Tell Me :
Talk
Again, what is your evidence to support the conclusion that Mick Taylor would be a bigger problem than Ronnie, other than wishful thinking on your part?
Not to say the 2 of them weren't a horrible caustic combination. And not to say that Katerina was an angel. But so far I've not heard of Katerina coming after Ronnie with knives, blunt instruments, hurled objects, or thrashing UGG boots toward Ronnie's jewels. have you? On the contrary, there have been many witnesses (over 3 incidents in 3 months) of Ronnie pretty much going berzerker in public.
If she did go after Ronnie with knives, bludgeons, boots, or thrown anvils, then Ronnie's stopping or restraining her or calling for help would be justified.
What you said, in any case, was "Knocking a woman around," may have been justified with "this little tart." The bitterness and anger here toward women or a woman, is actually frightening to me to hear -- and I'm really grateful & gratified that other men have stepped up to you on this.
Huh ? I would think restraining the woman would be quite sufficient in those cases. Not necessary to beat a female up when there are other ways to stop the violent behaviour or ensure someone else's safety.
I still haven't heard a legitimate reason to "knock a woman around" whether she is called Lorena, Naomi or is a passenger on a cross atlantic flight. I don't think you'd get away with pulling the "self defence" card in all the situations described.
If someone was coming at my balls with a knife, I'd say that any response would be 'justifiable', so do me a favour and dont try and lump me in with the wife-beating apologists, thanks very much.
When a band has been going for half a century, its absolutely unheard of for there not to be line up changes at some point.
There have only been three in that entire time - in 1969, in 1975/76 and in 1993.
The first two were in the same position and the third one was because a band member retired from the band. He wasnt replaced so there wasnt a line-up change.
For a band in their 60s to not have had a change in personnel for almost two decades is pretty impressive.
Yeah, following reports that the "Rolex getting stuck in hair" is becoming a widespread problem, a new local by-law was introduced and police constables in Claygate are coming down exceedingly hard on people that fail to keep their Rolexes under control.
Poor Ronnie was just a victim of circumstance.
I didn't mistake you for a wife beating apologist, but I was hoping to get some clarification regarding the appropriate response to domestic situations that look a little threatening and might prompt some to "knock a woman around".
Please note I said that the self defence excuse would not get you out of jail in all the cases described. (The Bobbitt story is an exception - a judge would recognise that things are a bit different when someone is armed with a knife or a gun).
Now, that's irony for you!
No amount of stiff drinks will help in this desperate situation - drastic measures (i.c. guitar reinforcement with historical significance) are required.
Both of the above are our business when we're paying hundreds of quid for tickets, flights and hotels and expecting in return someone to be in a fit enough state to perform.
Why hire a police officer?
These days, you can just attach a breathalizer to Ronnie's guitar, and the guitar won't transmit sound, much like a drunk driver's car is prevented from starting!
Off course, it is a Stones decision, but Mick will not go on the road loosing money.
(I was just about to say - "making a fool out of himself" - but that counts less than money)
)
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: December 19, 2009 23:08
Quote
Addicted
Replacing Ronnie with Mick Taylor? Now, how many cancellations would that lead to. Does anyone seriously believe he'd pass the medical? And replacing one problem with an even bigger one is nothing a corporation, that's what the Stones is, would even consider.
Again, what is your evidence to support the conclusion that Mick Taylor would be a bigger problem than Ronnie, other than wishful thinking on your part?
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
melillo
()
Date: December 19, 2009 23:10
true but it is starting to border on ridiculous with this ronnie replacement stuff, wyman jones and taylor being replaced is a good amount of lineup changes IMO, and if they do fire ronnie than it is without a doubt ridiculous lineup changes
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-19 23:22 by melillo.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-19 23:22 by melillo.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
swiss
()
Date: December 19, 2009 23:14
Quote
atip
Lastly, occasionally, and ONLY very rarely, knocking a woman around could be justified. I don't know if that's the case w/ this little tart.
Oh, let's say Lorena Bobbitt has you cornered w/ a sharp instrument, or Naomi Campbell is pissed off and hurling things at your head. How about the lady with a history of violence that kicked a male steward so severely on a BA flt that he was hospitalized, had permanent damage and out of work for months. Those are just a few that come right off the top. I'm sure there are others.
