Just a couple of days before Kirk was killed I’d discovered that Tucker Carlson was planning to release a multi-part documentary series on the 9/11 attacks on the anniversary. Just before Kirk’s death I’d watched his hour-long interview on the Piers Morgan show, in which I thought he’d done an excellent job.
Apparently Carlson’s documentary would declare that everything we’d been officially told for twenty-four years about 9/11 was a lie so his series had the potential to massively jump-start the strong revival of the 9/11 Truth movement.
I’d been planning to make Carlson’s 9/11 series the topic of my new article until the Kirk killing blew everything out of the water and also led Carlson to delay the release for a couple of weeks.
Carlson and Kirk are quite friendly and assuming that Carlson’s documentary was as good as I’d expect, I’d think that Kirk would have strongly endorsed it to his huge number of mainstream conservative follower.
Hitherto, 9/11 Truthers have overwhelmingly been leftists, so Kirk’s support could have made it a completely bipartisan, and the resulting political impact would have been enormous.
So if Israel did arrange Kirk’s, I think that’s the reason that they needed to do so before the release of Carlson’s 9/11 series.
Research suggests FIML, or Functional Interpersonal Meta Linguistics, is a communication technique to improve relationships by addressing misinterpretations in real-time.
It seems likely that FIML involves partners interrupting conversations to clarify emotional reactions, aligning with Buddhist principles of mindfulness.
The evidence leans toward FIML supporting advanced Right Speech and Right Listening, potentially transforming lives by enhancing understanding.
Description
What is FIML? FIML, or Functional Interpersonal Meta Linguistics, is a method designed to optimize communication and psychological well-being between two people. It’s described as a form of analytical psychotherapy that doesn’t require formal training, focusing on clearing up misunderstandings as they happen.
How It Works Partners agree to interrupt normal conversations when one feels an emotional reaction to something said. The reacting partner asks the other about their state of mind at that moment, and the other responds honestly. This process helps identify if the reaction was based on a misinterpretation, with follow-up questions for clarity. Repeating this frequently can develop better communication skills.
Connection to Buddhism FIML aligns with Buddhist teachings, supporting advanced forms of Right Speech and Right Listening. It’s seen as a practical application of mindfulness, based on impermanence and emptiness, potentially leading to personal transformation by freeing individuals from ordinary speech constraints.
Unexpected Detail: Precision Comparison Interestingly, FIML is compared to the James Webb Space Telescope for its clarity in communication, suggesting it offers a much sharper understanding than typical conversations, likened to using an old Hale telescope.
Survey Note: Comprehensive Analysis of FIML Based on American Buddhist Net
This note provides a detailed examination of Functional Interpersonal Meta Linguistics (FIML) as presented on American Buddhist Net, focusing on its description, practice, and relation to Buddhist principles. The analysis aims to offer a thorough understanding for readers interested in communication techniques and their philosophical underpinnings.
Background and Definition
FIML is defined on American Buddhist Net as a technique for optimizing communication and psychological well-being between two people. It is described as a form of analytical psychotherapy that can be practiced without formal training, emphasizing real-time analysis to clear mistaken psychological interpretations. This approach is particularly noted for addressing both recent and long-held miscommunications, enhancing the relationship dynamics between partners.
The site compares FIML to advanced scientific instruments, such as the James Webb Space Telescope, for its clarity in communication, contrasting it with normal speech, which is likened to using the older Hale telescope. This analogy underscores FIML’s potential to provide precise, high-resolution insights into interpersonal interactions.
Practice and Methodology
The practice of FIML involves a structured process, detailed in How to do FIML. Partners must first agree to interrupt normal conversations when needed, creating a foundation for open communication. The process unfolds as follows:
Step Number
Description
1
Partners agree to do FIML and can interrupt normal conversation as needed.
2
One partner feels a sensation or emotional reaction within one second after the other says something.
3
The reacting partner asks, “What was your state of mind when you said X?” seeking the other’s short-term memory contents.
4
The other partner answers honestly, describing their state of mind during the few seconds surrounding the statement.
5
If the reacting partner finds no justification for their reaction, they realize it was a misinterpretation, trusting the other’s honesty.
6
Follow-up questions, e.g., “Are you sure you were not implying boredom when you said X?” may be asked for clarity.
7
The reacting partner discusses the new understanding with the other, briefly or at length, as chosen.
8
The process is repeated frequently; after a few hundred successful instances, metacognition may develop, reducing the need for frequent interruptions.
The term “sensation” is clarified as an emotional, physical, or hormonal response occurring soon after something is said, starting at a discreet moment, and can be negative or positive. Mindfulness is crucial, with partners encouraged to observe these sensations within one second and make queries in a neutral tone to avoid further reactions.
