A Very Heavy Agenda Part 1: A Catalyzing Event [documentary]

[awepittance]

Buy DVD here

Stream Video on Demand here

dvd/streaming/download : 10.15.15

trailer:

[watch on youtube]

more information: http://averyheavyagenda.blogspot.com/

discussion about A Very Heavy Agenda on Porkins Policy Review

 

A Very Heavy Agenda

Post-9/11, the War on Terror had outlived its usefulness.

The minds behind the think tanks that drive America’s interventionist foreign policy decided that the U.S. needed a new enemy, so they chose an old one -- Russia.

Part 1: A Catalyzing Event 1hr 25mins

Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld were ubiquitous in the news media as they took every available opportunity to market to America an aggressive preemptive war policy. But from where did their ideas originate? The answer is a tightly knit and eminently well placed group of neoconservative thought leaders, chief among them Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan. Part 1 begins in the panicked weeks after 9/11, as Kagan et al. seized upon the hysteria surrounding the anthrax letter attacks to further shape America’s perception of reality, planting the seeds for endless future military engagements. George W. Bush may have been understandably perceived as an idiot, but watching these wonks and academics drive the ideological engine for his administration belies a much more sophisticated strategy at play.

Part 2: How We Learned to Stop Worrying and Love The New Neocons 1hr 35mins

After the Cold War, the US-NATO reach expanded significantly to take in most of the old Soviet Union clients in the Warsaw pact. Neoconservative darling Robert Kagan and his diplomat wife Victoria Nuland played key roles inside and out of various administrations and think tanks as they greased the skids for a US-sponsored coup in Ukraine. Part 2 shows the resurrection of old cold warriors from beltway depths to deliver blatant propaganda with techniques reminiscent of a red scare era that had only just faded from memory. US-funded outfits like Radio Free Liberty are pitted against Russia’s RT as each nation accuses the other of waging an ever more desperate and transparent "Information War".

Part 3: Maintaining the World Order 1hr 30mins

"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.

[click to enlarge]

[roasty]

[awepittance]

cute

[awepittance]

youtube preview clip

vimeo preview clip

[eugene]

one thing is pimping your music/label everywhere, it's a music forum so whatever, but shoving your political-teenage video art on the forum for the 5th time or so is just too red bull even for you.

[goDel]

Are you the red bull of being dismissive?

He did ask openly in his previous thread for peoples opinions on whether or not to make a new thread. I prefered a new one. Havent seen other opinions until now. People have different opinions. Which is a given. But I don't like your dismissive tone though.

[Friendly Foil]

lol

[eugene]

Are you the red bull of being dismissive?

He did ask openly in his previous thread for peoples opinions on whether or not to make a new thread. I prefered a new one. Havent seen other opinions until now. People have different opinions. Which is a given. But I don't like your dismissive tone though.

delete agreed because he holds similar moronic political views, and he didn't wait for any more "okays" besides yours, so this is pretty corny way to achieve some faux consensus on acceptance of his spam. this is plain exploiting watmm's genban userbase for advancement of his idiocy propaganda. i dunno if it's not allowed but it's definitely lame as fuck.

[Guest cult fiction]

 

Are you the red bull of being dismissive?

He did ask openly in his previous thread for peoples opinions on whether or not to make a new thread. I prefered a new one. Havent seen other opinions until now. People have different opinions. Which is a given. But I don't like your dismissive tone though.

delete agreed because he holds similar moronic political views, and he didn't wait for any more "okays" besides yours, so this is pretty corny way to achieve some faux consensus on acceptance of his spam. this is plain exploiting watmm's genban userbase for advancement of his idiocy propaganda. i dunno if it's not allowed but it's definitely lame as fuck.

 

watmm user making a post about a movie they made in genban does not seem unusual or unwelcome in the least

 

the thesis of part 1 doesn't seem terribly controversial does it?

 

parts 2 & 3 sound like they'd be a bit harder to back up with clips but we'll see

 

i liked the trailer save for the TV/movie "screens", those were a bit cheesy

[eugene]

but it's not "a movie" as in "hey guys looks at that cool art thing i did", it's a continuation of bludgeoning the same stupid shit over and over for years and not in a "let's discuss this" kinda of way but as in "i want those fucking watmm clicks", it's just sleazy. i mean his own user profile is basically an ever present commercial for this shit now.

[goDel]

 

Are you the red bull of being dismissive?

He did ask openly in his previous thread for peoples opinions on whether or not to make a new thread. I prefered a new one. Havent seen other opinions until now. People have different opinions. Which is a given. But I don't like your dismissive tone though.

 

delete agreed because he holds similar moronic political views, and he didn't wait for any more "okays" besides yours, so this is pretty corny way to achieve some faux consensus on acceptance of his spam. this is plain exploiting watmm's genban userbase for advancement of his idiocy propaganda. i dunno if it's not allowed but it's definitely lame as fuck.

You sound like you're actually angry about it. If you're really as emotionally invested as I think you are, you should report to Joyrex, or something. My guess is that would be more effective than crying about "moronic political views" and "idiocy propaganda".

And please take into consideration that I'm not some typical belieber who eats anything JE produces as if it's ultimate dogma. I just think it's obvious he spent a lot of time and energy in his work. And I'm interested to see in what he's produced. Regardless of the extent I share his point of view.

[awepittance]

another clip (not directly from the movie but the clip showing some of the claims in the synopsis of part 3)

[eugene]

 

 

Are you the red bull of being dismissive?

