutilators are an offense against each of us. The human vermin committing such acts should be confronted with those primitive measures that most effectively offend THEM. In the light of these demonic acts, it is our belief they are deserving of no less." (The Brush Banner, from KOA radio interview with Dane Edwards.)
The symbols, though they might be of interest to the reader, won't be reprinted here. One resembles a lower case written 'm' with a variety of crosses inside the mounds and the symbol for Mars (male) and Venus (female) beneath. The other resembles a fish eye with hooks hanging beneath, both supposed to be extremely offensive to witches and demons. For our part, we don't even care to offend them, except with the light.
Getting even peripherally involved in any way with witchcraft or devil worship, from my point of view, is an extremely stupid and deadly error. It's not only that evils are extremely contagious, more so than any other plague, but what is even worse is that we forfeit protection by letting our imaginations wander into such insanities. Wherever the battle is joined, we need all the protection possible. Even at best, none of us can expect to get out of this mess alive.
"Now, my principal, my leader and my good angel, which by our Lord art
deputed to be my warder and keeper, I pray and require thee that thou
now aid and help me. Amen."
The Art of Dying Well, The Bardo Thodal, edited by W. Y. Evans-Wentz,
Oxford Univ. Press, London and New York.