Additional resources on the site, such as FIML and practical semiotics, Advanced FIML, and FIML FAQs, provide further guidance on refining the practice, addressing issues like snowballing in practice and disruption of neurotic responses.
Relation to Buddhism
FIML’s integration with Buddhism is a significant aspect, as outlined in various articles on American Buddhist Net. It is described as supporting advanced Right Speech and Right Listening, aligning with Buddhist principles of impermanence and emptiness. This connection is detailed in What is FIML?, where it is noted as a method or process, not formalities, meeting requirements for creating Right Conditions for these advanced practices.
The site suggests that FIML can transform one’s life by freeing individuals from the constraints of Ordinary Speech, as seen in Notes on semiotics, FIML, Buddhism, and a bit of anthropology. This article highlights how FIML corrects distortions in thinking or feeling that may arise from practicing Buddhism in isolation, emphasizing the importance of truthful interaction with an honest partner. It posits that early Buddhists might have engaged in similar practices during their travels in pairs or fortnightly discussions of failings, a tradition that has declined in many places.
Further, The deep importance of intentional language discusses FIML as a profound philosophical answer to language and communication, revealing real-time speech analysis that moves meaning to true experience, resonating with Buddhist mindfulness. Global Workspace Theory and mistake awareness & correction links FIML to calibrating minds like fine instruments, playing the FIML communication game for precise readings, reinforcing its mindfulness aspect.
Significance and Impact
The significance of FIML lies in its potential to enhance communication precision, as evidenced by its comparison to advanced telescopes. This unexpected detail highlights its capability to offer clarity beyond typical conversational exchanges, potentially revolutionizing how partners understand each other. The site also suggests that FIML can address interpersonal conundrums arising from the Problem of the Criterion, as noted in Buddhism category posts, impacting daily relationships and communication at every level.
Author and Context
While specific author information is not directly provided, the site’s posts, such as About, indicate it is run by ABN, focusing on Buddhism, communication, and FIML. The contact email, realABN@pm.me, as seen in Contact, suggests a personal engagement with readers, reinforcing the site’s role as a platform for sharing and discussing these ideas.
Conclusion
FIML, as presented on American Buddhist Net, is a robust communication technique with deep ties to Buddhist philosophy, offering a practical method for enhancing interpersonal relationships through mindfulness and real-time analysis. Its structured practice, alignment with Buddhist principles, and potential for personal transformation make it a valuable tool for those seeking to improve communication and psychological well-being.
Grok used 45 seconds to deep search FIML and produce the above result, posted in full, minus one short paragraph. It did a good job. I am fine with posting this and encouraging readers to look it over. Done properly and for a reasonable amount of time, FIML is deeply life-enhancing. It probably should become a fundamental part of Buddhist practice. Grok did the summary on 03/07/2025. ABN
We’ve been lied to about our entire history and the origins of human civilization. We’re still being lied to because of what’s coming. But you can put two and two together if you look outside their mainstream scientific framework.
The speed of the North Magnetic Pole’s movement was around 10 km per year for most of the 20th century, then suddenly increased in the 1990s to over 50 km per year, moving toward Siberia…
They made this graphic in 2025, and what it reveals will change how you see your future—this is why billionaires are building doomsday bunkers!
Did you notice the sudden acceleration in the 1990s? That shift triggered true polar wander, which began altering Earth’s rotational axis.
Around 1995–2000, Earth’s spin axis took an abrupt turn toward the east and is now drifting almost twice as fast as before, at a rate of nearly 7 inches (17 centimeters) per year.
It’s no longer moving toward Hudson Bay, Canada, but instead toward Europe, just like the North Magnetic Pole!
I have posted information on this several times. Since it is quite plausible, and if true of enormous importance, I am posting this overview which is clear and concise. ABN
What he describes is a subcultural psycholinguistic and psycho-semiotic cage.
It has its own signs and symbols and like most subcultures stands in opposition to their caricature of the larger culture in which they live.
Mind-control works largely through manipulating these and many other subcultures and then manipulating our responses to them.
I hope all FIML practitioners can see this and also see outside of these semiotic cages, something very difficult for all humans to do no matter how smart you may be.
Psycholinguistics and semiotics have an enormous psychological and emotional component, which has a very strong hold on all of us.
Many people who grasp this only understand how to use it to manipulate other people. There are hundreds of books and videos on how to do this.
You can do stuff like that and it sort of works, but it’s horrible morality and goes against Buddhist practice because it is a form of deception, of lying. It’s a cheap exploitation of a universal human weakness.
The big problem here is that while individuals in pairs and small group can free themselves from their psycholinguistic cages, large numbers of people cannot.
I do not know how to fix that. Maybe AI or some other new tech will help.
For now, we are stuck with a variety of metacognitive cages that hold large groups of people together.
