the zimmerman telegram is a very good example of that. we all i think know the rough outlines of it. the german foreign minister comes up with a crazy idea, which he was prone to because he thought he was a real student of the united states, although he had only taken one trip to the united states once by train for a couple of weeks. he thought he would get the mexicans to join with the germans to recover lost territory in the southwest. he sends a telegram. it has been years of debate about how this telegram actually went, but i think we now know what happened. it actually went through washington. the reason it went through washington was because, although the wilson administration didn't admit it, after the lusitania went down, they determined it was impossible to commit it was -- communicate with washington anymore because they have severed all communication, so it was very difficult for the germans to get in touch with americans and make their points in america, let alone send news to the united states. so they were given a line throu

some reasons discussed, the influence of british propaganda, as well as zimmerman telegram, a diplomatic- cable intercepted between germany and mexico the proposed alliance between the two countries. the panelists also talk about president woodrow wilson's decision-making process, asking congress to declare war. world war i centennial commission organized this 45 minute event. it took place at the national world war i museum and memorial in kansas city, missouri. [applause]

we know that the germans are seeking american ships again, there was the zimmerman telegram at the german family thought they were going to get mexico to invade united. it doesn't get us to the point where he says actually it's better to five. and then his relationship to these five completely changes because now he's not the sometimes hopeful leaders of impulse in the right place. he's trying to break them. >> i want to ask you a question that's a little more widely ranging or at least more political. here's a book about a group of people in 1970, a century ago. for us it is time seemed to be changing so fast and as you said in the past six months so much has unraveled and so much more will unravel in the next couple years or maybe even couple of months. so it's philosophical but also an ethical question, why study something that happened 100 years ago? why look for continuity in a situation in a country where this continuity is overbearing? >> there are lots of clichcs that sort of answer the question . if we don't study the past, we are doomed to repeat it. partly it's because there ar