A Very Heavy Agenda Part 3: Maintaining the World Order - Out Now

A Very Heavy Agenda Part 3: Maintaining the World Order from Robert Martin on Vimeo.

[Click 'Watch Now' on the Vimeo embed to view Part 3 VOD]

"one of the most important documentaries in circulation at the moment
with relevance to the extremely dangerous drumbeat and buildup to major war"
- Joanne Leon [Shadowproof.com] 

Part 3: Maintaining the World Order 3hr 32mins [ Out Now on DVD & VOD ]

"When the Berlin wall fell, our work wasn't finished". -- Victoria Nuland, November 2013

“Fuck the EU” -- Victoria Nuland, February 2014

While stage managing the American empire has undoubtedly proved to be a more difficult task now than in the bipolar world of the cold war era, it is not for lack of greed or hubris that the Kagans and others continue to sell their vision. Did they create these ideas because they truly believe in America's right to be the dominant force in the world? Or, do these ideas help sell weapons and control resources like oil and rare minerals? Part 3 shows interview footage of an obscure PNAC member (Thomas Donnelly) taking credit for the ominous “New Pearl Harbor” phrasing in the notorious 'Rebuilding America’s Defenses' document. But the evidence shows the genesis of the concept to be patriarch Don Kagan, in conjunction with his son Fred, in prior op-eds that call for ‘a catalyzing event’. Other newly sourced footage shows the pair advocating for a US military ground invasion of Palestine on September 12th, 2001 and displaying an unnerving prescience about the 9/11 attacks themselves.

"We're an empire now and when we act we create our own reality, and while you're studying that reality—we'll act again, creating other new realities which you can study too. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do" - Karl Rove

When you take stock of the mindset of people who not only have access to the nexuses of power, but who trade in forming and widely disseminating arguments that justify bringing America closer to a potential nuclear confrontation with Russia, it shows something more plainly Machiavellian at work, with an aim ultimately much more sinister than simply spin.

Produced/Edited/Created by: Robbie Martin
Original Score by: Fluorescent Grey

A Very Heavy Agenda is a joint production between Media Roots & RecordLabelRecords.

If you are interested in obtaining a copy of A Very Heavy Agenda Part 1, 2 & 3 on DVD or VOD go to averyheavyagenda.com

Follow @VeryHeavyAgenda on Twitter

Robbie Martin's...

Latest film is very well done. I think the score is excellent, and he stepped it up a notch with the visuals as well. There was a lot of information I wasn't aware of in this movie. The amount of influence the "Neocons" or "the crazies (as Ray McGovern refers to them)" have in our establishment is staggering. Call them what you want. When everything is said and done, these people are truly criminals.

thanks Jon, I really

thanks Jon, I really appreciate the feedback.

50% off for 911blogger readers

just added a promotional code so that when you type in '911blogger' at checkout, you will get half off the digital rental or buy price.

please let me know if it doesn't work, although i just tested it and it appears to be working.

[the code is active until July 15th]

Curious to know why Max

Curious to know why Max Blumenthal is so enthusiastic about your film. This is a guy who has bashed 9/11 Truthers and the truth movement in general, and who's own father Sidney Blumenthal is a longtime Clinton friend who actively helped Hillary Clinton achieve regime change in Libya while Max criticized people who defended the Gaddafi and Assad governments against western media and government claims. Max is not normally the kind of person who would embrace and promote a documentary made by a person who has worked to expose 9/11 lies. Does Max's endorsement of A Very Heavy Agenda and also his friendship with your sister have anything to do with why you no longer raise questions about what happened to the WTC towers?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cm2ReVsUEAIeCpK.jpg:large Max Blumenthal saying that he will block anyone who sends him "truther material."
https://ton.twitter.com/i/ton/data/dm/685578305152532483/685578305173504000/QsUr4UcO.jpg Max criticizing Cynthia McKinney for "surrounding herself with 9/11 Truthers."
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cm3A5BzUEAAfURr.jpg:large Max criticizing McKinney for questioning western and media governments about Gaddafi's alleged evils at the same time as his father was giving Hillary Clinton information that helped her achieve regime change, and also labeling George Galloway an Assad apologist.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CjFLeS9VEAAJ_AZ.jpg Max congratulating Jeremy Scahill for refusing to participate on a panel with a nun who questioned whether or not Assad was responsible for chemical weapons attack which nearly led to war with Syria.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oP1nekuDLrA I guess you can't be expected to speak for your sister, but hopefully you will be more forthcoming than she was when someone tried to ask a question about Max and his family.

