Ferrante, this time your post has been a little bit lame... hope next time it will go better.

"got to be worked on
don't have no bark nor bite..."

The Bee Gees are probably more widely popular than the Stones, which signifies nothing except that it's easier to market crap than substance.
Macca is a safe and paunchy old wimp, no sex and now with the fascist stumpy old bird he married, no drugs! Not even good old cannabis. He's like the Hallmark card of rock and roll, all nostalgia and sweetness. @#$%& that!
Give me sex and rebellion and luciferian hedonism anyday.

Hey Shearer, you big fag.... why don't you take your comments to a "Macca" message board? I don't think anyone here is interested in your comparisons.

Hey Exile, just because we are fans of the stones, doens´t mean that we are so stupid to face the reality, although this may vary and be relative, everyones who really loves music more than the stones, could easily see that The Beatles are much better (still...the stones have a chance to make something bigger than any Beatles album, very unlikely though, with mediocre albums like ABB they just get better than themselves) in everyway...
About Macca, yes sir, he´s much more beloved and talented...Mick is a better showman, no doubt about it and Keith is much nicer than old poor snob Macca, but talking about music and their concerts, forget it...Macca sings better than Mick.
That Macca´s show rely on a lots of songs of the Beatles? well, he wrote most of the songs that he plays, so i don´t see the point... And besides, better than playing songs from ABB just to fill the show up...
I do love the Stones, Voodoo Lounge was a great Album, BTB had just few really great songs, the rest is for stones dye fans who will take anything that comes from them and ABB, well, even worst..., but again, being fan doesn´t mean taking also the shit that a band can get to play, and being a fan doens´t mean that i just can listen and enjoy the stones: there are things that the Beatles didn´t have that i admire in the stonse and viceversa...what´s the problem loving both of them the same??

VL

We all KNOW who started this post so my question is this: Why don't we ALL just NOT REPLY To him from now on and save all of our energy for real Stones matters and topics that interest us? It's like the guy comedians PLANT in audiences to stir things up, nothing of value, just an annoyance.

I don't know but,I'll say this - Macca is soft.Too soft.

Comparisons against our boys are of no consequence. The King of Norway maybe more popular than the Stones, in Norway. However the Rolling Stones are the
greatest RnR band in the world. Has any other band been crowned as such .No.

So there.

This guy must be Ferrante or a clone of him & speaking of Ferrante I dont recall seeing any posts from him since The Stones once again came top of the tour earnings list recently.
If I'm not mistaken,McCartney came in third - way behind the Stones - how strange if he's that more popular.

Theif in the Night Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't know but,I'll say this - Macca is soft.Too
> soft.


Ah Yes, the boys are really much tougher! Especially Keith! Here's an evidence:



Sunday :: January 19, 2003
Keith Richards On Osama bin Laden

Via Instapundit and Tim Blair, Keith Richards is lashing out at Paul McCartney for canceling an Australian tour. The Stones tour will go on.

Rolling Stones guitarist Keith Richards has lashed out at former Beatle Sir Paul McCartney for calling off an Australian tour because of the Bali bombings.

"I say to Osama and the boys bring it on, evaporate me," Richards said on the eve of the band's Australian tour. "If it gets to the stage where these guys are dictating if we rock or not, then forget about it.

"If McCartney uses these guys as an excuse, he should give it away. Don't give them the power. I can't wait to tour Australia, even if they take out my plane on the way there."


It's funny I copied it from the Macca forum!!!

"got to be worked on
don't have no bark nor bite..."

B
U
F
F
O
O
N

it is true, macca is more popular than the stones and the beatles combined.


as a matter of fact, wings, otusold both bands in the 70;s.

macca hold several records:

paid attandanceL 184 000 in rio
most successful composer of all time
most albums and records sold, over a billion.
most number 1s
most top 40 s
first billioneaire in the music business
hold the best selling single of all time without a re realease : mull of kyntire with 4.5 million copies. candle in the wind sold 30 mill but it was a re realease, so it doesn't count.

4 time tour of the year award winner, 1976, 1989-90 , 1993, and 2002-2003.

what more can we say?

Ok.

McCartney is more populair. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANTED TO HEAR?

Good, now we can stop this stupid discussion.

Yeah, I like the way macca kept his band together and didn't throw that away just to pursue his own endeavors. Yeah, the Beatles were such a cohesive unit that they just wanted to play together for as long as they could. The Beatles knew nothing about true rnr. They became so involved in their own selfish ideas and obviously felt that they could not share them with the band. macca is one of the most one dimensional performers there ever was. The Stones have been able to use the same formula for years and still make it sound fresh. Macca is a HACKA