Whistleblower Answers Questions and Shares New UFO Photos
In the latest update on the Strange Mysteries channel, Nathan, the host, shared a detailed follow-up in a video titled “UPDATE #3: I Received a Creepy E-mail w/ Leaked UFO Footage.” In the video, Nathan provided context for viewers unfamiliar with the ongoing story, encouraging them to start with earlier videos to understand the full scope of the mysterious leaks. Nathan recounted receiving another email from the anonymous leaker, which he described as containing some of the “creepiest” and most shocking content yet. This email, which the leaker claimed would be their last communication, included new images and information regarding UAPs, urging Nathan to continue sharing while emphasizing the importance of public awareness in pressuring for transparency on this subject.
Previously, Nathan, the host of the Strange Mysteries channel, addressed a series of questions submitted by viewers to an anonymous whistleblower who had previously leaked alleged UFO footage. Nathan mentioned that he had consolidated the numerous questions into approximately 30 that encapsulated the essence of the inquiries. He noted that some questions remained unanswered, often because they were outliers or less pertinent. To ensure the audience could fully engage with the material without being overwhelmed, Nathan decided to cover a portion of the questions and answers in the current video, with plans to address the remaining ones in a subsequent installment. He emphasized the importance of viewers thoroughly understanding the content rather than merely focusing on the accompanying images.
The questions were compiled and presented by Nathan, while the answers were provided by the whistleblower.
Hello again,
It’s been a busy week, but I’ve made the time to carefully read through most of the comments on your channel and other platforms. Like I mentioned to Nathan, I did catch the full livestream and saw all the questions and told him about someone joking that I’ll be answering questions until disclosure actually happens haha. I want to begin by expressing my sincere gratitude. Thank you to everyone who left supportive messages, particularly those who encouraged me to continue sharing these photos. I’m also grateful to those who offered positive feedback for Nathan, who has done nothing but provide a platform for this information. He’s provided me with a platform, and I truly appreciate that. Please don’t hold Nathan responsible for any of this, and I hope you continue to support him moving forward.
To YT @connoro8610, thank you for your thoughtful comment. It’s something I will carry with me for a long time.
I’ve seen some comments referring to me as a “temperamental leaker,” and while I understand that perception, I’m human. My primary focus is and always will be the protection of these operations and the safety of those involved. I am not here to seek recognition or cause disruption, nor am I trying to draw attention in the way others might suggest. No, I’m not Jack Teixeira. I’m not here to impress people on the internet or face consequences that would put my family and career at risk and no maybe I’m not the hero you want me to be.
That said, I need to address the recent comments made by Corbell. While I wish this wasn’t necessary, it’s important to be clear. The approach he’s taken, altering documents and attaching his name to reports like the Immaculate Constellation and submitting them to Congress, has crossed a line. This behavior risks undermining legitimate discussions and could lead to operational security breaches. It’s disheartening to see him try to hold onto fleeting relevance, especially when the focus should be on the integrity of the information rather than personal recognition. Time for everyone to move on, and I will do the same. This will be my last communication.
Lastly, I ask that you (Corbell) please refrain from repeatedly contacting ONI and AFISR personnel for data. These are putting them at unnecessary risk, and it’s important to consider the consequences of such behavior.
Now, onto the main event, your questions:
1) Why did you decide to share this now?
Timing is critical. The Immaculate Constellation report has reached certain decision-makers, but the data risks being buried or diluted unless the public demands accountability. There is a significant risk that the data could be downplayed, buried, or diluted unless there is pressure from the public for transparency. We need to lay the groundwork for greater acknowledgment without compromising operational security.
We’re also at an inflection point geopolitically. Adversaries like China and Russia have expanded their own UAP recovery programs, some modeled on AATIP, and the strategic gap is closing. Public awareness can act as a counterbalance, pushing our own programs to adapt more aggressively. We are closer to WW3 than ever before. It’s crucial that we come forward with the truth and engage the public, ensuring the collection and sharing of the best intelligence available. This transparency is vital to securing our position and countering the growing threats posed by Russia and China in a way that safeguards global stability for the long term.
2) What was your reason for choosing me to be the outlet you shared this information with?
Frankly, I considered other outlets, but their insistence on verifying my identity presented a risk. Your platform is large enough to reach the right people without creating unnecessary exposure. People have seen, as I have, your character and the way you handle sensitive material and protect your sources. Your commitment to maintaining OPSEC principles and respecting confidentiality has been evident. You were definitely the right choice for this.
3) Am I the only one you have shared this with besides the one other creator you originally mentioned?
No, you’re not the only one. I’ve shared these materials with a few trusted individuals who are aligned with the objective of responsible disclosure. However, the distribution has been limited, as sharing this information comes with significant risks, both personally and operationally.
4) Do you know what the possibilities and limits of the UAP in the pictures you shared are that are beyond what is described in the Immaculate Constellation report given to Congress?
The report is intentionally limited; it’s a briefing, not a full technical assessment. The UAPs observed demonstrate capabilities far beyond conventional aerospace benchmarks.
