Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it wrote Santayana.  History is bunk, said Henry Ford.  Of the two, I'm more with Ford.  The problem with Santayana's thoughtful quote, is that it assumes that history is accessible enough to be ignored.  The allure of Ford's seemingly anti-intellectual outburst, is that it reminds us that history can be complete fiction.  But I haven't been able to find anyone to quote on what seems to me to be the most significant point of all about history.  Namely, that much, perhaps most significant history is hidden.  I. F. Stone wrote a book called "The Hidden History of the Korean War."  Daniel Boorstin wrote, "Hidden History -- Exploring Our Secret Past."  And I thank Jamie Hecht for that.  He found that title on the Internet today.  Thank you, Jamie.  Howard Zinn wrote essentially an alternative history which a lot of you know about, "A People's History of the United States," and more recently Michael Parenti wrote, "History as Mystery."  But unfortunately, Michael Parenti, my friend, is very very poor on 9/11.  For some reason, like Noam Chomsky, he just can't seem to get his head around this.  It's a mystery to me.  But the most lethal hidden histories, pound for pound, are the false flag operations that Webster Tarpley mentioned.  These are the state-sponsored or rogue network toxic deceptions in which an actual attack on one's own country is engineered for the purpose of mobilizing public opinion, usually behind the war agenda of the invisible government and the ruling deceivers. 

Now these deceptions tend to be turning points of history leading to terrible loss of life, and even downward spirals for whole countries.  The book, "Great War Triggering Deceptions of All Time" is yet to be written.  But when it is, it will be very thick and of utmost importance.  And if it is written, I cannot think of an author more qualified and capable of writing it, than Webster G. Tarpley. [AB-1]

One more quote, by an American cultural critic, Larry Ray.  Again, thank you, Jamie, I couldn't remember the name and Jamie found it.  I didn't have access to the Internet today.  Larry Ray wrote, "Anniversaries are reservoirs of sacred power."  I saw this first hand this morning at ground zero.  But there is something more sacred than any commemorative occasion, and that is the search for truths about turning point events, specifically tonight, about the events of 9/11.  You're owed at least two relevant examples of previous deceptions, and that's all there's time for.  First, Pearl Harbor, the original outrage.  Robert B. Stinnett's book, "Day of Deceit," is in my opinion, by far the most comprehensive work on the subject.  A former U.S. Naval Officer, Stinnett invested 17 years in research and he liberated 100,000 previously classified documents.  To brutally summarize "Day of Deceit," it proves, to my satisfaction at least, that for a year before Pearl Harbor, FDR had a plan, specifically an 8-point plan, to provoke the Japanese into attacking U.S. forces or facilities.  He repeatedly emphasized that it must be the case that the Japanese fire the first shot, and what a shot it was.  It required that a significant part of the U.S. fleet be made vulnerable, that those responsible for protecting that fleet have one or both hands tied behind their backs.  That the Japanese remain unaware that all their codes right up through the high command had been broken, and broken good.  The day before Pearl Harbor, according to the Gallup poll, just 16% of the U.S. Public supported this country entering World War II.  The day after Pearl Harbor, 1 Million men volunteered to fight in that war.  That stingingly effective deception, at least was in service of adding another powerful ally to the struggle to defeat Nazi Germany, and I for one retroactively endorsed that, but such an ethically warranted fraud, if I may use that phrase, is virtually a lone exception to the rule in this sordid category. 

Typical, on the other hand, was the supposed attack by North Vietnamese torpedo boats in early August, 1964, on two U.S. destroyers  in the Gulf of Tonkin.  I believe this has been referred to earlier in the evening.  That's a problem when you come last.  The supposed attack on the U.S. destroyers, Maddox and Turner Joy was a sham.  Navy Commander James Stockdale, who was Ross Perot's vice-presidential candidate, was flying cover in the Tonkin Gulf that night.  "Our destroyers were firing at phantom targets," he wrote later.  There was nothing there but black water and American firepower.  Lyndon Johnson, nevertheless, went on TV to deceive the American people and the Congress.  The result was overwhelming support for immediate passage of the Tonkin Gulf Resolution which was the sole legal basis for the Vietnam War, the loss of 3 Million Vietnamese lives, and 58,000 American ones, and creation of a schism in the U.S. body politic that continues to this day.

Emblematic, and the media have been mentioned here without praise earlier this evening and after 33 years as a media critic I can't find any fault with that, emblematic of media malfeasance and supine service of illegitimate power, then and now, The New York Times after LBJ's speech editorialized that "The President went to the American people last night with the somber facts."  The most somber fact is that if We the People cannot force today's top hidden history into the open, a cascade of calamitous events is very likely to ensue.  And my prayer is that I am wrong.  Thank you.

Ed Begley, Jr. -- Host:  You've been so patient.  And we've been talking up here a lot, showing a lot of information.  We invite you now, we have roamers out there with microphones, to get your questions for the panel.  You can put some tough questions of any sort that you like.  We have people out there with microphones and we're going to get people to ask a question.

Question:  Where exactly are Rice and Powell in this whole thing?  I only heard one person say something about Condoleeza Rice, but also Colin Powell.  So those two.

Kristina Borjesson, Author/Investigative Reporter:  Powell did not want to go along with the program.  And he was basically pressured to sell the war on Iraq.  He was in the White House at the time when post -9/11 they were trying to ride that terror wave into Iraq, there were a number of offices, and I'm sure many of you have heard of them, within the administration there was the White House Information Group with Condoleeza Rice and company.  They were the messengers and the messages were being formulated at the same time for them to send out at the same time to sell the war, and the images of the mushroom cloud.  And then there was the Office of Special Plans for cherry picking intelligence, and putting it together in a way, again that would sell disinformation to the American public, and part of the Office of Special Plans was also to put pressure on high level people in the CIA, the NSA, and even Colin Powell not to go along with the program, but unfortunately, he buckled.  And he's trying to get Bob Woodward to sort of write his mea culpa, but he was a big man in a tight spot, and he did not, I think, acquit himself very well.  He didn't stand up and call a halt to the madness. 

John Prados, Author/Former Senior National Security Analyst:  Rice took over as National Security Adviser with a different agenda.  She's a Europeanist, an expert on the Soviet Union, Cold War.  She was and in a certain sense still is mired in the Cold War.  When she came into the White House, she put down the issue of terrorism.  The counterterrorism planning group, the Crisis Unit, which the Clinton Administration had formed, she downgraded it.  Richard Clarke, she demoted.  The plan that he advised she put on the file cabinet.  That plan then took 9 months to get to the President's desk the day before September 11th.