THE COLLINS ELITE: DID RELIGION INTERFERE WITH UFO INVESTIGATIONS? Former government UAP investigator Jay Stratton says he encountered senior intelligence officials who believed UFO investigations involved demonic forces. He also says he saw a written objection urging him to stop. But does that establish the existence of the mysterious Collins Elite? Nick Redfern’s 2010 book Final Events described an alleged network of government insiders who believed UFOs were part of a supernatural deception. Central to the story was a purported two-volume document known as The Collins Report, dated March 11, 1998. The problem? The complete report has never been publicly authenticated. I’ve now submitted a FOIA request to the Defense Intelligence Agency seeking the written religious objection Stratton described. My new investigation examines the original allegations, the government testimony, the missing document, and the theological assumptions behind the story. Religious opposition is not the same thing as evidence of an organized government conspiracy. But neither should documented leads be dismissed without investigation. Read my latest investigation at The UAP Convergence: theuapconvergence.substack.c…

The Black Triangle Mystery: Are Military Witnesses Describing the Same Craft? •••••••••••••••••••••• For decades, witnesses around the world have reported enormous triangular objects moving silently through the sky. Thousands of reports have accumulated, including accounts from military personnel, police officers, pilots, and civilians. But there’s an important question that often gets overlooked: Are these witnesses describing the same kind of object? Some report three brilliant corner lights. Others describe illuminated undersides, unusual surface features, or massive dark silhouettes that obscure the stars. In my latest investigation for The UAP Convergence, I examine selected cases spanning decades, comparing witness descriptions, available documentation, and competing explanations. The evidence raises an intriguing possibility: the familiar term black triangle may describe more than one kind of phenomenon. And newly released government interview records provide additional cases worth examining. Read the investigation: The Black Triangle Mystery: Are Military Witnesses Describing the Same Craft? substack.com/@theuapconverge…

The Black Triangle Mystery: Are Military Witnesses Describing the Same Craft? •••••••••••••••••••••• For decades, witnesses around the world have reported enormous triangular objects moving silently through the sky. Thousands of reports have accumulated, including accounts from military personnel, police officers, pilots, and civilians. But there’s an important question that often gets overlooked: Are these witnesses describing the same kind of object? Some report three brilliant corner lights. Others describe illuminated undersides, unusual surface features, or massive dark silhouettes that obscure the stars. In my latest investigation for The UAP Convergence, I examine selected cases spanning decades, comparing witness descriptions, available documentation, and competing explanations. The evidence raises an intriguing possibility: the familiar term black triangle may describe more than one kind of phenomenon. And newly released government interview records provide additional cases worth examining. Read the investigation: The Black Triangle Mystery: Are Military Witnesses Describing the Same Craft? substack.com/@theuapconverge…

THE COLLINS ELITE: DID RELIGION INTERFERE WITH UFO INVESTIGATIONS? Former government UAP investigator Jay Stratton says he encountered senior intelligence officials who believed UFO investigations involved demonic forces. He also says he saw a written objection urging him to stop. But does that establish the existence of the mysterious Collins Elite? Nick Redfern’s 2010 book Final Events described an alleged network of government insiders who believed UFOs were part of a supernatural deception. Central to the story was a purported two-volume document known as The Collins Report, dated March 11, 1998. The problem? The complete report has never been publicly authenticated. I’ve now submitted a FOIA request to the Defense Intelligence Agency seeking the written religious objection Stratton described. My new investigation examines the original allegations, the government testimony, the missing document, and the theological assumptions behind the story. Religious opposition is not the same thing as evidence of an organized government conspiracy. But neither should documented leads be dismissed without investigation. Read my latest investigation at The UAP Convergence: theuapconvergence.substack.c…

Hollywood’s Influence on American Society: The Impact of UFO Movies ••••••••••••••••• Hollywood movies have undeniably shaped societal perceptions of extraterrestrial visits to Earth. Below are some museum display artifacts from Spielberg’s 1977 film “Close Encounters of the Third Kind,” which are currently on display in Los Angeles.

