Not a legit paper but a rag. Many say it was a good show, and Keith was sober. A thinking person with an interest in music wouldn't see this as a review but rather the trash that gives the paper tabloid status. All is good because Keith handled it well, it could have been a bad scene. Soon to be forgotten, as all the criticisms prove inconsequential against the Life and music of Keith.

..and Brian wouldn't have written any stupid book or showed up on a interview with nonsense journalists...

2 1 2 0

As a Brian fan also, I must say, we'll never know. He was prone to messing up a bit here and there.

>>1. Markus didn't decide to go to Paris, his boss sent him there. <<

he didn't have to go. if he'd sensed that he might get into trouble he coulda told that the boss and send someone else. if that doesn't work with his boss he'd only need to send a message to Keith's camp and reveal who he is. they probably would've told him to stay away - far away.



3. The intention from Aftonbladet (as Markus tells in the "Schulman interview" was not to make war with Keith, on the contrary they wanted Markus to "make peace" with him, laugh about it and take a picture. It didn't turn out that way though... .

This is totally off topic! Keith does these interviews about his book and isn't traveling around the globe as a 2nd Dalei Lama.
who the hell is interested if this stupid boy wants to make peace with Keith? he had 3 years to make up.
since when is the journalist's personal state of mind or opinion of interest... or a matter of a story to report about?
It's supposed to be about the newly published book.

>>4. I, personally, think that keith has exaggerated this matter, perhaps he has been poorly informed by someone? I'm sure Mick would have just laughed about it... .<<

Keith gets ambushed and only realizes mid-interview that it's This sucker he's talking to.
that Larsson came in under the radar - he could have said who he is from the start. but that takes guts because he would've come back empty handed.


I'm not so sure that Mick would have laughed it up

Let's just hope Keith has learned a lesson from this incident and that he'll cool down a bit and resist
from making any further threats against reporters in the future. Simple as that.

Keith -

You shouldn't take it so hard.

Thanks for the kind word, Doxa. It was a local union-representative at Aftonbladet who said something like that (I don't remember the exact words) in the beginning of this "affair". The whole interview, word by word, you can find here:[www.aftonbladet.se] . It's in swedish though, I don't know if you are "finlandssvensk" or not. If not maybe it's all greek to you? Funily enough there is much talk about guns (Smith & Wesson, caliber 38), knifes (The ratchet) and fights. Keith says " the key to a successful knifefight is to kick your opponent on the balls instead. So that you don't need to use the blade" - (my translation).

Stoneage and others.. I translated the whole interview (except the latest part) at page 8 in this thread, and slightly above is Svartmer's translation.

Quote
open-g
>>1. Markus didn't decide to go to Paris, his boss sent him there. <<

he didn't have to go. if he'd sensed that he might get into trouble he coulda told that the boss and send someone else. if that doesn't work with his boss he'd only need to send a message to Keith's camp and reveal who he is. they probably would've told him to stay away - far away.



3. The intention from Aftonbladet (as Markus tells in the "Schulman interview" was not to make war with Keith, on the contrary they wanted Markus to "make peace" with him, laugh about it and take a picture. It didn't turn out that way though... .

This is totally off topic! Keith does these interviews about his book and isn't traveling around the globe as a 2nd Dalei Lama.
who the hell is interested if this stupid boy wants to make peace with Keith? he had 3 years to make up.
since when is the journalist's personal state of mind or opinion of interest... or a matter of a story to report about?
It's supposed to be about the newly published book.

>>4. I, personally, think that keith has exaggerated this matter, perhaps he has been poorly informed by someone? I'm sure Mick would have just laughed about it... .<<

Keith gets ambushed and only realizes mid-interview that it's This sucker he's talking to.
that Larsson came in under the radar - he could have said who he is from the start. but that takes guts because he would've come back empty handed.


I'm not so sure that Mick would have laughed it up

+1

JumpingKentFlash

Thanks, Back Of My Palm. Didn't notice that.

Keith Richards alleged assault interview recording fails to validate claim
November 13th, 2010 3:22 pm ET

By Robert Rheubottom, "Examiner"

The Keith Richards interview in which the guitarist allegedly hit Swedish journalist Markus Larsson in the head was aired on a Norway TV show, but the audio tape fails to reveal convincing evidence of the “assault” the reviewer claims took place.

Larsson appeared on the “Schulman Show" on Norway's VG TV yesterday (11/12/10) to portray his version of the events that took place during the Nov 9 interview with The Stone’s guitarist at which the journalist claims Richards “hit him in the head.”

The veteran rocker supposedly hit Larsson upon terminating the promotional interview he’d held for his new autobiography “Life” at Le Meurice Hotel in Paris, France.

