Trust Is The Key
Trust is the key.
I told you many years ago
But you couldn’t see
Trust is the key
It’s what binds humanity
But you wouldn’t listen to me
Are you listening now.
It’s the doorway to division
But do you see?
MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.
3 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment
Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.
This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.
Does anybody trust anymore.
The handshake deal, meaningless.
The politicians, failing to deliver.
Can people trust there partners.
Even family members.
It’s a lonely world, without a person, you can trust.
Comment by DJ Ward — Fri 12th November 2021 @ 11:44 pm
This case is good for looking at trust.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/uk/300453644/julian-assange-granted-permission-to-marry-his-partner-in-prison
As a justice question, you have this.
“In January, a judge refused a US request to extradite Assange, but he remains in prison while a higher court considers the US government’s appeal.”
So not guilty in effect, decided by a judge.
The trustworthiness increases, when prosecutions are rejected.
But while not guilty, the imprisonment continues.
The aggrieved permitted another attempt.
The long arm of the law, has reached every nation.
Was what Assange did, a crime where he was.
The alleged sex crime, he was subject to jurisdiction.
But for the document crimes?
Am I now subject to US laws.
Did the bid for extradition, fail on trust.
The punishment to harsh.
The trial to biased.
The trial to influenced by politics.
Even the judges, endorsed by the party.
Is all this because, the person can’t be trusted.
That those in power, don’t know what’s next.
If he was free, what could he publish next.
Would it be about them.
Could you have a conversation with him.
And expect it to remain private.
Was he reckless in publishing everything.
Being reckless doesn’t inspire trust.
Certainly you can trust the document, as to what was written.
And some showed, behaviours that look like crimes.
Some just embarrassing.
Lots of the machines of war, and diplomacy.
Even then, trust is not guaranteed.
How many little lies, are the documents infected by.
Was he justified in publishing some things.
The things that look like crimes.
But unjustified, in everything else.
Would they want his arrest, if he published only Chinese documents.
Or any other documents, of the ‘enemies of US interests’.
Would they then be trusted documents.
By a trusted, proponent of free speech.
Would if done in the US, that extradition would be denied.
The aggrieved nations demands for justice, rejected.
Trust in the things, that benefit you.
No trust, in things that don’t.
Even when both are true.
Very human.
And he waits in his imprisonment, his actions restricted.
Endless years, waiting.
For the thing we should trust.
For law to act, in a just, timely way.
In spite of them, he has found some happiness.
In marriage, he may find a person, he can trust.
Comment by DJ Ward — Sat 13th November 2021 @ 11:07 am
This raises important questions, about trust between nations.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/china-and-nz/300566638/supreme-court-decision-to-allow-extradition-to-china-causes-global-concern
The important question is evidence, would we prosecute.
Does proof exist, that he committed the crime.
If it’s all hearsay, and proofs that prove nothing relevant.
If it can’t pass our prosecution guidelines, then extradition is wrong.
If a murderer left NZ, would China extradite for us.
Can the murderer, go nation shopping.
Finding a safe haven, from a provable act of murder.
It is only in justices interests, that it should happen.
It is not a crime, we don’t have.
Russia prosecution of dissent, is not a crime here.
Being homosexual, is not a crime here.
With a promise of no death penalty, a sentence we don’t have.
Would China risk its reputation, by ignoring the promise.
That this person, does get a genuine defence in court.
As should everyone, accused in any nation.
That being in a secretive nation, the thing not trusted.
The separation of the judge, from the state is the test.
Comment by DJ Ward — Fri 15th April 2022 @ 11:12 am