Not to say the 2 of them weren't a horrible caustic combination. And not to say that Katerina was an angel. But so far I've not heard of Katerina coming after Ronnie with knives, blunt instruments, hurled objects, or thrashing UGG boots toward Ronnie's jewels. have you? On the contrary, there have been many witnesses (over 3 incidents in 3 months) of Ronnie pretty much going berzerker in public.
If she did go after Ronnie with knives, bludgeons, boots, or thrown anvils, then Ronnie's stopping or restraining her or calling for help would be justified.
What you said, in any case, was "Knocking a woman around," may have been justified with "this little tart." The bitterness and anger here toward women or a woman, is actually frightening to me to hear -- and I'm really grateful & gratified that other men have stepped up to you on this.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Lightnin'
()
Date: December 19, 2009 23:25
Quote
atip
Lastly, occasionally, and ONLY very rarely, knocking a woman around could be justified. I don't know if that's the case w/ this little tart.
Quote
Gazza
Please feel free to fill us all in as to when its 'justified'....
Quote
atip
let's say...... (3 examples)
Quote
Gazza
No - those examples are self defence - and justifiable.
Huh ? I would think restraining the woman would be quite sufficient in those cases. Not necessary to beat a female up when there are other ways to stop the violent behaviour or ensure someone else's safety.
I still haven't heard a legitimate reason to "knock a woman around" whether she is called Lorena, Naomi or is a passenger on a cross atlantic flight. I don't think you'd get away with pulling the "self defence" card in all the situations described.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Midnight Toker
()
Date: December 19, 2009 23:33
Everyone should stop speculating about this whole ordeal. Did this happen? Did that happen? No one on this message board was there. Gee wiz.
For all we know, Ronnie was attempting to brush off the dandruff of the little golddiggers coat, his watch got caught in her hair, and she jerked her head to get her hair untangled from Ronnie's Rolex. Two passers by saw this and called the cops. How is that for speculation?.
For all we know, Ronnie was attempting to brush off the dandruff of the little golddiggers coat, his watch got caught in her hair, and she jerked her head to get her hair untangled from Ronnie's Rolex. Two passers by saw this and called the cops. How is that for speculation?.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: December 19, 2009 23:37
Quote
Lightnin'Quote
atip
Lastly, occasionally, and ONLY very rarely, knocking a woman around could be justified. I don't know if that's the case w/ this little tart.Quote
Gazza
Please feel free to fill us all in as to when its 'justified'....Quote
atip
let's say...... (3 examples)Quote
Gazza
No - those examples are self defence - and justifiable.
Huh ? I would think restraining the woman would be quite sufficient in those cases. Not necessary to beat a female up when there are other ways to stop the violent behaviour or ensure someone else's safety.
I still haven't heard a legitimate reason to "knock a woman around" whether she is called Lorena, Naomi or is a passenger on a cross atlantic flight. I don't think you'd get away with pulling the "self defence" card in all the situations described.
If someone was coming at my balls with a knife, I'd say that any response would be 'justifiable', so do me a favour and dont try and lump me in with the wife-beating apologists, thanks very much.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
windmelody
()
Date: December 19, 2009 23:37
Oh white lightnin' I'm sure tastes good.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: December 19, 2009 23:42
Quote
melillo
true but it is starting to border on ridiculous with this ronnie replacement stuff, wyman jones and taylor being replaced is a good amount of lineup changes IMO, and if they do fire ronnie than it is without a doubt ridiculous lineup changes
When a band has been going for half a century, its absolutely unheard of for there not to be line up changes at some point.
There have only been three in that entire time - in 1969, in 1975/76 and in 1993.
The first two were in the same position and the third one was because a band member retired from the band. He wasnt replaced so there wasnt a line-up change.
For a band in their 60s to not have had a change in personnel for almost two decades is pretty impressive.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
carlostones10
()
Date: December 19, 2009 23:44
The storie sounds very bad. Really sounds bad.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Lightnin'
()
Date: December 19, 2009 23:48
Quote
Midnight Toker
For all we know, Ronnie was attempting to brush off the dandruff of the little golddiggers coat, his watch got caught in her hair, and she jerked her head to get her hair untangled from Ronnie's Rolex. Two passers by saw this and called the cops. How is that for speculation?.