The fight allegedly stemmed from an August 2007 incident in which time Larsson gave The Rolling Stones a 2 out of 5 rating for a concert in Gothenburg, Sweden, describing them as "amateurs," and singling out Richards in particular for criticism for which the musician demanded an apology.

During the TV program, Larsson plays an audio recording of the last few minutes of the interview during which the supposed attack took place.

What’s made clear in the recording, is that Richards is not aware of the fact that he’s being interviewed by the same critic who’d trashed The Stones in 2207 until Larsson deliberately brings up incident with the obvious intention of baiting the musician.

Larsson claims that when The Rolling Stone realized who he was, "His eyes got black and he was absolutely furious.” But on the audio recording, though it’s clear the guitarist has been taken by surprise, and is annoyed by the deception, does not start screaming – his voice remains level.

Keith Richards: "So you're the one who hates me."

Markus Larsson: "No, I'm not hating you."

Keith Richards says, "You dislike me. So it's you. Let's turn the lights out. You've written some crap ..."

Richards queries him briefly about the bad review, but wants to end the interview, and the journalist can be heard apologizing.

At the point of the supposedly assault, the guitarist says, "You're going to have a field day with this. Let's say goodbye right now. You're going to be lucky that you got out alive. Now you can make a big thing in the Gothenburg newspaper."

A sound like a glass being put down hard on table is heard. Assumedly, this sound is what is supposed to prove that Richards hit Larsson in the head.

On the TV show, when the camera pans to Larsson, he is laughing and smirking while the audio is being played.

No outcry or reaction whatsoever at the point the supposed “assault” takes place can be heard from Larsson in the audio segment.

A representative for Richards has contradicted Larsson’s account, telling Rolling Stone, "At the conclusion of the 20 minute interview Keith Richards jokingly tapped the journalist on the head after his questions got a bit silly. From the people in the room during the interview they would suggest that the writer has allowed his imagination to get the better of him.”


from: [www.examiner.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-11-14 08:45 by Title5Take1.

That about sums it up I reckon!

Quote
Title5Take1
Keith Richards alleged assault interview recording fails to validate claim
November 13th, 2010 3:22 pm ET

By Robert Rheubottom, "Examiner"

The Keith Richards interview in which the guitarist allegedly hit Swedish journalist Markus Larsson in the head was aired on a Norway TV show, but the audio tape fails to reveal convincing evidence of the “assault” the reviewer claims took place.

Larsson appeared on the “Schulman Show" on Norway's VG TV yesterday (11/12/10) to portray his version of the events that took place during the Nov 9 interview with The Stone’s guitarist at which the journalist claims Richards “hit him in the head.”

The veteran rocker supposedly hit Larsson upon terminating the promotional interview he’d held for his new autobiography “Life” at Le Meurice Hotel in Paris, France.

The fight allegedly stemmed from an August 2007 incident in which time Larsson gave The Rolling Stones a 2 out of 5 rating for a concert in Gothenburg, Sweden, describing them as "amateurs," and singling out Richards in particular for criticism for which the musician demanded an apology.

During the TV program, Larsson plays an audio recording of the last few minutes of the interview during which the supposed attack took place.

What’s made clear in the recording, is that Richards is not aware of the fact that he’s being interviewed by the same critic who’d trashed The Stones in 2207 until Larsson deliberately brings up incident with the obvious intention of baiting the musician.

Larsson claims that when The Rolling Stone realized who he was, "His eyes got black and he was absolutely furious.” But on the audio recording, though it’s clear the guitarist has been taken by surprise, and is annoyed by the deception, does not start screaming – his voice remains level.

Keith Richards: "So you're the one who hates me."

Markus Larsson: "No, I'm not hating you."

Keith Richards says, "You dislike me. So it's you. Let's turn the lights out. You've written some crap ..."

Richards queries him briefly about the bad review, but wants to end the interview, and the journalist can be heard apologizing.

At the point of the supposedly assault, the guitarist says, "You're going to have a field day with this. Let's say goodbye right now. You're going to be lucky that you got out alive. Now you can make a big thing in the Gothenburg newspaper."

A sound like a glass being put down hard on table is heard. Assumedly, this sound is what is supposed to prove that Richards hit Larsson in the head.

On the TV show, when the camera pans to Larsson, he is laughing and smirking while the audio is being played.

No outcry or reaction whatsoever at the point the supposed “assault” takes place can be heard from Larsson in the audio segment.

