Any brands you don't buy on principle?

the_syco

Maxtor.

pickarooney

sensibleken wrote: »

no, these countries had very low literacy levels, they did not have the adequate knowledge about how sanitary the water was, nor could many of them read the instructions on the tin.

This is the thing I don't get (it's not mentioned explicitly in any articles I've read) - how did Nestlé convince these women that breast feeding was bad and powdered milk was good? And how can people not know that dirty water is not good for you?

mossyc123

Any company that tries to portray a wholesome image are lying.

You are in existence to make money for your shareholders.

Thats all that matters.

Don't pretend it's any other way.

I actively ignore anything that is "Fairtrade/eco-friendly/Green", etc.


Oh and Apple... my oh my what a smarmy bunch of wankstains they are.

Those Steve Jobs presentations where he wows the converted with the launch of some pointless piece of gadgetry... loathsome stuff.

sensibleken

wandatowell wrote: »

A come on, of course they knew the water was poisonous. Do you really think they lived with the stuff and didnt question it???? Nestle are a bunch of fcukers but the parents have to accept responsibility too.

do you think theyd feed their children poison intentionally. theyre told the formula is better than their breast milk, they are given it free in hospital and once they leave have to pay for it, now that their lactation has been hampered by a reliance on the formula from day one they have little choice but to use the formula. now if they could mix that with evian im sure they would have. sorry but the finger of blame remains at nestle.

tommyhaas

heyheyhey1982 wrote: »

But Liverpool Fans have a short memory when it come to the Heysel Disaster- and when a few months back Malachy Clerkin criticised Liverpool fans for what happened at Heysel, Newstalk where inundated with calls complaining and saying they wouldnt be listenening to the sports show unless there was an apology. What he said was fine in my eyes- most of the fans that died where Itlaians. So i have now came to the conclusion you cant criticise Liverpool FC - there fans will boycott you.

A short memory? Liverpool last played Juve in 2005, there were tributes that night for the 39 killed, and rightly so. That was 20 years after the disaster. Heysel has not been forgotton by the club, as the tributes on the website and plaque in the Centenary Stand testify

To lay to blame solely at the door of the Liverpool fans is both convenient and short sighted. There were a number of contributing factors that led to the disaster, namely the state of the ground, the lack of segregation, the poor policing by the authorities and of course the behavior of sections of both sets of fans attending the game

Flippant remarks stereotyping Liverpool fans as killers are bound to stir up strong reactions, particularly when any criticism leveled dose not take into account the full set of circumstances surrounding the events that evening. Only when these full circumstances were considered could measures be taken to ensure the contributing factors that led to the disaster could not be repeated

S.R.F.C. wrote: »

The scouser's boycotting it is one thing but the wannabe scousers over here doing the same is embarrasing, just trying to make themselves seem more in with Liverpool and actual fans

Lets be honest, that post is nothing but an attempt at using the boycott of the Sun as a reason to have a dig at those in Ireland supporting English Clubs

What happened at Hillsborough is as relevant to match going fans of any club as it is to Liverpool fans not personally affected by the tragedy in that it could easily have happened to the fans of any club

sensibleken

pickarooney wrote: »

This is the thing I don't get (it's not mentioned explicitly in any articles I've read) - how did Nestlé convince these women that breast feeding was bad and powdered milk was good? And how can people not know that dirty water is not good for you?

water sanitation is not inate knowledge, nor are the same conditions for yourself available to those worldwide

Setun

It's worth noting that it is almost impossible to avoid sweatshop goods in the west. In Cavite in the Phillipines, the shoe factories churn out tonnes daily. The branding is done further down the line. So you can buy your non-brand penneys canvas shoes or your converse from a high street store - the same pair of hands made them. The same can be said for electronics: apple aren't the only company in foxconn.

EL_Loco

I don't avoid any specific brands per se, but if someone puts out an annoying ad I intentionally don't buy that product. Bad advertising should be punished!!!

sensibleken

Daddio wrote: »

It's worth noting that it is almost impossible to avoid sweatshop goods in the west. In Cavite in the Phillipines, the shoe factories churn out tonnes daily. The branding is done further down the line. So you can buy your non-brand penneys canvas shoes or your converse from a high street store - the same pair of hands made them. The same can be said for electronics: apple aren't the only company in foxconn.

not every factory in asia is a sweatshop its worth noting. although trying to tell the difference is an exhausting afair

Blazer

Ecco...all those so-called training jobs they use as an excuse to get free labour from the Government...

