A Quote by Martti Ahtisaari

Mediators do not choose the conflicts they became involved in, but the parties to the conflict choose the mediator. Their participation as intermediaries is based on the trust of all the conflicting parties.
The purpose of formulating [a] conflict as a game is not that of resolving the conflict by 'solving the game.' It is that of displaying the structure of the conflict and thereby exposing features of it that may be concealed by rhetoric. In particular, appreciation of the peculiar structure of some of the so-called mixed - motive conflicts represented nonzero-sum games may change the conflicting parties' perception of their situation.
I find parties difficult. I like a dinner party, but I find being at parties difficult, so I choose not to go to parties.
As a black person, I have two parties to choose from: liberal and conservative. If I choose to be a liberal - regardless of who I choose - I'm picking the lesser of two evils in my mind basically.
The American system is set up to have two parties competing for votes. But Americans have not had the same two parties to choose from since the beginning.
I always say as a celebrity you have two choices - you can be a celebrity, or you can be a role model. You can choose to just go to parties and do the red carpets and all that, or you can choose to be an example to these people.
The task of the mediator is to help the parties to open difficult issues and nudge them forward in the peace process. The mediator's role combines those of a ship's pilot, consulting medical doctor, midwife and teacher.
A smart contract is a mechanism involving digital assets and two or more parties, where some or all of the parties put assets in, and assets are automatically redistributed among those parties according to a formula based on certain data that is not known at the time the contract is initiated.
The pretense in disputed elections is that the great conflict is between the two major parties. The reality is that there is a much bigger conflict that the two parties jointly wage against large numbers of Americans who are represented by neither party and against powerless millions around the world." (p. 65)
There is only one way out of the trap: that you don`t choose; neither this nor that - you simply don`t choose. You withdraw from choice and you become choiceless. Choicelessness is freedom. To choose is to choose a prison; to choose is to choose a bondage. To choose is wrong, to be choiceless is to be right.
If we trust parents to choose child care for their children, and we trust them to help their children choose a college to attend โ€“ and both those systems have been so successful โ€“ why do we not also trust them to choose the best elementary or high school for their children?
This I choose to do. If there is a price, this I choose to pay. If it is my death, then I choose to die. Where this takes me, there I choose to go. I choose. This I choose to do.
I don't choose my projects based on genre, I choose them based on the role and whether or not I've tackled that yet, based on the director and such.
I can't influence how other parties choose to vote.
Federalists, Whigs, Democratic-Republicans; parties are born, parties die, and parties realign themselves to adapt to shifting demographics and attitudes.
Positioning one leader against another is not necessarily how our democracy functions. We do not directly elect the president or the prime minister. We choose parties based on their policies, and their efficacy depends on how well they implement their policies.
Society judges political parties based on the results that they give. When they don't meet the population's needs, when they are not up to expectations, that leaves society free to pick other parties.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!