A representative for Richards has contradicted Larsson’s account, telling Rolling Stone, "At the conclusion of the 20 minute interview Keith Richards jokingly tapped the journalist on the head after his questions got a bit silly. From the people in the room during the interview they would suggest that the writer has allowed his imagination to get the better of him.”


from: [www.examiner.com]

<<< the writer has allowed his imagination to get the better of him >>>

That's it precisely. End of discussion ........

[ I want to shout, but I can hardly speak ]

Quote
Stoneage
MadMax: That kind of language (your first sentence) is simply improper on this board (or any board).

Watching him sitting in that couch, laughing, after what he did - makes him look like a, well, moron. Just my two cents.

I think BV lifted out MadMax's comment. He said something slightly more disturbing than "moron".

There's some good material here to make some cool T-shirt designs, don't you think?!>< Let's do some brainstorming!

<A perfectly ok Keith solo:> < DandelionPowderman>

Nothing against Keith, but this HTW guitarsolo is below zero; he can hardly play it imo.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-11-15 00:42 by Amsterdamned.

Really funny, BB! I mean that! Bet this one would sell more than the official merchandise! Maybe Markus should earn royalties on it!

Quote
Amsterdamned
<A perfectly ok Keith solo:> < DandelionPowderman>

Nothing against Keith, but this HTW guitarsolo is below zero; he can hardly play it imo.

Well he's no Mick Taylor that's for sure.

"It's just some friends of mine and they're busting down the door"

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
Amsterdamned
<A perfectly ok Keith solo:> < DandelionPowderman>

Nothing against Keith, but this HTW guitarsolo is below zero; he can hardly play it imo.

Well he's no Mick Taylor that's for sure.

It's not the issue here, Taylor is no Keith.
Richards has played this solo much better a 1000000 times,and that's an understatement, as DP knows very well.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-11-15 01:12 by Amsterdamned.

If the solo/Keith's playing in Gothenburg was poorer than, for instance, The Licks tour etc. - then Larsson would have a point. But it isn't. It's not great at all, but it's ok. Larsson said Keith was dead drunk and not able to play. The videos + the attendees proved him wrong.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Larsson said Keith was dead drunk and not able to play.

And that was the main issue for Keith

-------------------
Keep On Rolling

he also said that Keith's playing on the Licks tour was "@#$%& brilliant". What a hypocrite!

There is another reason that may have sparked Keith to react the way he did. If you look at the review from 2007 you can see that there is one review of the Stones and then a separate one of Keith´s "poor" performance. No wonder he was upset.

[www.aftonbladet.se]

När Nöjesbladet träffade The Rolling Stones i Berlin i januari 2008 skickade Keith Richards ett speciellt hot till Markus Larsson.

– Jag skickar bara dit några killar som slår sönder hans knän, sa han.

Very Nice Keith!

2 1 2 0

Quote
Stoneage
Really funny, BB! I mean that! Bet this one would sell more than the official merchandise! Maybe Markus should earn royalties on it!

><

Quote
Svartmer
There is another reason that may have sparked Keith to react the way he did. If you look at the review from 2007 you can see that there is one review of the Stones and then a separate one of Keith´s "poor" performance. No wonder he was upset.

[www.aftonbladet.se]

For the non-Swedish understanding people, there is a translation of the Keith section already in this thread (in some of my posts.)

But like said, I can not understand why an old dog like Keith can be so upset and so thin skinned about it that demands public apology that as an act is so un-rock and roll as it can be.

- Doxa

Hint - perhaps look at Rolling Hansie's post above. It's one thing to be called dead drunk, whether you're drunk or not, when you're in good health - you'd no doubt just laugh it off. But I doubt anyone appreciates being called dead drunk and generally dissed if the reason for any drunken-like actions was related to recent cranial surgery and/or post-op medication.

Quote
Come On
När Nöjesbladet träffade The Rolling Stones i Berlin i januari 2008 skickade Keith Richards ett speciellt hot till Markus Larsson.

– Jag skickar bara dit några killar som slår sönder hans knän, sa han.

Very Nice Keith!

'

For the non-Swedish-speaking folks (again), Keith is this 2008 article claiming that he could get Larsson shoot if he wants to. Sounds not very nice. But as again, taken out of context, and not knowing how humorous (I hope!) Keith was, making too quick conclusion is not perhaps wise. Seemingly this AFTONLADET article is the only source in this matter.

But of course, Keith could perhaps a bit think what kind of language he uses. It is so easy to make screaming headlines out of them.

I seriously have started to think that there is something wrong with Keith's Swedish informants. Keith seems to think that this Larsson guy is really after him, and hates him, etc. Something lost in the translation, or someone is adding a bit of their own interpretion to it, or how to explain Keith's way too heavy reaction?

- Doxa