Have to laugh at all the anti-apple idiots...guaranteed they're all android users who's data Google is happily selling to advertises

As for Dell...why?

Krieg

HP: I worked with HP and they are scumbags of the electronics world imo,
Apple: Unjustifiable hate, though I own an iphone and love it, I have terrible double standards on this one.
Tesco: Especially their brand products. For reasons like what was mentioned previously; they are getting too big and treat their suppliers like **** as they have them by the balls.
Activision: (Games developer). Because of the words of their CEO, admitting that he doesn't want innovation but rather release the same games year after year and increase the price if he could.
Sony: Simply because they are over priced, that said I treated myself to a PS3 last year.

pickarooney

sensibleken wrote: »

water sanitation is not inate knowledge, nor are the same conditions for yourself available to those worldwide

In fairness, it's basic cop on that dirty water causes illness. Millenia of dysentery and cholera outbreaks have embedded that in the collective consciousness.

I still don't get the situation.
Why are Nestlé reps giving advice to mothers? (How many births are actually in hostpitals come to think of it?)
How are these mysterious reps able to convince whole populations to override the basic knowledge of breastfeeding that has existed since time began?
How does Nestlé figure that the mothers are going to keep feeding their children when they know there is no clean water?
What is the gain for a company whose potential client base has no cash to purchase the product and no viable means of consuming it?
What is the advantage of 'killing babies' to any company?

The whole thing just smacks of poorly-referenced 'corporations kill babies' bull**** for people to feel appalled/superior about.

I don't buy it.

Donny5

pickarooney wrote: »

This is the thing I don't get (it's not mentioned explicitly in any articles I've read) - how did Nestlé convince these women that breast feeding was bad and powdered milk was good? And how can people not know that dirty water is not good for you?

Well, basically what happened was they sent reps to hospitals with free formula to convince the medical staff to give it to newborn infants. Many mothers chose to accept the free milk over breastfeeding, but once they stopped breastfeeding, they stopped lactating and were forced to keep buying the no longer free milk.

This was in the seventies, and many westerners would have been hard pressed to understand the intricacies of water contaminants, let alone those in the extreme poverty in developing countries. The had neither the knowledge nor ability to sterilise drinking water, which is very often still the case, as the WHO claims over 1.5 million people, mostly infants, died from water borne illnesses in 2010. The use of formula greatly increases the likelihood of contracting a serious disease, becoming malnourished and death.

It's not really thought that Nestlé did anything illegal, just that their marketing practices resulted in many dead babies, and that is true. It is also true that not only Nestlé, but the doctors, local governments and mothers all chose to use the formula, and so culpability is shared. The guys who campaign against the use of formula and set up the boycott claim that Nestle knew that the formula would have such an effect and used the ignorance of the local populations to lock them into their products. They proposed the boycott not to punish Nestlé, but to try to make the cost of the negative publicity in the developed world outweigh the profit of the practice in the developing world.

hidinginthebush

Chiquita bananas! An extremely evil corporation that had a hand in sparking civil war in Guatemala that resulted in the deaths of thousands.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Transnational_corps/ChiquitaBanana.html

Qualitymark

pickarooney wrote: »

In fairness, it's basic cop on that dirty water causes illness. Millenia of dysentery and cholera outbreaks have embedded that in the collective consciousness.

I still don't get the situation.

Starving women without enough milk to feed their babies, educated types - including medics - telling them that they can give their babies nourishment by buying them powdered milk products.

sensibleken

pickarooney wrote: »

In fairness, it's basic cop on that dirty water causes illness. Millenia of dysentery and cholera outbreaks have embedded that in the collective consciousness.

I still don't get the situation.
Why are Nestlé reps giving advice to mothers? (How many births are actually in hostpitals come to think of it?)
How are these mysterious reps able to convince whole populations to override the basic knowledge of breastfeeding that has existed since time began?
How does Nestlé figure that the mothers are going to keep feeding their children when they know there is no clean water?
What is the gain for a company whose potential client base has no cash to purchase the product and no viable means of consuming it?
What is the advantage of 'killing babies' to any company?

The whole thing just smacks of poorly-referenced 'corporations kill babies' bull**** for people to feel appalled/superior about.

I don't buy it.