Yeah, following reports that the "Rolex getting stuck in hair" is becoming a widespread problem, a new local by-law was introduced and police constables in Claygate are coming down exceedingly hard on people that fail to keep their Rolexes under control.
Poor Ronnie was just a victim of circumstance.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
melillo
()
Date: December 20, 2009 00:03
I know alot of people dont like when i bring up u2 but by the time the stones were 31 years into their career they had several lineup changes and maybe another coming soon,
and u2 has had zero changes and i think thats pretty impressive, and i do consider wyman a lineup change, he left and he was replaced
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-20 00:08 by melillo.
and u2 has had zero changes and i think thats pretty impressive, and i do consider wyman a lineup change, he left and he was replaced
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-20 00:08 by melillo.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
skipstone
()
Date: December 20, 2009 00:08
There was a thread, for how long I don't know, about the double talk and double morals and hypocrisy here about Ronnie and I responded to it but it's gone. Here's what I wrote:
Well, we do know that he left his wife. That's none of our business really but that pretty much leaves itself open for commenting since it has been made so public. Which has happened.
We do know that he has never really been on the wagon, he's just been bouncing behind it. That's none of our business really.
What he did with the little chick is none of our business. You can't sit here and judge him for maybe hitting the chick or for maybe not hitting the chick or for some wishing that he had hit her. It's none of our business.
His role in The Rolling Stones is none of our business either. Wanting him to A. be higher in the mix or B. be more involved or C. not be such a drunk clown etc is our own position of wanting Ronnie to be good etc...
The Mick Taylor/Bill Wyman whining has just got to stop. Some people just need to grow up around here and accept the truth.
Well, we do know that he left his wife. That's none of our business really but that pretty much leaves itself open for commenting since it has been made so public. Which has happened.
We do know that he has never really been on the wagon, he's just been bouncing behind it. That's none of our business really.
What he did with the little chick is none of our business. You can't sit here and judge him for maybe hitting the chick or for maybe not hitting the chick or for some wishing that he had hit her. It's none of our business.
His role in The Rolling Stones is none of our business either. Wanting him to A. be higher in the mix or B. be more involved or C. not be such a drunk clown etc is our own position of wanting Ronnie to be good etc...
The Mick Taylor/Bill Wyman whining has just got to stop. Some people just need to grow up around here and accept the truth.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Lightnin'
()
Date: December 20, 2009 00:21
Quote
Gazza
If someone was coming at my balls with a knife, I'd say that any response would be 'justifiable', so do me a favour and dont try and lump me in with the wife-beating apologists, thanks very much.
I didn't mistake you for a wife beating apologist, but I was hoping to get some clarification regarding the appropriate response to domestic situations that look a little threatening and might prompt some to "knock a woman around".
Please note I said that the self defence excuse would not get you out of jail in all the cases described. (The Bobbitt story is an exception - a judge would recognise that things are a bit different when someone is armed with a knife or a gun).
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
skipstone
()
Date: December 20, 2009 00:49
Whoever said they'll get Mick Taylor because Ronnie will have been dumped needs to get a stiff drink and get over themselves.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: December 20, 2009 00:50
Quote
skipstone
Whoever said they'll get Mick Taylor because Ronnie will have been dumped needs to get a stiff drink and get over themselves.
Now, that's irony for you!
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
skipstone
()
Date: December 20, 2009 00:52
Heh heh...
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: December 20, 2009 00:53
Quote
Lightnin'Quote
Gazza
If someone was coming at my balls with a knife, I'd say that any response would be 'justifiable', so do me a favour and dont try and lump me in with the wife-beating apologists, thanks very much.
I didn't mistake you for a wife beating apologist, but I was hoping to get some clarification regarding the appropriate response to domestic situations that look a little threatening and might prompt some to "knock a woman around".
Please note I said that the self defence excuse would not get you out of jail in all the cases described. (The Bobbitt story is an exception - a judge would recognise that things are a bit different when someone is armed with a knife or a gun).
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Lightnin'
()
Date: December 20, 2009 00:54
Quote
71TeleQuote
skipstone
Whoever said they'll get Mick Taylor because Ronnie will have been dumped needs to get a stiff drink and get over themselves.
Now, that's irony for you!
