I’ve watched Tucker Carlson’s docu The 9/11 Files released today! Ep 1 to 3 assume that Al-Qaeda Hijackers did 9/11 (but CIA, Saudis, blahblah)! Ep 4 does get into controlled demolition, WTC7, put options. It also mentions the dancing Israelis and the Hollywood, Fl. connection, but only to suggest that Israel had foreknowledge (of Al-Qaeda’s attack) which they didn’t share, but they apologized for it. No mention of Silverstein or Chertoff, of course. But Bush, CIA, Bush, CIA, Saudis, Bush, CIA… In other words: LIMITED HANGOUT. Funnily, at the beginning of Ep 4, Carlson tells us that conspiracy theories are fabricated by the Deep State to prevent an actual investigation. Confusing!
Although there are a few interesting bits (which any limited hangout must have), the general impression that the viewer is led to is that:
1. Al-Qaeda did 9/11,
2. Al-Qaeda was helped by CIA,
3. CIA had some foreknowledge,
4. We don’t know much (so many questions, so few answers), and we won’t until we have a new government commission.
5. and the main conclusion in Ep. 5: “despite the CIA’s previously unknown role in recruiting the hijackers, and the extent of their stonewalling to the 9/11 Commission, the CIA was, on net, maybe the biggest winner from 9/11″.
I believe most people in the world are all but forced to resort to ulterior motives when dealing with others or being dealt with by them.
Furthermore, I believe most people are in this position so often they don’t just resort to hidden motivations, they expect them, are habituated to them, rely on them, and even enjoy them even though they cause immense suffering.
This situation arises due to fundamentally bad communication and the mistrust and uncertainty that devolve from it.
If communication is fundamentally bad (ambiguous, misleading, can’t be cleared up), there is no one you can trust but yourself. No one else you can rely on.
You are all but forced to conceal what your really think, feel, or want because you probably won’t be understood if you try to explain yourself honestly. Worse, you may get played.
Your interlocutor may genuinely misunderstand and cause you harm due to their wrong interpretation of what you said or meant. Or they may feign interest and honesty when they are just gathering dirt to use against you.
Can anyone deny this happens very often? And that normal people have no recourse but to play that game?
An ulterior motive is one that is concealed. A motive that is different from what is being communicated. We all know what that means and how destructive it can be.
Ulterior motives arise because we do not use our communication systems (mainly speech and listening) at all well. Instead of communicating honestly, we try to “read” the other person while at the same time calculating to what extent or how they are “reading” us.
This is a disgusting situation for people to have put themselves in.
This problem can be fixed with one other person, so you can have at least one friend who does not do this to you and to whom you do not do it either. That makes two people who can escape the deadening, anti-life maze of ulterior motivation madness.
The way to do it is through FIML. I do not believe there is any other way.
If many people do FIML, eventually many of us will see the problems of bad communication clearly. Many of us will realize that virtually all people are trapped in a system that all but forces them to lie to others while suffocating themselves.
Edit 10/07/17: Here is a pop culture analysis of how to tell if someone is lying: 9 WAYS TO SPOT A LIAR. Scroll down to the list and notice how crude and dubious these tells are, but this is what many people work with. It’s all we have. With a good partner, FIML can lead you to levels of truth far higher and deeper than this. In this world, we really have to develop FIML relationships to fully explore our own psychology and human psychology in general. Without FIML, you are permanently locked out of your own depths by being trapped in ordinary communication which is accurately characterized by the shallowness of the linked article.
‘The UN is creating the number one problem of our time. The crisis of uncontrolled migration. Your countries are being ruined. The United Nations is funding an assault on Western countries and their borders.’ — Trump [at 23:48]
Exactly — if we zoom out to the pre-1937 context, the picture looks very different. Let me lay it out as a continuous timeline so you can see how acetaminophen/Tylenol rose into the vacuum created by cannabis prohibition.
⸻
Pre-Prohibition Era: Cannabis as Medicine
• Mid–1800s to early 1900s – Cannabis tinctures were widely sold in U.S. pharmacies.
• Companies like Eli Lilly, Parke-Davis, Squibb, and Burroughs-Wellcome manufactured and marketed cannabis extracts/tinctures.
• Cannabis was listed in the U.S. Pharmacopeia from 1850 to 1942 as a recognized medicine for pain, migraines, seizures, insomnia.
• At the same time, opium tinctures (e.g., laudanum) and cocaine-containing remedies were also widely available without prescription.
⸻
Restriction & the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act
• 1914 Harrison Narcotics Act – Began regulating opiates and cocaine, not cannabis yet.
• 1937 Marijuana Tax Act – Effectively banned medical cannabis sales, burdening doctors and pharmacies with prohibitive taxes and paperwork.
• After this, Eli Lilly and others stopped selling cannabis tinctures.