Its not basic cop on. Its learned. if you dont buy it thats grand, the facts however continue to exist

Eric Cartman

upandcumming wrote: »

Back the shit up man.

Dell - they make terrible quality machines, laptops dont seem to stand up to anything , batteries, power supplies die just outside of warranty, more spec for your money with lenovo or apple

Microsoft - havent made anything worth using since windows xp and even then its entirely inferior to mac os x or linux

Any clothing brand worn by anyone who attends trinity college or lives in most of south dublin - abercrombie, american apperal, cantembury etc... all overpriced clothing of poor quality for knobs

philips electronics - have never seen a decent philips tv, everything theyve made since the early 90s is of low quality and breaks far to easily , we ordered 10 philips tvs in work, 3 of them failed within a month.

pretty much anything sold in brown thomas - overpriced designer crap for people with more money than sense

aer lingus - the staff still act like civil servants, strike for any reason , cabin crew are unattractive, not like flying should be, same service as ryanair at twice the price.

anythig with 'fair trade' on it - i dont buy into this sympathy shít , i dont care i just want things cheaper , im not going to be guilt tripped into some money making scam

anything that focuses on itself being 'green' - i really dont care, ill be dead before the enviroment collapses anyway

anything running android - its just unreliable, i dont need to be able to rewrite a kernal for my phone , android phones are just smartphones for people who cant afford iphones , its really just a knockoff

pickarooney

Qualitymark wrote: »

Starving women without enough milk to feed their babies, educated types - including medics - telling them that they can give their babies nourishment by buying them powdered milk products.

That's a very different spin to the one of healthy women who have no problems breastfeeding being coerced into using an alternative. This is doctors advising an alternative to women who physically can't feed their babies.

heyheyhey1982

tommyhaas wrote: »

A short memory? Liverpool last played Juve in 2005, there were tributes that night for the 39 killed, and rightly so. That was 20 years after the disaster. Heysel has not been forgotton by the club, as the tributes on the website and plaque in the Centenary Stand testify

To lay to blame solely at the door of the Liverpool fans is both convenient and short sighted. There were a number of contributing factors that led to the disaster, namely the state of the ground, the lack of segregation, the poor policing by the authorities and of course the behavior of sections of both sets of fans attending the game

Flippant remarks stereotyping Liverpool fans as killers are bound to stir up strong reactions, particularly when any criticism leveled dose not take into account the full set of circumstances surrounding the events that evening. Only when these full circumstances were considered could measures be taken to ensure the contributing factors that led to the disaster could not be repeated

Yeah i see where you are coming from- but what was wrote in the paper re hillborough that day seemed to be a made up story fabricated out of thin air.

Heysel itself had many factors- but at the end of the day the root cause was rioting fans. Video evidence showed it was more the liverpool fans- and for some reason all english sides where banned from europe. Blaming security and segregation not been up to standard is a bit of a cop out- the simple reason was there was a huge faction of liverpool fans wanting a riot.

Liverpool fans are notorios for not accepting criticism- John Giles and
Eamonn dunphy have both said they have recieved huge amounts of criticism over the years from Livepool fans saying they are too harsh on Liverpool. Maybe its the fans being over sensative.

Johnnio13

Dell for reasons already mentioned
Any english papers - during the 60, 70s and 80s the Times/Mail et al all basically said the Irish were scum and should be wiped out.
The mail was particuarly bad and it sickens me to see the "Irish Daily Mail" - pile of shi%e.
The Sun for reasons already mentioned
Riverrock - tap water with a label

Biggins

Good to see a lot of folk avoid Coke.
Especially what they are doing in South America and Africa.

Setun

sensibleken wrote: »

not every factory in asia is a sweatshop its worth noting. although trying to tell the difference is an exhausting afair

I never said that every factory in asia is a sweatshop - just that it is very hard to purchase ethically in the west. In the last decade (after the highly-publicised anti-sweatshop protests all over the world in the late 90s, eventually culminating in a Beverley Hills 90210 plotline that dealt with the issue!) ethical/eco products have become a firm part of pop culture. Children are taught about it at school, the fairtrade logo has become a global brand in itself etc. Nike have written codes of conduct for the factories they do business with, as have other brands that have been problematic in the past (H&M, The Body Shop, Starbucks et al), but past evidence has shown that they're not actively monitoring the working conditions for the lowest-aid factory workers. All these codes of conduct have done is deflect responsibility and somewhat masked the problem - Nike and co might pretend to be "ethical" to satisfy the buzzword consumers, but that certainly does not mean that they are indeed actively supportive of trade unions, satisfactory wages, employment contracts and good working conditions in their factories in the free trade zones of Asia. It's actually harder than before to genuinely find out what MNCs look after their workers.