unfortunately whether I

unfortunately whether I disagree with max on those things or not (and I do disagree) is a non-issue because i know this goes back much further than this supposed problem you have to an actual personal vendetta you have with Abby, not with me. Somehow I've gotten dragged into a now 2-3 year long obsession you've had that pre-dates her not passing a certain type of 9/11 truth litmus test that you have dogmatically put forth. I won't call you out personally by name. You can identity yourself if you choose and also let the readers here know you've now created over 10 sock puppets to troll me on twitter mentioning the exact same things verbatim you've raised here all having to do with one person who said a few nice things about my movie. [ and your account is only 4 weeks old, which leads me to believe you created it just to continue your twitter harassment here ]

People can watch the film and decide for themselves if it's worthy of their time, I think many truthers especially would find things in it that would connect dots they have previously learned about. I've never stopped raising questions about 9/11, that's part of why I spent 2 years making A Very Heavy Agenda.

I admit to getting a bit

I admit to getting a bit carried away and setting up troll accounts, which I acknowledge is somewhat childish but it doesn't discredit or invalidate the points I have made. Yes I am unhappy with your sister, but this Isn't about that. It's about allowing people like Max Blumenthal to set parameters for what does and does not constitute acceptable discourse. Max Blumenthal has viciously slandered and character assassinated good people who have raised questions about 9/11 as well as about the official government/media narrative of events in Libya/Syria. On top of that his father actively helped Hillary Clinton destroy Libya and achieve regime change. You constantly go on about progressives who are pro intervention and about good and bad truthers, yet you still openly and publicly tout Blumenthal's endorsement. I think It's more than fair to ask whether or not yours and Abby's watered down 9/11 stance is at all related to gaining acceptance from Blumenthal and other influential progressives. Max's latest exoneration of Abby on the topic of 9/11 makes this question even more valid. I strongly believe that this has possible negative ramifications for not just 9/11 accountability, but for truth telling efforts in general. Personal issues or not, this is an important conversation I am trying to start here and this is something that needs to be discussed rather than swept under the rug.

I think it speaks volumes that you openly ally with people who have no issue with the 28 Pages but who have in many cases taken shots at 9/11 truth in the past, while you deride and criticize people who go further than that. Regardless of what one might think about Webster Tarpley or Kevin Barrett, It's interesting that you have so much vitriol for them while you openly praise people who have proven to be hostile to the cause of 9/11 truth in general. Funny that you accuse me of being dogmatic in litmus testing when you participate in the same exact tactics against people who you don't approve of.


"I admit to getting a bit carried away and setting up troll accounts, which I acknowledge is somewhat childish but it doesn't discredit or invalidate the points I have made."

Care to clarify what this means? Trolling is not allowed on this website, especially sock-puppet accounts or impersonations. You will be banned if this is confirmed.

He posed...

As Abby Martin, as Robbie Martin, as several other people on twitter.

I set up a few Twitter parody

I set up a few Twitter parody accounts in what I admit was a somewhat immature way to get attention, never on this site.

I have Presented My Case

So feel free to respond. Ball is in your court.

I have Presented My Case

So feel free to respond. Ball is in your court.


Abby Martin on 911blogger - http://911blogger.com/topics/abby-martin

Abby unsure if the three Towers fell due to controlled demolition.