He did ask openly in his previous thread for peoples opinions on whether or not to make a new thread. I prefered a new one. Havent seen other opinions until now. People have different opinions. Which is a given. But I don't like your dismissive tone though.

delete agreed because he holds similar moronic political views, and he didn't wait for any more "okays" besides yours, so this is pretty corny way to achieve some faux consensus on acceptance of his spam. this is plain exploiting watmm's genban userbase for advancement of his idiocy propaganda. i dunno if it's not allowed but it's definitely lame as fuck.

You sound like you're actually angry about it. If you're really as emotionally invested as I think you are, you should report to Joyrex, or something. My guess is that would be more effective than crying about "moronic political views" and "idiocy propaganda".

And please take into consideration that I'm not some typical belieber who eats anything JE produces as if it's ultimate dogma. I just think it's obvious he spent a lot of time and energy in his work. And I'm interested to see in what he's produced. Regardless of the extent I share his point of view.

 

yes, but only because i care a lot about the purity of watmm and intellectual development of its children.

[goDel]

[caze]

delete and JE have just had to pick up the slack since chunky got banned.

[LimpyLoo]

another clip (not directly from the movie but the clip showing some of the claims in the synopsis of part 3)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdcj4-2RePo

 

The problem with throwing around the word 'neocon' so much

(You called me a 'neocon' for positing moral dilemmas involving torture)

Is that now it doesn't mean anything

[caze]

it's just a leftist bogey word at the end of the day, neoliberal is another one. it has little meaning now other than an insult, whatever it might have once meant.

[Guest Atom Dowry Firth]

Yeah Nazi is just another leftist bogey word as well really

[Silent Member]

kek

[awepittance]

 

another clip (not directly from the movie but the clip showing some of the claims in the synopsis of part 3)

The problem with throwing around the word 'neocon' so much

(You called me a 'neocon' for positing moral dilemmas involving torture)

Is that now it doesn't mean anything

 

to say it doesn't mean anything now is false (even if i overuse the word). Please check out the meaning of neoconservativism online. I was hoping for some more thoughtful feedback in here, really disappointing that some people have taken their beef with me on the forum here but even more disappointing people just writing off the material without even really looking at it.

[autopilot]

Probably a decent video but what are yalls thoughts on genital mutilation?

[caze]

Yeah Nazi is just another leftist bogey word as well really

 

I know you're joking, but this is kind of true - only vaguely, but certainly true for the term fascist.

 

edit: lol, just after writing this post I checked out the trailer, 'you nazi sonofabitch'. haha

[LimpyLoo]

 

 

another clip (not directly from the movie but the clip showing some of the claims in the synopsis of part 3)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdcj4-2RePo

 

The problem with throwing around the word 'neocon' so much

(You called me a 'neocon' for positing moral dilemmas involving torture)

Is that now it doesn't mean anything

to say it doesn't mean anything now is false (even if i overuse the word). Please check out the meaning of neoconservativism online. I was hoping for some more thoughtful feedback in here, really disappointing that some people have taken their beef with me on the forum here but even more disappointing people just writing off the material without even really looking at it.

If you check the 'American anthrax' thread

I said 'great trailer!'

And then praised your editing chops

[awepittance]

 

 

 

another clip (not directly from the movie but the clip showing some of the claims in the synopsis of part 3)

The problem with throwing around the word 'neocon' so much

(You called me a 'neocon' for positing moral dilemmas involving torture)

Is that now it doesn't mean anything

to say it doesn't mean anything now is false (even if i overuse the word). Please check out the meaning of neoconservativism online. I was hoping for some more thoughtful feedback in here, really disappointing that some people have taken their beef with me on the forum here but even more disappointing people just writing off the material without even really looking at it.

If you check the 'American anthrax' thread

I said 'great trailer!'

And then praised your editing chops

 

i saw that, you might actually get something out of watching the finished product since the idea that 'neocon doesn't mean anything anymore' is a central theme, that neocons have tried very hard since Bush to rebrand their image so much so that they don't even use the term anymore, and actually often respond to the question with 'i don't even know what that means anymore'. So coincidentally you've basically said what they've been saying, and no i'm not saying that it makes you a neocon to say that, but i think by saying that (accidentally) you've brought light to an extremely important issue. If it 'doesn't mean anything anymore' where did all the people who created the blueprint for George W Bush's foreign policy go? Did they just disappear? No they didn't, they've just been incredibly successful in normalizing what used to be known as neoconservatism. Technically most of them aren't in 'power' anymore (only 1 of the main ones got an appointment inside the Obama administration) but the ripple effects of their policies we are still feeling today, and their policy making outside of government is incredibly influential. Just look at any map or stat about ISIS/middle east in the New York times, the data almost everytime comes from the Kim & Fred Kagan tank the Institute for the Study of WAr (Fred is the guy who wanted ground troops in Palestine as retaliation for 9/11)

 

see:

 

 

 

 

back to what you originally said about 'the problem' of throwing around the word. I would say that it was only a problem when people used the term too broadly, to describe the entire Bush cabinet for example as being 'neocon', but that's not an accurate way to use the term. Neoconservative means something more specific, and even during Bush the 'real' neocons were saying things far more extreme and deceptive than anything Bush directly said (like repeatedly trying to link the 2001 anthrax mailings with Saddam hussein). So the problem started a long time ago with Fahrenheit 9/11 and the torrent of hatred coming towards Bush. My documentary hones in on the *real* neocons, not the way the term was broadly used in the past.

 

 

 

 

[LimpyLoo]

I plan to watch it as soon as it's out

American Anthrax was very well done

And this looks to be similary well done

 

And yeah I was being a bit hyperbolic

'Neocon' definitely applies to the Wolfewitz'es of the world

I just think it's "crying wolf" a bit to call (e.g.) Hitchens or Harris neocons