Hollywood’s Influence on American Society: The Impact of UFO Movies ••••••••••••••••• Hollywood movies have undeniably shaped societal perceptions of extraterrestrial visits to Earth. Below are some museum display artifacts from Spielberg’s 1977 film “Close Encounters of the Third Kind,” which are currently on display in Los Angeles.

TRUMP: “WE ARE RELEASING EVERYTHING.” BUT WHAT DOES EVERYTHING MEAN? During an October 15 Newsmax interview, President Trump was asked directly whether aliens are real, whether Earth has been visited, and whether the United States is reverse-engineering extraterrestrial technology. His response included a remarkable statement: “We are releasing everything.” 🛑 But Trump never directly answered the questions about extraterrestrial visitation or reverse engineering. And that distinction matters. Releasing previously classified UFO reports is one thing. Disclosing the existence of alleged crash-retrieval programs, recovered nonhuman biological materials, and highly classified reverse-engineering efforts would be something entirely different. If such programs exist, would their records even be included in a conventional UFO document release? What about materials allegedly held by private aerospace contractors or concealed within special-access programs? For decades, the central allegation has been that the most consequential information is not contained in ordinary government UFO files. Trump’s statement is encouraging for transparency, but it is not confirmation that the government possesses extraterrestrial technology. The real test of disclosure isn’t how many documents are released. It’s whether the government addresses the specific allegations at the center of the controversy. Until then, “everything” remains a word in need of a definition. — The UAP Convergence

TRUMP: “WE ARE RELEASING EVERYTHING.” BUT WHAT DOES EVERYTHING MEAN? During an October 15 Newsmax interview, President Trump was asked directly whether aliens are real, whether Earth has been visited, and whether the United States is reverse-engineering extraterrestrial technology. His response included a remarkable statement: “We are releasing everything.” 🛑 But Trump never directly answered the questions about extraterrestrial visitation or reverse engineering. And that distinction matters. Releasing previously classified UFO reports is one thing. Disclosing the existence of alleged crash-retrieval programs, recovered nonhuman biological materials, and highly classified reverse-engineering efforts would be something entirely different. If such programs exist, would their records even be included in a conventional UFO document release? What about materials allegedly held by private aerospace contractors or concealed within special-access programs? For decades, the central allegation has been that the most consequential information is not contained in ordinary government UFO files. Trump’s statement is encouraging for transparency, but it is not confirmation that the government possesses extraterrestrial technology. The real test of disclosure isn’t how many documents are released. It’s whether the government addresses the specific allegations at the center of the controversy. Until then, “everything” remains a word in need of a definition. — The UAP Convergence

THE UFO INFORMATION LOOP: IS DISINFORMATION HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT? What if some of the most credible voices investigating the alleged UFO cover-up are unknowingly repeating information planted by the very people they’re trying to expose? In his new book, Out of the Shadows, former UAP Task Force director Jay Stratton alleges that a secret Legacy Program learned to manipulate public perceptions through journalists, former intelligence officials, podcasters, and social media influencers. But there’s an uncomfortable irony. Stratton himself repeats extraordinary claims about Roswell supplied by an unnamed insider—claims that resemble accounts circulating in UFO literature for decades. And consider David Grusch and Eric Davis discussing four alleged nonhuman types: Greys, Nordics, Reptilians, and Mantids. Those same categories appeared together in UFO literature more than 30 years ago. Does that mean they’re repeating disinformation? Not necessarily. But it raises a question that deserves considerably more attention: When multiple credentialed intelligence sources tell a journalist the same extraordinary story, are they independently confirming an event—or repeating information that originated from one source? There’s an important difference between independent witnesses and independent information. And if Stratton’s allegations are accurate, the distinction becomes even more consequential. I’ve examined two possible pathways: unintentional information recycling and deliberate information laundering—and how both could operate within the same UAP information network. The implications extend to disclosure advocates, skeptics, journalists, and government investigators alike. Read my new investigation at The UAP Convergence: The UFO Information Loop: Is Disinformation Hiding in Plain Sight? theuapconvergence.substack.c…