To be fair I think It's

To be fair I think It's perfectly fine for her to say that as a professional journalist. My problem is that she tries to use said uncertainty as an excuse to avoid the topic altogether, which I think is dishonest. There is nothing (except for perhaps self censorship) stopping her from doing a program raising questions about how the 3 towers fell, she could take a neutral stance while allowing an expert on the topic to present evidence, similar to what Ben Swann did a few years back. However she won't do that and has chosen to ignore it altogether. She uses the argument that she's not an expert to try and justify it, yet the fact that she is not a scientist doesn't stop her from asserting that human caused climate change is an undeniable fact. That is a very Chomsky like stance to take if you ask me. Another thing that bothered me about the Jon Gold podcast is that she deliberately cited some of the more divisive people such as Alex Jones, Webster Tarpley, and Judy Wood in an attempt to discredit people who make controlled demolition one of their primary causes while not even bothering to mention AE911, David Griffin and the many other researchers who have credibility. I think It's a disservice to somehow assert that deliberately ignoring such an important topic is an example of journalistic integrity.

I get that people can change their minds, but this is all very convenient.

MintPressNews & Robbie & "the new war with Putin"

MintPressNews - http://www.mintpressnews.com/

Robbie Martin, the filmmaker behind the new documentary series “A Very Heavy Agenda,” joins Mnar Muhawesh, editor in chief of MintPress News and host of Behind The Headline to explain how the neoconservative agenda took control of American politics in the aftermath of September 11. He also delves into the ways neocons maintain power today in both the parties through bipartisan support for war and the military-industrial complex -- all in the name of “fighting terrorism” as well as dissect the current war in the Middle East and how it’s not about countering jihadi terror groups but Russia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybmh7rbC--Q (Published on March 23, 2016)

Follow on Twitter!
Mnar Muhawesh: https://twitter.com/MnarMuh
Behind The Headline: https://twitter.com/BTHeadline
MintPress News: https://twitter.com/MintPressNews

Follow on Facebook!
Mnar Muhawesh: https://www.facebook.com/Mnar.Muhawesh
Behind The Headline: https://www.facebook.com/BehindTheHea...
MintPress News: https://www.facebook.com/MintpressNews

Since I included Abby in a list

of gatekeepers protecting Israel re: 911, it's only fair that I link to this video, in which she lambastes Israel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3lpDvPbIHM. She accuses Israel of war crimes, apartheid, and terrorism.

She mentions house demolitions and (3:44) "the intention of the Israel army to demolish the Al-Shoroq Tower"--AKA the "Journalists' Tower" in Gaza City.


I acknowledge that the vast majority of her work is valuable and important. I don't however think it makes her immune to critical analysis of the topics she won't discuss and the possible reasons why.

Do you have a right...

To stalk her on the internet, attack her, slander her? I remember when you first "befriended" me on Facebook. You had no interest in my "friendship." I can tell that by your first message to me on 4/30/2013: "Hey Jon. I'm friends with Alan Kent, and I'm hoping to make it to Springfield MO for the Tour De Peace tour later this month. I saw your post about progressives and the need to speak out for 9/11 Truth. I have been going back and forth with Abby Martin via email about what I believe was a softball interview with Jeremy Scahill in which she didn't ask him at all about 9/11. I know that Abby has frequently posted on 9/11 Blogger, and has been a Truther for a while now. Just curious to get your thoughts on her refusal to ask guests who deny 9/11 Truth the tough questions. Thanks!"

Over 3 YEARS AGO and you are STILL harping on Abby. It's disgusting.

So good as to be shocking--Thank You RM

I have to go a few steps further.... I was surfing YouTube about an hour ago, and watched a brief segment from A Very Heavy Agenda, which won't be linked to, as it may be "bootleg". It was so powerful, though, that I must comment. I am literally in a mild state of shock, having read of the Kagans suggesting we invade Palestine after 911, but having never seen this particular footage of the chuckling William Kristol or heard Fred Kagan's voice while urging that we "take the war to these people" of Palestine.

Whether one uses the term Zionist or NeoCon, what I saw was superbly done. Their evil--that is, their lack of certain forms of empathy, and their concomitant willingness to kill, maim, and bereave people who had nothing to do with 911--is sickening.