No amount of stiff drinks will help in this desperate situation - drastic measures (i.c. guitar reinforcement with historical significance) are required.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: December 20, 2009 00:56
Quote
skipstone
We do know that he has never really been on the wagon, he's just been bouncing behind it. That's none of our business really.
His role in The Rolling Stones is none of our business either. Wanting him to A. be higher in the mix or B. be more involved or C. not be such a drunk clown etc is our own position of wanting Ronnie to be good etc...
Both of the above are our business when we're paying hundreds of quid for tickets, flights and hotels and expecting in return someone to be in a fit enough state to perform.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: December 20, 2009 00:56
they should hire John Frusciante! He's available (LOL)
[www.nme.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-20 00:58 by dcba.
[www.nme.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-20 00:58 by dcba.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Rip This
()
Date: December 20, 2009 01:03
....too bad for the Peppers....not the same w/o him....
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Bliss
()
Date: December 20, 2009 01:19
How great would it be...if the Stones pulled back Mick Taylor and Bill Wyman, practised for months, and went out in a blaze of glory?
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
bernardanderson
()
Date: December 20, 2009 01:49
The likelihood of mick taylor rejoining the band as a full-time member is about the same as peter green rejoining fleetwood mac. zero.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
georgelicks
()
Date: December 20, 2009 01:49
They won't tour without Ron Wood, it's ridiculous.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Midnight Toker
()
Date: December 20, 2009 02:01
Michael Cohl will take a police officer on tour to conduct breathalizer exams and field sobriety tests on Woody before each gig. You mess up, you lose millions of dollars. Problem solved and now it is time to rock.
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Edith Grove
()
Date: December 20, 2009 03:14
Quote
Midnight Toker
Michael Cohl will take a police officer on tour to conduct breathalizer exams and field sobriety tests on Woody before each gig. You mess up, you lose millions of dollars. Problem solved and now it is time to rock.
Why hire a police officer?
These days, you can just attach a breathalizer to Ronnie's guitar, and the guitar won't transmit sound, much like a drunk driver's car is prevented from starting!
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
ROPENI
()
Date: December 20, 2009 03:19
My choice to replace Ronnie,Steve Conte, the guitar player for the New York Dolls.
Mick taylor? not in a million years,Mick Jagger would never go for it,Taylor is in the same boat or worse than Ron Wood.
"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"
Mick taylor? not in a million years,Mick Jagger would never go for it,Taylor is in the same boat or worse than Ron Wood.
"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: December 20, 2009 03:34
Hey it's a real problem ....
All the guitar players they's damaged....Outcasts all their lives.....
Mick & Keith's only option is one of the Jonas brothers ....Nick or Kevin
Surely Keith could lead 'em to the back-rooms of hell and shape 'em up in time for the road ....
ROCKMAN
All the guitar players they's damaged....Outcasts all their lives.....
Mick & Keith's only option is one of the Jonas brothers ....Nick or Kevin
Surely Keith could lead 'em to the back-rooms of hell and shape 'em up in time for the road ....
ROCKMAN
Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
mtaylor
()
Date: December 20, 2009 10:08
Exactly - well said. As loyal fans, it is a must that the product Stones delivers to us is worthy. Else, nobody will show up to the conserts.Quote
GazzaQuote
skipstone
We do know that he has never really been on the wagon, he's just been bouncing behind it. That's none of our business really.
His role in The Rolling Stones is none of our business either. Wanting him to A. be higher in the mix or B. be more involved or C. not be such a drunk clown etc is our own position of wanting Ronnie to be good etc...
Both of the above are our business when we're paying hundreds of quid for tickets, flights and hotels and expecting in return someone to be in a fit enough state to perform.
Off course, it is a Stones decision, but Mick will not go on the road loosing money.
(I was just about to say - "making a fool out of himself" - but that counts less than money)
)Re: Latest on Ronnie (includes mention of Mick, Keith, Stones)
Posted by:
Rolling Hansie
()
Date: December 20, 2009 10:14
Cool that nobody is arguing anymore IF there will be a Stonestour in 2010. Everybody seems to have accepted that rumour as a fact. I really like that positive attitude.
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
1963luca0 , automaticchanger , blindman , cyclist , DEmerson , gastonl74 , Halup , Joce , loog droog , millerman60 , MingSubu , petewasbristol , Rickster , soulrob , steffialicia , stoneskid , syrel , TW2019 , z
Guests:
1261
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10