THE UFO INFORMATION LOOP: IS DISINFORMATION HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT? What if some of the most credible voices investigating the alleged UFO cover-up are unknowingly repeating information planted by the very people they’re trying to expose? In his new book, Out of the Shadows, former UAP Task Force director Jay Stratton alleges that a secret Legacy Program learned to manipulate public perceptions through journalists, former intelligence officials, podcasters, and social media influencers. But there’s an uncomfortable irony. Stratton himself repeats extraordinary claims about Roswell supplied by an unnamed insider—claims that resemble accounts circulating in UFO literature for decades. And consider David Grusch and Eric Davis discussing four alleged nonhuman types: Greys, Nordics, Reptilians, and Mantids. Those same categories appeared together in UFO literature more than 30 years ago. Does that mean they’re repeating disinformation? Not necessarily. But it raises a question that deserves considerably more attention: When multiple credentialed intelligence sources tell a journalist the same extraordinary story, are they independently confirming an event—or repeating information that originated from one source? There’s an important difference between independent witnesses and independent information. And if Stratton’s allegations are accurate, the distinction becomes even more consequential. I’ve examined two possible pathways: unintentional information recycling and deliberate information laundering—and how both could operate within the same UAP information network. The implications extend to disclosure advocates, skeptics, journalists, and government investigators alike. Read my new investigation at The UAP Convergence: The UFO Information Loop: Is Disinformation Hiding in Plain Sight? theuapconvergence.substack.c…

WHY WASN’T JAY STRATTON A PRIORITY IN 2025? WHAT CHANGED? In an August 2025 recorded conversation, Rep. Eric Burlison was asked whether his congressional UAP investigation had spoken with Jay Stratton. His answer: “No, we have not.” Burlison acknowledged that Stratton’s name had come up multiple times, but said David Grusch did not appear to consider him a high-priority witness. That raises an interesting question. Stratton was the first director of the Pentagon’s UAP Task Force. Grusch served as its NRO representative, investigating classified programs under Stratton’s direction. Travis Taylor served as chief scientist, while Luis Elizondo collaborated with Stratton during earlier UAP investigations. These weren’t strangers operating in separate circles. But the situation apparently changed. In an August 20, 2026 statement reproduced online, Burlison said Stratton had been cooperating with his office for several months. He also expressed interest in hearing Stratton’s account publicly, potentially at a congressional hearing. Then came Stratton’s October 12 Fox News interview with Bret Baier. “I have seen non-human beings and non-human craft with my own eyes,” Stratton stated. He further alleged that government agencies and defense contractors possess recovered non-human craft and are attempting to reverse engineer them. When asked why he hadn’t taken his information to Congress, Stratton replied that he had briefed lawmakers numerous times, beginning with Senator Harry Reid in 2007 and continuing over the following 16 years. So what changed between 2025 and 2026? Was Stratton initially considered a lower priority because he had already briefed Congress? Did Burlison independently pursue him? Did new information emerge? Importantly, Burlison’s later engagement does not establish that Grusch personally changed his assessment. I’m not suggesting anyone deliberately withheld information. But these developments deserve clarification. Given Stratton’s leadership role, his relationship with Grusch, and his extraordinary firsthand claims, I’d like to know whether Congress has now received his most significant evidence. I’d welcome an explanation from Rep. Burlison, David Grusch, or Jay Stratton. -- The UAP Convergence REFERENCES 1) Vetted. “Rep. Eric Burlison Discusses Jay Stratton and David Grusch.” August 18, 2025. Recorded discussion concerning Stratton’s status as a potential congressional UAP witness. uapdrop.com/l/view/e5lbApdlQ… 2) Rep. Eric Burlison. Public statement concerning Jay Stratton’s cooperation with his office and the possibility of congressional testimony. August 20, 2026. Secondary reproduction; original X post not independently verified. gaya.one/en/society/disclosu… 3) Fox News, Special Report with Bret Baier. Interview with Jay Stratton concerning alleged non-human craft, firsthand encounters, reverse-engineering programs, and previous congressional briefings. Broadcast October 12, 2026. foxnews.com/video/6406725522… 4) PEOPLE. “Confessions of the Government’s Top Alien Hunter.” October 13, 2026. Profile of Jay Stratton discussing his intelligence career, UAP investigations, and claims presented in his book Out of the Shadows. people.com/confessions-of-th…