Another grim global brand is Shell, they did awful things in Nigeria. Look up Ken Saro-Wiwa and the circumstances surrounding his execution if you're interested.

tommyhaas

heyheyhey1982 wrote: »

Heysel itself had many factors- but at the end of the day the root cause was rioting fans. Video evidence showed it was more the liverpool fans- and for some reason all english sides where banned from europe. Blaming security and segregation not been up to standard is a bit of a cop out- the simple reason was there was a huge faction of liverpool fans wanting a riot.

I'm not saying that they were solely to blame, simply that it was a contributing factor. I think its fair to say though that in the absence of any one of the following factors, the deaths could have been avoided

• A delapadated stadium
• Lack of proper segregation and policing
• Confrontation between the two sets of supporters

To simply jump to the first conclusion, and tar all Liverpool fans with the same football hooligan brush is wrong, and IMO is something that is done only to create unnecessary controversy

sensibleken

Daddio wrote: »

I never said that every factory in asia is a sweatshop - just that it is very hard to purchase ethically in the west. In the last decade (after the highly-publicised anti-sweatshop protests all over the world in the late 90s, eventually culminating in a Beverley Hills 90210 plotline that dealt with the issue!) ethical/eco products have become a firm part of pop culture. Children are taught about it at school, the fairtrade logo has become a global brand in itself etc. Nike have written codes of conduct for the factories they do business with, as have other brands that have been problematic in the past (H&M, The Body Shop, Starbucks et al), but past evidence has shown that they're not actively monitoring the working conditions for the lowest-aid factory workers. All these codes of conduct have done is deflect responsibility and somewhat masked the problem - Nike and co might pretend to be "ethical" to satisfy the buzzword consumers, but that certainly does not mean that they are indeed actively supportive of trade unions, satisfactory wages, employment contracts and good working conditions in their factories in the free trade zones of Asia. It's actually harder than before to genuinely find out what MNCs look after their workers.

Another grim global brand is Shell, they did awful things in Nigeria. Look up Ken Saro-Wiwa and the circumstances surrounding his execution if you're interested.

all true, sorry i didnt mean to come accross as if i was correcting you, i meant that for as a stand alone point of my own.

One of my latest dissapointments was when i went to buy a Cort banjo, very good for the price but did a bit of research and discovered how badly they treat their workers. I ended up spending twice as much on a different make but i wouldnt have been able to give them money in good conscience. was one of those 'aargh can i not buy anything ethically' moments

HeisenbergBB

I buy Irish when I can. I would never buy walkers crisps and I have been with Meteor for years. And while its financially rewarding to stay with Meteor anyway I would never go with vodafone or o2 if that were to change.

heyheyhey1982

tommyhaas wrote: »

I'm not saying that they were solely to blame, simply that it was a contributing factor. I think its fair to say though that in the absence of any one of the following factors, the deaths could have been avoided

• A delapadated stadium
• Lack of proper segregation and policing
• Confrontation between the two sets of supporters

To simply jump to the first conclusion, and tar all Liverpool fans with the same football hooligan brush is wrong, and IMO is something that is done only to create unnecessary controversy

I see your point and it is a fair one- Just annoys me when liverpool fans "Remember the 96" and forget about Heysel. It was a traumatic time for the City of liverpool but you have to wonder when people are saying they'd never buy the sun after what was said about the fans. some of them wherent even born when the article was written- and the sun has been printing lies for years- a reason i would never buy a copy of it.

I do feel Heysel is the elephant in the room when it come to liverpool fans. They have a romantic notion about the Hillborough disaster and update their facebook pages "remembering the 96"... blah blah blah. I dont think half these people know the history of the disaster and they think "oh i support liverpool - i must remember the 96". A far bigger disaster happened at Braford city and no one ever remembers that.

ClareVisitor

gooch2k9 wrote: »

Apple as well.

+1. Terrible software. iTunes is a virus.

DublinWriter

heyheyhey1982 wrote: »

A far bigger disaster happened at Braford city and no one ever remembers that.

Probably because at the time The Sun didn't say that Lincoln City fans were pickpocketing and urinating on the dead.