These are our religions, ideologies, races, ethnies, and subcultures, like the one described above.
There is no power or authority on earth that can control metacognitive group identity, which is why conflict and war is inevitable.
Humans are too simple-minded to see a way out in large numbers, so large crazy groups will continue to rule the world.
The crazier they are, the stronger their hold on their members because it is very hard to get out of a crazy cage in which you have invested everything or were born into.
Look around you. Is there any culture that is not insane? ABN
Video taken from Kirk’s left make a shot from the right look plausible but 1) that’s an impossible shot and 2) foreshortening of distance between Kirk and the alleged right-side shooter are deceptive. There are many missing pieces in the story as of now but that Kirk was shot at close-range from his right side is not one of them. ABN
I doubt most know anything about him or the other guy unfortunately. Charlie started to wander off the plantation. He was becoming a liability. This was a warning to others.
Until these questions are answered, I don’t believe one word of it. The writing on the bullet casings and finding out he lives with a trans is a nice and easy deflection. This story has more holes than a loaf of sourdough. Expect another Butler type “investigation”. And they have already planted the seed the kid is suicidal. Jus sayin.
Ian Smith, Sr. @iansmithfitness People get upset for not accepting the official government narrative of Kirk’s death – as if questioning a government that has done nothing but lie is somehow disrespectful. If anything, blindly accepting the cute gift-wrapped narrative is. Charlie was a man who encouraged questioning. Let’s walk through some of the contradictions and questions. 1) Discord evidence. Officials claim digital chats were found mapping the plan, but Discord says it’s not on their servers. So where is it? Screenshots? Forensics? Chain of custody? If a planner is smart enough to scout/escape, why leave a confession on a public platform? 2) No ballistics and caliber. We still don’t have a lab match between the rifle and the bullet that killed Charlie. Until there’s rifling/toolmark confirmation, everything else is noise. Officials can end this instantly with the fired bullet’s measured lands/grooves and a simple one-page lab prelim. Why haven’t they? 3) Rifle fairy tale. Video shows the runner without a rifle at several points. So he had to disassemble it. Are we supposed to believe he then re-assembled it just to dump it in the woods? 4) Family contradiction. Grandmother claims nobody in the family is a leftist and she’s never seen him touch a gun. That clashes with the leftist narrative and the story of a calm, competent shooter. 5) Confession theater. Shooter executes the plan under pressure, escapes, then immediately tells on himself via dad/minister. You don’t pull off a precise shot and then sprint home for a group confession circle. 6) Decoys. Two decoy arrests/contacts the same night. If this was a lone impulsive student, why the extra moving parts? Who coordinated this? 7) The plane. A private jet near the scene “disappears” from public tracking right after the shooting. We’re told “nothing to see here.” Cool, then release the ADS-B raw logs, tower audio, and a simple flight timeline. 8) Security. Clips show odd hand signals and movements around Charlie seconds before the shot. If that’s normal, let’s see an official breakdown of who those people were and what they were signaling. 9) Motive tangle. Information suggests Charlie had public disagreements with major donors and was pivoting harder to America-First fights. Ask the most basic question: cui bono? Who benefits from the story we’re being sold? 10) Wardrobe shift. Rooftop figure is head-to-toe black. The suspect appears in different clothing. If the shooter changed, where are the discarded clothes? Recovered? Tested for GSR/DNA? Logged? Show the evidence tags. 11) Rooftop access unclear. Which door, hatch, or ladder? Card swipe? Alarm trip? Camera angles? If the route is “known,” release the complete path with timestamps. A campus roof isn’t a bus stop. 12) Camera gaps. We get a few convenient snippets but no uninterrupted multi-angle sequence from roof to woods. Where’s the full pull from all cams? Redactions can protect privacy but cuts protect narratives. 13) Forensics. No GSR [Gun Shot Residue] results from the suspect’s hands/clothes. No latent prints/DNA announced on the rifle, scope, or towel. No matching shoe prints/soil transfer from the roof. These are day-one tests. Where are they? 14) Geodata. If the FBI has the right man, they have his location history, pings, and IP logs. Publish the warrant returns (redacted) that place his device at the roof and along the dump route. 15) Backpack & gear. Backpack color/cut in roof footage vs later images of the suspect aren’t a clean match. Was the pack recovered? Contents? Gloves? Optic cover? Sling? Any of it booked into evidence? 16) Media choreography. The most cinematic detail (the father/minister pipeline) was rolled out before forensics. That primes the public with a tidy moral arc while the science lags. Classic play. If the FBI has the shooter, show the receipts. Not some “I’ll see you in Valhalla” bullshit. Until then this case is a puzzle with pieces hammered to fit. We don’t need another polished narrative. We need proof. 11:30 AM · Sep 13, 2025 · 117.3K Views
In other words, reading between the lines: The night before Kirk’s talk at UVU, rabbi Wolicki asked to have a one-hour Zoom conversation with him, to go through his pro-Israel “talking points”, because many of his fans “were turning on Israel” and “there were prominent people … actively working to [get him to] drop his support for Israel on a daily basis.” (In other words, Kirk was pushed in an anti-Israel direction by his followers and by people like Carlson and Owens, and needed strong opposite pressure to stay in line.) Kirk was “in a combative mood”, “playing the role of devil’s advocate.” (In other words, the conversation turned into an argument.) Kirk was assassinated the next day.