WHY WASN’T JAY STRATTON A PRIORITY IN 2025? WHAT CHANGED? In an August 2025 recorded conversation, Rep. Eric Burlison was asked whether his congressional UAP investigation had spoken with Jay Stratton. His answer: “No, we have not.” Burlison acknowledged that Stratton’s name had come up multiple times, but said David Grusch did not appear to consider him a high-priority witness. That raises an interesting question. Stratton was the first director of the Pentagon’s UAP Task Force. Grusch served as its NRO representative, investigating classified programs under Stratton’s direction. Travis Taylor served as chief scientist, while Luis Elizondo collaborated with Stratton during earlier UAP investigations. These weren’t strangers operating in separate circles. But the situation apparently changed. In an August 20, 2026 statement reproduced online, Burlison said Stratton had been cooperating with his office for several months. He also expressed interest in hearing Stratton’s account publicly, potentially at a congressional hearing. Then came Stratton’s October 12 Fox News interview with Bret Baier. “I have seen non-human beings and non-human craft with my own eyes,” Stratton stated. He further alleged that government agencies and defense contractors possess recovered non-human craft and are attempting to reverse engineer them. When asked why he hadn’t taken his information to Congress, Stratton replied that he had briefed lawmakers numerous times, beginning with Senator Harry Reid in 2007 and continuing over the following 16 years. So what changed between 2025 and 2026? Was Stratton initially considered a lower priority because he had already briefed Congress? Did Burlison independently pursue him? Did new information emerge? Importantly, Burlison’s later engagement does not establish that Grusch personally changed his assessment. I’m not suggesting anyone deliberately withheld information. But these developments deserve clarification. Given Stratton’s leadership role, his relationship with Grusch, and his extraordinary firsthand claims, I’d like to know whether Congress has now received his most significant evidence. I’d welcome an explanation from Rep. Burlison, David Grusch, or Jay Stratton. -- The UAP Convergence REFERENCES 1) Vetted. “Rep. Eric Burlison Discusses Jay Stratton and David Grusch.” August 18, 2025. Recorded discussion concerning Stratton’s status as a potential congressional UAP witness. uapdrop.com/l/view/e5lbApdlQ… 2) Rep. Eric Burlison. Public statement concerning Jay Stratton’s cooperation with his office and the possibility of congressional testimony. August 20, 2026. Secondary reproduction; original X post not independently verified. gaya.one/en/society/disclosu… 3) Fox News, Special Report with Bret Baier. Interview with Jay Stratton concerning alleged non-human craft, firsthand encounters, reverse-engineering programs, and previous congressional briefings. Broadcast October 12, 2026. foxnews.com/video/6406725522… 4) PEOPLE. “Confessions of the Government’s Top Alien Hunter.” October 13, 2026. Profile of Jay Stratton discussing his intelligence career, UAP investigations, and claims presented in his book Out of the Shadows. people.com/confessions-of-th…