K-9

heyheyhey1982 wrote: »

Yeah i see where you are coming from- but what was wrote in the paper re hillborough that day seemed to be a made up story fabricated out of thin air.

Heysel itself had many factors- but at the end of the day the root cause was rioting fans. Video evidence showed it was more the liverpool fans- and for some reason all english sides where banned from europe. Blaming security and segregation not been up to standard is a bit of a cop out- the simple reason was there was a huge faction of liverpool fans wanting a riot.

Liverpool fans are notorios for not accepting criticism- John Giles and
Eamonn dunphy have both said they have recieved huge amounts of criticism over the years from Livepool fans saying they are too harsh on Liverpool. Maybe its the fans being over sensative.

Well of course Liverpool fans are to blame, saying otherwise is stupid.

Delapidated stadium as tommyhaas said, that was the main cause for the deaths, an old and decaying wall couldn't take the pressure from fleeing fans. Liverpool asked for the ground to be changed.

Ticketing was a shambles, Juventus fans ended up beside the Liverpool end, this together with a poorly trained police force didn't help. Having fans next to each other like that with very little police presence was a disaster, doesn't happen like that anymore. When the match eventually started there was rioting from Juventus fans on the other side of the pitch, the police totally unprepared.

The Belgian investigation recommended that the officer in charge be charged for manslaughter.

Pointing out these things doesn't exonerate the fans for their involvement just as pointing out inadequacies of Hillsborough stadium doesn't exonerate the authorities there.

St.Spodo

stovelid wrote: »

Do you also boycott other Murdoch companies like Sky Sports?

No, I don't. It's not so much a hatred towards the Murdoch empire, more a gesture of solidarity towards the Liverpool fans. A boycott of The Sun is what is encouraged by the fans, who have yet to receive an apology from the writer, so I simply don't buy that newspaper. It's obviously shít anyway.

holystungun9

Patchy~ wrote: »

KFC, self-explanatory. I have a Sony laptop but I'd never buy another - the keys are falling off and my "one year warranty" covers accidental damage only (yeah I purposely ripped my fúcking keys off) and damage to the hard drive. In other words, accidental damage to the hard drive, which is next to impossible. They'd fix it for a few hundred euro. :mad:

I would like to put myself in line for unending criticism and suggest a Mac (yes people, those of evil, baby killing, brainwashing, overpricing, constantly failing, rip-off merchant infamy)

Fad

Tabloids/Sindo/Murdoch news.

Anything from Petrogas and their outlets

Dell

Coke (Generally, but sometimes it is a necessary evil for a sugary hangover fix....)

tommyhaas

heyheyhey1982 wrote: »

I see your point and it is a fair one- Just annoys me when liverpool fans "Remember the 96" and forget about Heysel. It was a traumatic time for the City of liverpool but you have to wonder when people are saying they'd never buy the sun after what was said about the fans. some of them wherent even born when the article was written- and the sun has been printing lies for years- a reason i would never buy a copy of it.

I do feel Heysel is the elephant in the room when it come to liverpool fans. They have a romantic notion about the Hillborough disaster and update their facebook pages "remembering the 96"... blah blah blah. I dont think half these people know the history of the disaster and they think "oh i support liverpool - i must remember the 96". A far bigger disaster happened at Braford city and no one ever remembers that.

I think though as a supporter of the club, regardless of when you were born, you have an obligation to maintain the stance taken by the clubs supporters on this due to it being such a highly emotive issue. Also, the campaign for Justice for the 96 is still on going, and hence the boycott is still relevant to today.

Personally, I had no friends or family there, nor do I know anyone who had. I'm not involved in any of the campaigns or anything like that, but as an Irish fan who goes over a few times a year, I still sympathise with those affected, and respect the boycott

Wrt the fire at Valley Parade, it is remembered over there, but Bradford being a smaller club dont get the same level of coverage as Liverpool do. That coupled with the fact that the justice campaign for the 96 is still continuing is probably why relative to Hillsborough, you hear very little about it

Zebra3

K-9 wrote: »

Aren't you quite the attention seeker.

No, they are.

tommyhaas wrote: »

Would you wind up people about 9/11? Relative to the size of the cities, they were on the same scale

I wind people up about buying a newspaper, but fair play to you for overreacting just like they do.

Cheap Thrills!

Harvey Normans due to the irritating ad.

