Nigerian woman poised to lead WTO after rival withdraws, Washington offers support

[Morch]

11 minutes ago, Enzian said:

I saw an article on a US site generally considered very conservative that claimed that she indeeds leans toward China, and it seems a fact that China actively supported her candidacy. I understand that the Democrats want to reverse certain of the previous administration's policy positions, but I would hope they don't throw out the baby with the bath water.

 

"I saw an article on a US site generally considered very conservative that claimed that she ..."

 

Were there any details on how she figures in the QAnon mythology?

[simple1]

1 hour ago, Enzian said:

I saw an article on a US site generally considered very conservative that claimed that she indeeds leans toward China, and it seems a fact that China actively supported her candidacy. I understand that the Democrats want to reverse certain of the previous administration's policy positions, but I would hope they don't throw out the baby with the bath water.

 

During the trump era the US was actively interfering with the functioning of WTO by refusing to give the go-ahead for the appointment of appeal judges and then attacking WTO for lack of effectiveness - trump admin activities were Orwellian. The current proposed leader of the WTO is supported by a number of member countries, including the EU and Japan. trump was a spoiler for smooth functioning of international relations grounded upon his so called America First policy which was driven Paleo Conservative ideology, in no small part, based upon white grievance, isolationism and other ugly elements of today's far right (refer Stephen Miller). Personally I'm sure the Biden administration with concur with Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala's appointment.

Edited February 7, 2021 by simple1

[soalbundy]

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Hold on a moment.

 

‘Lighten up, going PC is counterproductive’

 

Challenging the racist comments in this thread is not ‘going PC’.

 

comments are opinions, be they right or wrong people are entitled to them. There are laws and social norms of respect that ensure (or ought to) that opinions that are unfair or hurtful don't turn into actions. It is (IMO) OK to express an opinion on a neutral platform where they can be argued against or agreed with, you chose to argue against such comments and I find that good but give then reasoned arguments (which you have done) and not get emotional because it isn't PC. PC is a blight on society, it has dented comedy and become a sort of mild 1984 'news speak'.

[Chomper Higgot]

31 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

comments are opinions, be they right or wrong people are entitled to them. There are laws and social norms of respect that ensure (or ought to) that opinions that are unfair or hurtful don't turn into actions. It is (IMO) OK to express an opinion on a neutral platform where they can be argued against or agreed with, you chose to argue against such comments and I find that good but give then reasoned arguments (which you have done) and not get emotional because it isn't PC. PC is a blight on society, it has dented comedy and become a sort of mild 1984 'news speak'.

Having accepted I have made reasoned counter arguments, where’s your justification for accusations of ‘Political Correctness’?

 

 

[soalbundy]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Having accepted I have made reasoned counter arguments, where’s your justification for accusations of ‘Political Correctness’?

 

 

your intensity on the subject, does it matter if someone says red is blue? this whole thing now is about racism although a few have managed to stay on course to ask about her policies and agenda, that is more important and a few jokes can lighten things up.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, soalbundy said:

your intensity on the subject, does it matter if someone says red is blue? this whole thing now is about racism although a few have managed to stay on course to ask about her policies and agenda, that is more important and a few jokes can lighten things up.

It wasn’t me who introduced the racism, I and others simply called it out.

 

Oh and and of course, it wasn’t racism it was only a joke.

 

Do you know how tired that particular self excuse is?!

 

 

Edited February 7, 2021 by Chomper Higgot

[soalbundy]

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It wasn’t me who introduced the racism, I and others simply called it out.

 

Oh and and of course, it wasn’t racism it was only a joke.

 

Do you know how tired that particular self excuse is?!

 

 

I'm not going to argue the toss here, it isn't worth it, an Englishman, an Irishman and a Scotsman walked into a..... oh wait isn't that a bit racist..... forget it.

[JonnyF]

On 2/6/2021 at 7:48 AM, david555 said:

So ...that must be the reason they did not chose Fox .... the man who said Brexit was " the easyest thing in life "....to do .....????

 

Beaten by a subject of an  ex colony.....????

Wrong again.

 

It's disingenuous to use half a quote to misrepresent the message, and you even managed to get that part wrong.

 

Here's what he actually said. Pay attention to the part in red. It turned out he was correct, unlike you.????

 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-40667879

 

 

 

[Gecko123]

2 hours ago, car720 said:

Originally Answered: Is Merriam Webster better than Oxford? Merriam Webster produce American English dictionaries. The Oxford English dictionary is for standard English, but additionally lists American english, where they differ. So, no, OED is “better”.

Oxford says the exact same thing as the Merriam Webster dictionary. See usage examples under verb entry 1.1 in below link. The debate was never about which was "better"; it was whether it was grammatically permissible. Both dictionaries clearly confirm it is.

 

 

https://www.lexico.com/definition/graduate

 

 

Edited February 8, 2021 by Gecko123

[pedro01]

On 2/6/2021 at 6:55 AM, scammed said:

im sure she got the post on merit alone...

 

I never understood this.

 

I never consider the sex of the person when considering whether to employ them.

 

Same goes for sexual orientation - but that's mostly because that unless you turn up as a man with a feather boa or a woman with a T-Shirt bearing the title of the 2000 Guy Ritchie hit movie (as a gay gal I know often does), then it won't come up in a job interview and you probably won't know.

 

Never met anyone that did either. She seems well qualified and has probably seen the impact of China's footprint on Africa. 

[scammed]

10 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

 

I never understood this.

 

I never consider the sex of the person when considering whether to employ them.

 

Same goes for sexual orientation - but that's mostly because that unless you turn up as a man with a feather boa or a woman with a T-Shirt bearing the title of the 2000 Guy Ritchie hit movie (as a gay gal I know often does), then it won't come up in a job interview and you probably won't know.

 

Never met anyone that did either. She seems well qualified and has probably seen the impact of China's footprint on Africa. 

in america they have a thing for mandating quotas of both sex and race,

much like they do in south africa, biden took it to another level altogether and want to enforce 'climate justice' whatever that on earth mean, forcing people to live in snow half of the year/other ?

Edited February 8, 2021 by scammed