These crafts demonstrate transmedium travel, non-ballistic motion, and localized gravity manipulation. Some, like the cruciform entity, show distinct behaviors indicating functional differences. Shape-shifting has been observed, possibly due to advanced cloaking or optical refraction, referred to as morphogenic behavior, allowing adaptation to environments or missions with materials or energy constructs beyond Earth’s technology. Certain UAPs emit EMF signatures that disrupt ISR systems, causing sensor malfunctions. Orb-class UAPs focus on surveillance with minimal EMF interference, while cruciform entities exhibit aggressive maneuvers and high-energy emissions capable of disabling systems such as the EO DAS.
5) Is there any picture you’ve seen where the craft has any kind of letters, symbols, or similar on it?
Yes. Two high-resolution captures from ISR platforms (one from an MQ-9 Reaper, another from a P-8A Poseidon) show markings resembling glyphs. These are non-alphanumeric and appear etched, possibly isotropic engravings. These markings might serve symbolic, functional, or communicative purposes, though their meaning is entirely speculative.
6) In your second drop of images, one of them that you had me blur was called “The Cruciform Entity.” The word entity could be interpreted as having something organic or lifelike associated with it. Is that the reason it has that word associated with it?
The term “entity” reflects observed behavior that suggests autonomy or intelligence. The Cruciform-class displayed pursuit patterns and what could only be described as evasive maneuvers when intercepted. This behavior goes beyond what we’d classify as “remotely piloted.” While no biological components have been recovered, the tactical response it demonstrated suggests a level of sentience. We’ve also seen different types of Cruciform-Class entities with different lengths and widths.
7) Have you witnessed disagreements or power struggles among those in charge of UAP programs?
Frequently. Some agencies push for a strictly defense-oriented posture, while others advocate for scientific exploration and international collaboration. These disagreements result in fragmented data-sharing, funding disputes, and siloed operations. For instance, the divide between the AATIP-style exploratory programs and strictly defensive units within NASIC has caused significant delays in cohesive analysis.
8) You spoke of cooperation between allies, is there cooperation with adversaries?
Yes, but it’s limited and often indirect. For example, during UAP detections in SSBN Bastion zones in the Arctic, there was limited Track II diplomacy with Russian GRU counterparts to avoid misinterpretations of activity as military provocations. However, China remains aggressively secretive about their encounters, suggesting either an inability or unwillingness to collaborate.
9) Is there a trend in shapes over time?
Yes.
- Pre-1980: Predominantly disk-shaped or cigar-shaped sightings.
- Post-2000: A notable increase in orb-class and triangular, star polygons, star polyhedron, and chandelier configurations.
- Pre-1980, Post-2000: Rare appearances of cruciform-class entities known to the IC.
10) Can you debunk any bogus claims about UAP being currently circulated publicly?
Certainly. One common misconception is that all UAPs are extraterrestrial. While some sightings may involve non-terrestrial technology, a significant number could involve advanced, classified technology developed by adversaries, including China and Russia. Claims that UAPs are merely drones are misleading; no known drone technology can achieve the speeds, maneuverability, and transmedium capabilities observed in these phenomena.
Previously, one of Nathan’s earlier videos featured a photo that bore a striking resemblance to the UFO described in the 1967 Angus Brooks incident, where a cross-shaped object was reported. The whistleblower now answers questions and provides new photos, furthering the discussion and potentially linking modern UAP accounts to historical sightings like Brooks’.
The “Black Triangle UFO Near Catalina Island” incident involves sightings of large, silent, triangular-shaped unidentified flying objects near California’s Catalina Island, a region known for frequent UAP activity. These sightings have been linked to the “Immaculate Constellation” program, which released confidential infrared images depicting various UAPs, including black triangles, reigniting interest in the area’s history of aerial anomalies. The proximity of Catalina Island to locations like the USS Nimitz incident site and Guadalupe Island, both associated with UAP encounters, suggests a potential regional corridor of such activity. The whistleblower’s revelations about these images and incidents have prompted renewed scrutiny of past UAP encounters in the region.
Previously, The “Confidential IR Picture Set of UAPs from the Legacy Program” article discusses an anonymous whistleblower’s disclosure of classified infrared images depicting Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs), including “orbs” and “motherships,” allegedly surveilling sensitive sites such as nuclear deterrent bases. These images were shared with the host of the Strange Mysteries YouTube channel, who examined the 14-page PDF titled “Immaculate Constellation UAP IR Cam Picture Set Research Station NA 43.” The images, primarily in black and white due to their infrared nature, showcase unusual shapes and patterns, such as starfish-like objects, discs with distinctive markings, and spinning crosses.
This disclosure aligns with the whistleblower’s previous revelations, where they provided answers to questions and new photos related to UAPs. The consistent theme across these disclosures is the whistleblower’s intent to bring to light information about UAPs that has been classified and intentionally withheld from the public. By sharing these materials, the whistleblower aims to inform the public about ongoing covert operations and surveillance activities involving UAPs, emphasizing the need for transparency and responsible dissemination of such information.