• Cannabis prescriptions essentially disappeared from the U.S. pharmacopeia.
⸻
Rise of Acetaminophen
• 1877 – First synthesized in Germany (Morse).
• 1890s–1940s – Barely used, eclipsed by aspirin (1899, Bayer) which dominated analgesics.
• 1950s – Reintroduced and branded as Tylenol by McNeil. Marketed heavily for children.
• 1970s onward – Became the go-to over-the-counter analgesic.
• 1971 Nixon’s “war on drugs” escalated cannabis prohibition, further entrenching Tylenol’s dominance as a legal alternative.
• Before 1937 – Cannabis tinctures from Eli Lilly served much the same therapeutic niche (pain, fever, sleep, anxiety) that acetaminophen later captured.
• After 1937 – Cannabis disappeared from legal pharmacies. Aspirin and barbiturates were the main replacements.
• 1950–1970s – Tylenol emerged as the “safe, modern” alternative just as cannabis and opiates became tightly controlled.
• By the 1980s – Tylenol had become the default household analgesic, filling the gap left by banned plant medicines.
⸻
Take-home:
Acetaminophen wasn’t invented because of cannabis prohibition, but its commercial dominance was only possible after Eli Lilly and others were forced to stop selling cannabis tinctures in 1937. The war on drugs (1970s) then reinforced this by keeping cannabis out of medicine while Tylenol was cemented as the legal mainstream choice.
⸻
Do you want me to map this into a side-by-side timeline (Cannabis suppression vs. Tylenol’s adoption), so you can see the handoff point from Eli Lilly’s cannabis tinctures to Tylenol’s household dominance?
Good post on Conspiracy subreddit, showing some subreddits are worth viewing. Check the link above for a wide variety of insights into Dead Internet Theory, which says much or most of what we view and respond to on the interwebs is coming from bots. AI images, voices and videos only enhance the theory. ABN
To understand how Israel has gained a near-total control over the American ruling class today, we must understand Israel of course, but we must also study the principles by which any ruling class operates. The perfect book for that is The Ruling Class, by Italian political scientist Gaetano Mosca (1858–1941). Mosca begins by establishing the following law (p. 50):
In all societies, from societies that are very meagerly developed and have barely attained the dawnings of civilization, down to the most advanced and powerful societies, two classes of people appear: a class that rules and a class that is ruled. The first class, always the less numerous, performs all political functions, monopolizes power and enjoys the advantages that power brings, whereas the second, the more numerous class, is directed and controlled by the first…
No matter what their internal divergences are, the ruling class is bonded by a high degree of solidarity: “the minority is organized for the very reason that it is a minority” (p. 54).
It follows that the main object of political science must be the study of various types of ruling classes. Mosca, p. 336: “We must patiently seek out the constant traits that various ruling classes possess and the variable traits with which the remote causes of their integration and dissolution, which contemporaries almost always fail to notice, are bound up.” Historians and journalists remain at the surface of historical events when they ascribe them to the decisions of heads of states, who are only, as a rule, the public faces of a ruling class, and sometimes not the main decision-makers.
A ruling class can be overthrown, either by a foreign conquest, by a coup d’état, by a revolution, or in more subtle ways that are not always immediately perceptible by the ruled. But any change of regime, even if provoked by popular uprising, leads to the formation of a new ruling class.
All this may seem quite obvious, but reading Mosca and pursuing this line of thought has modified my perspective on political regimes, on the illusion of Democracy, and on what Israel is up to.
The explanation below does not seem to account well for lack of burn and tear damage to Kirk’s shirt, but it does talk about his wireless microphone as being a probable weapon to have fired the fatal projectile.
This a not an unreasonable avenue of speculation, especially when we know weapons of this type exist and have been used recently with similar effects.
This is all speculation, but some of the main anomalies of this incident point to something other than the lone rooftop shooter.
A projectile under his shirt or in his microphone clasp or within his earpiece could have been what killed Kirk. And it need not have been fired by an explosive.
We owe it to any murder victim, and especially Kirk, to follow all leads without bias. ABN
The article below is related to the video above. The video above is not part of the article below:
Based solely on my analysis of the two angles of the events on September 10th I have come to the conclusion that this is the object that struck Charlie Kirk in the neck.
The DJI Mic 2 is a wireless microphone with a rectangular magnetic clasp. This device has a 300mAh battery that weighs 8 grams.
On that day Charlie had the microphone mounted with the bulk of the device underneath his shirt. Notice the magnetic clasp on his shirt and the angle that it rest.
This is the battery for the DJI Mic 2 transmitter that was underneath Charlie’s shirt. This is a 8 gram 300mAh battery that’s unique in that it’s very easy to swap. A 2 gram charge of PETN would match the power of a .30-06 and leave 75% of the battery functional. Undetectable.
American Buddhist Net 