JAY STRATTON: THE QUESTIONS WE SHOULD BE ASKING @jaystratton With the release of Out of the Shadows and Jay Stratton’s appearance on Fox News, we’re hearing extraordinary claims from someone who spent years investigating UAP within the U.S. intelligence community. Stratton has publicly stated that he has personally seen nonhuman craft and nonhuman beings. That statement deserves more than a headline. It deserves a serious, detailed conversation. I’d welcome the opportunity to hear Jay elaborate on several questions, to the extent he can discuss them publicly. 1. THE CRAFT: Have you personally stood beside a recovered nonhuman craft? What did it look like? Its dimensions, shape, surface, construction, and apparent materials? 2. THE INTERIOR: Have you entered one? Were there seats, controls, instruments, compartments, or recognizable propulsion systems? 3. THE BEINGS: When you say you’ve seen nonhuman beings, were these living entities, deceased biological specimens, photographs, or something else? What did they physically look like? 4. BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE: Has any examination established that these beings are biologically nonhuman? What characteristics or testing support that conclusion? 5. ENGINEERED BIOLOGY: Is there evidence that some of these beings might be artificially manufactured biological entities rather than the intelligences that designed the craft? 6. TECHNOLOGICAL ORIGIN: What specific characteristics convinced you that the recovered technology was not manufactured by humans? 7. INDEPENDENT SOURCES: How much of what you’ve learned comes from your own observations versus testimony, briefings, and documentation? Can we distinguish independent discoveries from information circulating among the same intelligence sources? 8. PUBLIC DISCLOSURE: What additional physical descriptions or findings could be released without compromising national security? These aren’t questions intended to challenge Stratton’s integrity. They’re questions intended to understand his testimony. I’m grateful that he has chosen to speak publicly. But the next stage of UAP disclosure should move beyond extraordinary statements and into the specific observations, physical characteristics, and investigative findings behind them. I’d welcome Jay Stratton’s responses, and I’d be interested in hearing what other researchers would ask him. — The UAP Convergence

JAY STRATTON SAYS THE NAVY ATTRACTED A UAP USING A NUCLEAR SUBMARINE With the release of his new book, Out of the Shadows, former UAP Task Force director Jay Stratton is making a claim that deserves far more attention than the sensational stories surrounding his personal encounters. Stratton reportedly describes a Navy operation involving a nuclear-powered submarine off the East Coast and a P-3 surveillance aircraft equipped with specialized sensors. According to his account, a UAP appeared during the operation, and the aircraft successfully collected data. If accurate, this is significant. For decades, researchers have examined reports of UAP activity around nuclear weapons, submarines, and military installations. But Stratton is describing something different: an apparent attempt to deliberately attract and observe a UAP using military assets. That raises several questions. Was this the previously discussed Operation Interloper, which Luis Elizondo has described as canceled, or a separate operation? What exactly did the P-3 record? Radar? Infrared imagery? Other sensor measurements? And most importantly, where is that data today? Stratton’s firsthand account is evidence of what he says occurred. The original operational records would allow us to evaluate what was actually detected. I hope interviewers move beyond the sensational headlines and ask him these questions. If the Navy successfully attracted and recorded an unidentified object, this could be one of the more consequential claims in his book. The evidence collected during that operation is the real story. The UAP Convergence —

JAY STRATTON SAYS THE NAVY ATTRACTED A UAP USING A NUCLEAR SUBMARINE With the release of his new book, Out of the Shadows, former UAP Task Force director Jay Stratton is making a claim that deserves far more attention than the sensational stories surrounding his personal encounters. Stratton reportedly describes a Navy operation involving a nuclear-powered submarine off the East Coast and a P-3 surveillance aircraft equipped with specialized sensors. According to his account, a UAP appeared during the operation, and the aircraft successfully collected data. If accurate, this is significant. For decades, researchers have examined reports of UAP activity around nuclear weapons, submarines, and military installations. But Stratton is describing something different: an apparent attempt to deliberately attract and observe a UAP using military assets. That raises several questions. Was this the previously discussed Operation Interloper, which Luis Elizondo has described as canceled, or a separate operation? What exactly did the P-3 record? Radar? Infrared imagery? Other sensor measurements? And most importantly, where is that data today? Stratton’s firsthand account is evidence of what he says occurred. The original operational records would allow us to evaluate what was actually detected. I hope interviewers move beyond the sensational headlines and ask him these questions. If the Navy successfully attracted and recorded an unidentified object, this could be one of the more consequential claims in his book. The evidence collected during that operation is the real story. The UAP Convergence —