Volvic for the same reason.

Korvanica

APPLE

A Horrible Horrible company...

Shining **** and overpricing it...

K-9

Zebra3 wrote: »

No, they are.

Thanks for proving my point. You troll Liverpool supporters about the Sun and Hillsborough. Classy.

keefg

Aston Martin
Lamborghini
Ferrari


The price of their cars is just scandalous, I'm never going to buy any of them*













*Unless I win the lotto jackpot of course

Mint Sauce

Well the reasons I dont by The Sun, is (i) down to the comments after Hillsborough, (ii) even though they attempted to apologise they would still run the story if it came up again, and (iii) finally, I rank the quality of it below toilet paper.

stovelid

irish-stew wrote: »

Well the reasons I dont by The Sun, is (i) down to the comments after Hillsborough, (ii) even though they attempted to apologise they would still run the story if it came up again, and (iii) finally, I rank the quality of it below toilet paper.

A lot of papers did run the story too but obviously the Sun went furthest. Absolute toilet of a paper and beyond shocking that McKenzie kept his job after insulting the dead of Liverpool. The citizens of Liverpool are absolutely correct to boycott the Sun.

That said: I seem to remember a furore a year or two also about News of the World-sponsored dancers at Dalymount Park amongst Irish Liverpool fans here before so the rule sometimes seems to be get offended about Murdoch companies as long as you don't rely on one of them to watch the majority of your football.

Oranage2

Oranage2 wrote: »

Not really a brand but i dont eat Cod because its an endangered species

70% Of the time you'd get Herring or Whiting labelled as Cod anyway so you shouldn't worry.

galah

refuse to buy anything whose label/brand name confuses 's' with 'z', or 'c' with 'k' in an effort to be 'cool'.
Heinz 'Beanz' or 'Krispy Kreme', for example.


Oh, and Apple. And red-top newspapers.

Auvers

Eric Cartman wrote: »

more spec for your money with lenovo or apple

are you being serious


Apple more bang for your buck


me hole

Trevor451

apple

Deutschlandfürimmer7 wrote: »

i boycott anything from israel

So you dont have a intel processor in your computer?

VampiricPadraig

Apple and Seagate!

tommyhaas

Zebra3 wrote: »

I wind people up about buying a newspaper, but fair play to you for overreacting just like they do.

You know what your doing, its not like the paper is boycotted for trivial reasons. To try use the deaths of 96 people to wind others up is fairly pathetic IMO

As I was saying in another post earlier, I didnt know any of the victims, nor do I know anyone who did. I wasn't directly affected by it, but I think anyone, particularly Liverpool and football fans in general can understand the sensitivities involved in both what happened and in the on-going campaign for justice and hence show a level of respect to those that were affected

EGriff

Surprised by all the hate for Dell. My last laptop was a Dell and it ran great for about 3 years (with a RAM upgrade half way through). Got a new XPS recently and it was the best spec I could find at the price.

I wiped the old laptop too and gave it to someone else and it's running fine for them, as is the 4 or 5 year old Dell desktop my parents have.

Just lucky I guess.

My first laptop was a HP and both the screen and the power connection on the motherboard broke.

Edit: Oh wait, people hate them because they closed the factory. Understandable I suppose.

RussellTuring

Lanaier wrote: »

I live in Beijing.
I need bottled water.

I welcome anyone to come here and drink the tap water though.
Have fun with that.

RussellTuring wrote: »

Not all brands exactly but:

• Animal products.
• Apple.
• Coca-cola.
• Nestlé.
• Go Compare (because of the ads).
• Most fast food places.
• Bottled water. I think it's ridiculous to buy something of which you can get a cleaner version for free, although I will buy one if I need a bottle.
• Heroin.
• The Catholic Church.

Probably a couple more. I'm curious as to the reasoning for the seemingly popular Israeli boycotts. I'm well aware of the actions of the government but why is this not applied to countries such as the USA? Surely the whole population is not to be blamed for actions of the state.

If you can't drink your tap water, then go ahead and drink bottled water. Nobody is trying to impose their choices on you. I don't live in Beijing so I'll drink tap water.

macman2010

I try to avoid ticketmaster but it is actually impossible as they have a complete monopoly on ticket distribution and the booking fees are scandalous.:mad:

Joey the lips

I dont have brand problems I mainly try buy irish.

However i will not shop in Dunnes Stores

Because the difference is we NOT irish