Wallace is quoting from the (then still secret) Robertson Panel Report findings and its recommendations, which after the 1952 Washington DC flap had become official USAF policy and Standard Operating Procedure, i.e. to discredit and debunk UFOs and witnesses regardless of the evidence or qualifications of the witnesses. The document Wallace was quoting was held "Top Secret" till 1994, although portions were published in the Condon Report, 11 years after this interview.

Curiously, even today, some paragraphs of the Robertson Committee Report are amazingly still classified "top secret," more than 56 years later.

Many of the Robertson Panel members, while "fronting" as detached, unbiased scientists, were secretly working as paid consultants for the Central Intelligence Agency, including the Chairman, H.P. Robertson, Professor Donald Menzel and Dr. Luis Alvarez, who had officially requested non-disclosure of their CIA affiliations before the public if the panel's report was ever released (which was not until 1968)…

See Dr. Alvarez letter in CIA UFO files in FOIA-released "Project Bluebook" files.

Wallace's reading of the partial conclusion is a disingenuous ploy, in short, a "smokescreen", apropos his sponsors, Parliament "Highly Filtered" Cigarettes, with Wallace shamelessly "blowing smoke" at a nationwide audience by reading the recommendations out of context in order to hide the real significance of the Robertson Panel's findings. The reader will see just how "highly filtered" was Wallace's disinformation.

The actual text and the true context of the Robertson recommendations is quoted below:

"3. The Panel further _concludes_:

We cite as examples the clogging of channels of communication by irrelevant reports, the danger of being led by continued false alarms to ignore real

indications of hostile action, and the cultivation of a morbid national psychology in which skillful hostile propaganda could induce hysterical behavior and harmful distrust of duty constituted authority."

Let's look at that again (and more) in another way…

indications of hostile action, and the cultivation of a morbid national psychology in which skillful hostile propaganda could induce hysterical behavior and harmful distrust of duty constituted authority.

4. In order most effectively to strengthen the national facilities for the timely recognition and the appropriate handling of true indications of hostile action, and to minimize the concomitant dangers alluded to above, the Panel recommends:

a. That the national security agencies take immediate steps to strip the Unidentified Flying Objects of the special status they have been given and the aura of mystery they have unfortunately acquired;

b. That the national security agencies institute policies on intelligence, training, and public education designed to prepare the material defenses and the morale of the country to recognize most promptly and to react most effectively to true indications of hostile intent or action.

We suggest that these aims may be achieved by an integrated program designed to reassure the public of the total lack of evidence of inimical forces behind the phenomenon, to train personnel to recognize and reject false indications quickly and effectively, and to strengthen regular channels for the evaluation of and prompt reaction to true indications of hostile measures. "

Interview continues…

WALLACE: …"We suggest an integrated program designed to reassure the public of the total lack of evidence of inimical forces behind the phenomena."

And again, as I point out, Secretary Horner says it's simply "ain't" so.

Now, why? The point really at issue here, it would seem, Major Keyhoe, is this:

Why do you believe that the Air Force says that nothing is going on?

Why do you believe that the...?

It's a fairly serious charge that you make.

KEYHOE: I know it is.

WALLACE: You make the charge that the United States government is withholding from the people of the United States certain very important information. Why? What would their motive be for withholding that kind of information from us?

KEYHOE: Well, I'll answer that, but I'd also like to show you some proofs that they are withholding it. The reason was given to me when they were working with me back in '52 and '53: It was first that they were afraid of hysteria. Remember the Orson Wells show? Back... way years back, when he scared people in the hills with the...

WALLACE: I do.

KEYHOE: ...idea of invading Martians. Then, they were also afraid that it would upset organized religion, that was a smaller factor, but there was some fear of it. Later, they were afraid that these accidents when the interceptors had chased these things and had been lost or had crashed, might be considered a proof of hostility. Now, I would never have put my name on anything if it were a matter of a personal opinion.

Now, I have in my possession a copy of the special report fourteen, which is their Bible on this. In the back, it has a table showing that of thirty-two hundred and one cases they examined, nineteen and a half percent were unsolved. And they admit they still are unsolved. You add up what they've had since then; it makes over twelve percent of the reports and those are mostly from the best possible sources.

WALLACE: Well now, wait just a second; I'll use your figures.

The Department of Defense released an official bulletin on November 5, 1957, saying that from June of '55 to June of '57, a two-year period, just a fraction over two percent of all investigated unidentified flying objects had to be listed as "unknown." Two percent, so that's your one point nine...

KEYHOE: What's the period, again?

WALLACE: '55 to '57. The rest were determined to have been balloons, airplanes, hoaxes, and a category about 12 percent, called insufficient information, which means that the report was so flimsy that there was simply nothing to check on.

I must confess that they have...

they've certainly shown me no classified material, but they have opened their files quite willingly to us in our preparation for this program tonight, and they've given us very convincing evidence, Major Keyhoe, that it is largely...

I shouldn't say largely, I'll say ninety-nine and forty-four, one-hundred percent, a hoax. Now, you mentioned...

KEYHOE: A hoax?

WALLACE: Well, let... when I say a hoax...

KEYHOE: Are you saying a lot of good pilots, "hoax"?

Click on the 'NEXT' arrow for page 5

Share this article with: