chinabomb

意大利运动品牌kappa公然出售藏独衫，坚决反对藏独，疆独，台独等分裂分子！...3 P  d1 V( Y, h' A

1 r% A4 y, B, [  E& \同志们要抵制啊！！！08.gif
# T' g: q5 d* M, F. {
8 ^* e1 c1 i) R. t
8 U2 t5 W! J) d; O) a) k+ a# x( g  o# G1 w( X% x& u

9 K& E3 \0 M& j

chinabomb

要抵制啊！！！

﹏.舞ˇ.

好贱啊,坚决抵制..

黑暗天使

why do you guy want to stop the freedom of speech?

繁小城

引用:

原帖由 黑暗天使 于 2008-5-8 20:41 发表
& }1 X8 _/ w6 y" \& q/ x, Z, K0 Lwhy do you guy want to stop the freedom of speech?

1 G8 h. B7 S2 Y& v" p
/ m7 u) F3 K. ]boycott has nothing to do with freedom of speech.

KLi

引用:

原帖由 黑暗天使 于 2008-5-8 20:41 发表
5 A0 i. U  S4 w7 b; owhy do you guy want to stop the freedom of speech?

% u5 z/ \1 E( \) J: w. Y% i& p3 M

+ s; ~8 W  Q! E; g4 I" ]! i+ ~Do you remmember what people in United States did to British companys???

黑暗天使

I thought 抵制 means to stop producing.  Of course if I was wrong, I apolgise.  I'm still getting in touch with the finer points of of the Chinese language
5 j" e& ]( E! h8 ]+ J1 U: `8 @9 Z, |& `0 j
Do you remmember what people in United States did to British companys???  E: l( ], D) Z( E5 {( a% x6 S9 w
. d. n8 ^) ?, z: }. Z# M
Actually I'm not certain which incident you are directing your question towards, however I'd love to be enlightened on this subject.

KLi

引用:

原帖由 黑暗天使 于 2008-5-9 12:08 发表
8 e. h2 K0 R" N- N0 |* o6 C0 v2 }I thought 抵制 means to stop producing.  Of course if I was wrong, I apolgise.  I'm still getting in touch with the finer points of of the Chinese language# C  o8 v. F+ T( H
0 `9 c2 f$ w1 Q4 T
Do you remmember what people in United St ...

- w0 m. {0 o0 x! t# }% h

" i7 T/ z# e- Q7 \http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_tea_party

KLi

引用:

原帖由 黑暗天使 于 2008-5-9 12:08 发表 : A8 Q* {& q/ p, Y) w) @. M
I thought 抵制 means to stop producing.  Of course if I was wrong, I apolgise.  I'm still getting in touch with the finer points of of the Chinese language
0 M2 R6 r4 P1 }& k! H# w- b3 Y/ P- d  o# K3 k
Do you remmember what people in United St ...

5 R$ j+ k9 Y& D8 j

: \4 s6 [+ q' I9 u+ Q& S) GI support Freedom of Speech as well. Yet I think there should be certain certain extent of obligations which need to be held; moral or leagal.

黑暗天使

I'm not sure if the Boston tea party would be the best analogy for use in this case.  You are comparing a direct government bill, against a private entity.  While I agree the reaction are some what similar, the cause of the problem creates a slippery slope situation.
3 y5 U, _. W8 F
$ g+ C+ W/ r+ j1 C; x* sDon't get me wrong, I would support a boycott of the products based on your views.  But there's a difference between "stop production" and "boycotting".  As I stated above, if i was wrong in my interpretation of the words, then I apologise, and forget I said anything, and I'm truely sorry.
6 C% Q) j* q0 M2 |! U
  k% m9 ?- U# s' w6 a5 c- ?Of course each person is obligated to accept the consequences of their actions (speech been an integral part), however unless the actions of their speech has direct negative impact (physical, monatary, physchologist approved emotional distress), I do not believe there should be any legal implications.  Moral wise, each person is entitled to their own opinions, and is a hard point to argue =)

﹎īναńсе

没关系 从来不穿这个牌子 设计本身不怎么好.