; ^3 ] t+ v! V6 Q0 ~: B. ?+ u版友如要討論事件請到其他post, 多謝認真投票.+ O+ d9 r ]6 V+ [
w2 l# b7 f, @7 w
樓主不鼓勵發佈,傳閱有問題圖片及一切違法行為.作者: ckyckk 時間: 2008-2-1 11:32 PM
完全沒看過 作者: malecoke 時間: 2008-2-2 12:43 AM
if u havent seen it ure missin out on a part of history man作者: lizard 時間: 2008-2-2 12:51 AM
抗議！0 j: u- l1 {+ @' q' B% S3 f
. ~3 o, K. v- X9 p1 U( X; A只許 谷德超 商場 買 翻版鹹碟1 o, D/ Y1 t, F& \# T0 z- B
不准 香港人 網絡 睇 自拍淫照 5 c4 |) T# i0 l ! v5 X6 e( k. E強列 要求 香港警察 不要 選擇性 執法！" N; J5 y5 N* W s- _9 C$ }
, ~3 L% f' i+ k[ Last edited by lizard on 2008-2-2 at 12:57 AM ]作者: Edgar_Davids 時間: 2008-2-2 08:37 AM
What is the definition of "原圖" ? 9 t& J: H; ?3 `9 Z' T) j6 C - E+ ?8 u) b5 T0 L: j! t* I. R( n) m. ]6 }* B, h, @
I have watched only several "疑似" 相片," g t* [! Y; y- L. f& P
and "I AM NOT SURE WHETHER THEY ARE REAL OR FRAUD"....3 l Y$ S, X0 I
2 F2 _% W3 l* H2 a# F) VI can only say that "I believe they have been widely spreaded".....作者: garlicguy79 時間: 2008-2-2 09:09 AM
I did saw some but it seems quite true, anyway, if they really done something, they hv to bare the responsibility. ' n6 Z& E7 p4 p4 g) r' WOn the other hand, in fact the media have to play a important rules, before anything finalise, especially the truely of the photo, have to be verify by the specialst and after that, they wrote whatever they want. 3 {. O, b; S9 v8 I B& p2 j0 jWell, just my personal comments. ; y' C2 M2 u" c1 s7 G4 e- {1 @. X9 B3 D" k- e7 B6 J; m: l
Hv a nice day.作者: alanfcw 時間: 2008-2-6 03:42 PM
完全沒看過~~~作者: 迪達拉姑 時間: 2008-2-9 01:45 AM
未呀..未看到入洞..咁算唔算看過原圖= =作者: loklok117 時間: 2008-2-9 03:31 AM
我完全沒看過...0 n) y. b" }7 q. R
你信唔信ar?作者: 傲魂楓 時間: 2008-2-9 06:50 PM
