This article contains one of the most hypocritical and self centered arguments I've seen quoted in a long time. Emily Villagrana made this statement, and it speaks for itself, though the rest of the article makes this statement look even worse. As a lead in the article is concerning a protest of getting Coke removed from UCLA because it employs workers in Columbia, where a civil war is going on.

For now, private corporations are subject to the political realities of whatever government they operate under. How are they expected to provide protection in a war-ravaged country such as Colombia?

'As far as I know, they haven't tried anything,' Villagrana said.

I suggested that her knowledge might be augmented by listening to Coca-Cola's defenders at the meeting, rather than attempting to physically silence their free speech. 'You're entitled to believe that,' she said.

Ya know, if you want to fight for something, try to have a logical argument before you do. Statements such as these make the argument more of a self centered attention grab than anything resembling a logical argument. And when the argument is made without giving opposers of the view the ability to even speak, it pretty much means they have NO basis what-so-ever.


I tend to find people resort to chanting over those with differing views only do so because they honestly know their argument couldn't hold ice, let alone water...