Another point I have not seen brought up is the timing of the shot is said to have been .23 seconds, which comes from an audio measurement of the shot from firing to hitting Kirk.
How do we know the audio has not been doctored?
That would be an easy thing to do. That .23 seconds yields a distance of 143 yards, precisely the distance the sniper is said to have been away from Kirk.
But that ‘sniper’ ran off with no apparent gun in hand.
Also, no bullet has been recovered and there appear to be no signs of it exiting, which should have been conspicuous.
Why did Kirk’s security immediately clean up the scene? And why did Zinn act like a decoy immediately after the shot?
There are numerous anomalies like these in the so-far official story of what happened. ABN
In just a couple of days, an impressive amount of information has been brought to light pointing to Israel’s strong motive to take out Charlie Kirk ASAP. I will here compile that information, as I found it on X and other Internet outlets.
In doing so, I am not influenced by my personal opinion on Kirk. I hardly ever listened to him before the last three days, and my opinion was mostly negative. Today, I still feel that Nick Fuentes was right in his very severe judgment of him as a traitor to his country paid by Israel to keep the MAGA movement in line with Israel’s interests, even when he was doing some “damage control”. That doesn’t mean, in my view, that Kirk was not sincere in his defense of Israel. As an evangelical Christian, he probably really saw this as a calling from God. On the other hand, I think that ambitious men are never exclusively interested by truth, that men in general (women included) are very good at lying to themselves about their true motivations, and that religion is a very practical way to lie to yourself. I also think that Kirk, although an energetic and talented fast talker, was not extremely intelligent—less intelligent than Fuentes, in my view. Like Fuentes, I don’t think anybody who supports Israel because the Bible tells him so can be very intelligent.
So based on what I have seen recently, I believe that Kirk was turning, but I wouldn’t be able to say to what extent his turning was motivated by his love for truth and morality, or by his concern for keeping the trust of his base of followers, and saving his political future. I suppose he was feeling opposite pressures from two sides: from his pro-Israel backers on the top, demanding that he keeps his unconditional support of Israel, and from his grass-root followers on the bottom, who find Israel’s actions and Israel’s influence on U.S. policies more and more unbearable (Kirk’s followers also listen to Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens or Nick Fuentes).
Whatever his motivations were, and no matter how far he was planning to go in his critics of Israel, the fact is that he had gone quite far already.
Simon makes a decent point, but don’t throw the crowd out with the bathwater. Nothing is perfect. Millions of Brits needed a reason to show their mettle. Who organized it is not the main feature. We have to work with percentages. A huge crowd like this inspires tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions. Don’t make perfect be the enemy of pragmatics. ABN
The West clings to its delusion of supremacy like a fading empire hoarding tarnished trophies.
It’s the same old playbook for them.
They spin a narrative, call it truth, and expect the world to bow.
They do this with everything. From marketing product sales, to politics.
To grasp the Middle East’s geopolitics, you have to understand this Western narrative framework.
“Terrorism” is always the villain, and the West, the gallant hero, swoops in to save the day.
There’s no reality where the resistance topples Israel and “wins” the Middle East.
That’s not how the script works.
The West demands its victory lap, claiming it tamed the savages and gifted the region peace.
The reality however, is that their grand experiment failed to become a hegemony so they need to wrap this up, and demote Israel to just another player integrated into the region’s control.
That’s the reality. That’s the outcome.
The Gulf states get this. They ditch the ego and pride and see the board for what it is. And they couldn’t care less what the region thinks of them.
Outcomes over optics.
Many on here don’t understand this. Frankly, they should not be involving themselves with geopolitics.
Just pay attention over your timeline. Anyone saying the Gulf states are an embarrassment or a humiliation over this Doha strike,
are the ones being played by the Western narrative. They care about the narrative of optics over the reality outcomes.
They care about shit like honor, integrity, glory when the stakes are far more substantial.
These people are like naive children.
They don’t just fall short when it comes to geopolitics. They often conduct themselves poorly in other domains within their life.
I see it in corporate very often.
Very easy to manipulate.
They become part of the means for people who shape outcomes.
American Buddhist Net 