Blair Even Less Popular than Bush

[Ben]

"George Bush isn't the only world leader whose popularity is in the toilet. According to an Angus Reid Global Scan report, the American President's 34 percent rating is actually better than that of his British counterpart.

They cite an Ipsos-MORI poll that shows only 28 percent of the respondents considered Prime Minister Tony Blair's performance satisfactory. This represents a drop of nine points since the last poll in November."

It's interesting that last night Mr. Blair appeared on the popular talk show 'Parkinson' to talk about his life in front of a seemingly appreciative audience. Obviously, the subject of decision making and the decision to go to war came up. Tony wasted in no time in pointing out that the decision weighed heavily on his conscience but he stands by it. He also made a vague reference to a higher power which will ultimately judge his decisions. Parkinson of course tried to clarify this by asking if he had prayed and felt that God was on his side, Tony's reluctance to confirm this was obvious - probably because of the reaction of the British public when George Bush did this. How easy it would be, when watching this man, to feel comforted and willing to judge him by his eloquent and thoughtful words and his appearance of higher emotions rather than his actions.

What is my point here? 'By their fruits you shall know them'. The man lied, continues to lie and has done nothing concrete to repair the consequences of his lies but deny them repeatedly. Anybody else in the UK see this show?

 

[Craig H]

Ben wrote:
Anybody else in the UK see this show?

I couldn't bear to watch it. Tony Blair has gone over to the dark side, although I'm sure this was never his intention. He isn't even aware that he has gone over to the dark side. Gurdjieff could no doubt explain this outcome in terms of the law of seven, however I read the following, that is attributed to Gurdjieff which pertains to the work of groups, in Ouspensky's "In Search Of The Miraculous". It made me think of Blair, 9/11 and the so called 'War on Terror':

All that has been said till now refers to real groups connected with real concrete work which in its turn is connected with what has been called the ‘fourth way’. But there are many imitation ways, imitation groups, and imitation work. These are not even ‘black magic’.

Questions have often been asked at these lectures as to what is ‘black magic’ and I have replied that there is neither red, green nor yellow magic. There is mechanics, that is, what ‘happens’ and there is ‘doing’. ‘Doing’ is magic and ‘doing’ can be only of one kind. There cannot be two kinds of ‘doing’. But there can be a falsification, an imitation of the outward appearance of ‘doing’, which cannot give any objective results but which can deceive naïve people and produce in them faith, infatuation, enthusiasm, and even fanaticism.

“This is why in the true work, that is, in true ‘doing’, the producing of infatuation in people is not allowed. What you call black magic is based on infatuation and upon playing upon human weaknesses. Black magic does not in any way mean magic of evil. I have already said earlier that no one always does anything for the sake of evil, in the interests of evil. Everyone always does everything in the interests of good as he understands it. In the same way it is quite wrong to assert that black magic must necessarily be egotistical, that in black magic a man strives after some results for himself. This is quite wrong. Black magic may be quite altruistic, may strive after the good of humanity or after the salvation of humanity from real or imaginary evils. But what can be called black magic has always one definite characteristic. This characteristic is the tendency to USE people for some, even the best of aims, without their knowledge and understanding, either by producing in them faith and infatuation or by acting upon them through fear.

Blair is being used. In fact, until we wake up, we are all being used. We are pawns in the game. Blair hasn't woken up and probably never will. He could never stand to see what he has become. For similar reasons most people don't want to see what their world has become. They just can't face it.

We are all going along with the 'war on terror' through 'faith and infatuation' or 'through fear'. That Blair can be taken in shouldn't surprise us because most people have been taken in too. And when people say that 9/11 couldn't be an inside job because 'How could so many people keep such a secret?', the answer is, the insiders are being used too, through 'faith and infatuation' or 'through fear'.

 

[Ben]

Your perspective on this is interesting. I agree that Blair, Bush and their kind are being used but I disagree slightly as to the nature of this manipulation:

"Blair hasn't woken up and probably never will. He could never stand to see what he has become."

I think that he knows exactly what he has become and to some degree what the purpose of what he is doing is (from a 3D perspective, of course). I don't think that he has the capacity to dislike what he is doing, because I don't think he places any honour in truth and integrity. I say this because it is difficult for me to believe how colossal his denial would have to be if he truly did have a conscience.

Having said that, that he believes he is acting for genuine good I am willing to consider. I do not have any recognisable personal experience of psychopaths and I only have Blair's actions to go on. Regarding his 'inner world' and how he expresses things in private meetings etc. I can only speculate.

 

[anart]

I think that he knows exactly what he has become and to some degree what the purpose of what he is doing is (from a 3D perspective, of course). I don't think that he has the capacity to dislike what he is doing, because I don't think he places any honour in truth and integrity. I say this because it is difficult for me to believe how colossal his denial would have to be if he truly did have a conscience.

This is how I feel about Bush, as well. I've not watched Blair closely (having enough on my hands even glancing in G.W.'s general direction, which makes me want to jump off of a cliff), but it wouldn't surprise me in the least that he is of the same 'stuff'; that 'stuff' being psychopathic manure.

 

[Ben]

Yes, Blair is difficult to watch. I have to admit that you win the 'most difficult to watch political leader' award, though. I welcome any opportunity, nonetheless, to watch these people 'in the act'. Last night I watched Jack Straw (the foreign secretary) discussing with MP's on a segment called 'diplomacy and Iran', which should be more accurately titled 'how to justify not being diplomatic towards Iran'. He must have been very pleased about the questions he had to 'deal with' - mostly about the threat to Israel and how Iran is 'near the top of the list' when it comes to countries one would want to prevent from developing nuclear weapons. Possibly, right below Israel, the US, the UK, France.....