IT'S A GAS, GAS, GAS!!
MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVES/WEEKLY ROCK POLL POST
Return to Gasx3/Poll Post Board Homepage
Name: Keno
E-Mail:
Subject: RE: Several replies in one!
Date: Thursday, August 06, 2015
Time: 11:24:18 AM
Remote Address: 162.255.158.4
Message ID: 296651
Parent ID: 296626
Thread ID: 296626
Gosh, I see the Keith defenders here are at it again!.... He is again talking shit about the band you love – so why is that okay to some of you guys and why do you defend it (and you are defending it)… Can one of you, or all of you Keith defenders, please explain why you allow Keith to put down the Stones, but when I, or Mike, or anybody else counters it, you defend his actions and then go after one of us like we are the ones doing the bashing (although nobody went after me here this time) (and bashing and defending are 2 different things, we are only defending the other Stones to the lies Keith has again stated). Here are my replies to what has been written here, and I realize not all listed below are Keith defenders…..
MikeE quoted K from '88 interview:
“I took his old lady. You know he enjoyed beating chicks up, not a likable guy.”
That always gets me, he took Anita away from Brian because BJ was beating her up, and then it’s revealed years later by others who saw it, that Keith did the very same thing to her – and in public, mind you! So Keith is nothing but a hypocrite!
Pluto replied to Mike:
As for the who founded, was a founding or original member, or who's owed what by whom etc, it's mute, or much of it is.
Totally changing history is mute? Are you kidding me?! If somebody did that to you, would you like it and think it’s cool? Or even worst, if you started the world’s second greatest Rock band ever…. and then years later, after you died, the guy who you hired to be a part of the band - lies about you and makes up a new story, that’s mute? You would turn over in your grave dude!
2000 Man wrote about a comment made about Keith not producing for the Stones in ’66-‘67:
Say what? Have you listened to the band he's in? Keith is fully involved in the albums you mention, and his contributions are often the best part of a kind of shaky period. Not just for The Stones, but Rock music in general.
First, how the hell is that a “shaky period” for the Stones - or even rock music? The Stones put out some of their best work back then! Aftermath and BTB were shaky?! Those were 2 great albums, and Mike is correct, Keith didn’t do much musically on them 2 at all, it was all Brian, other than Mick’s singing, and little from Keith. Hell, just look at my own review written from 1998 on this: “This is one album that Keith Richards seem to take a back seat to and not stepping out front with his guitar too much. “… I wrote that years ago and I stand by it, since it’s the truth. Where is Keith “all over” either of those albums, or on TSMR for that matter? Please point it out. Where is Keith all over any of the albums before ‘68’s BB? He ins’t, it’s the Mick and Brian show and yes, every so often Keith played a fantastic guitar part on a few of the songs, that’s it. The truth is, before 1968, Keith took a back seat to Brian in the band, and yet today he tries to change that with his lies, and some of you buy into those lies and now believe it.
The guy was dead on about Sgt. Pepper. That album blows.
Are you kidding me? We’ve already known for years that you're not a Beatles fan, that’s fine, but it blows? It blows because you don’t get it or is it because you just don’t like the Beatles? I bet if I ran a poll question at the Rock site asking if that album blows, you, Keith, and maybe 2 or 3 other fans would vote for that option, but 99% would disagree with you. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it blows. Maybe an album like DW blows, but nothing the Beatles ever did blows, or was even not good.
Mike wrote:
I mean do I need to go into detail how much he risked with his band mates, friends, family, children. You can think it's cute or cool all you want, but he made Jones look like an angel during that time……and….The sad thing is he doesn't seem to take any blame for his own actions and blames others for being weaker than he thinks he is.
Damn right! I mean, the dude allowed little children, including his own young son, to be drug mules for him, how fucking low is that? Then years later, the story about those 2 preteen boys who carried heroin for him strapped to their bodies for hours on a plane, is changed too, and it’s now claimed it wasn’t done for him…. But it was! And he did hide his H in his son’s toys, real stupid thing to do! That’s called child abuse today!
20000 Man wrote:
Keith has always said whatever came to mind to the press. Whatever amuses him. Mick does it, too. Why wouldn't they? They get asked the same questions all day, every day. They may as well say something that gets them on Page 1 instead of page 6.
So they should lie and change history to get on page 1, and that’s okay!? But MJ (I think) has never done that, only Keith does it. Why 2000 Man, is there so few others who do this in the business? Every star wants to get on page 1, but other than stupid politicians and some movie asshole stars, most rockers don’t do that on a regular basis like Keith does it. Of late, 2 rockers besides Keith, those being Ted Nugent and Ginger Baker, have been doing this regularly, that’s it! With that in mind, I got to wonder why the interviewer didn’t ask Keith how he felt about Baker claiming that Keith and his bandmates aren’t good musicians. That Keith had a right to bitch about and yet he doesn’t even bring it up, instead he just puts down the Beatles and Bill?
It's not their job to care if Brian's legacy is preserved like he was some kind of deity. It's Brian's family's job to do that, and if they aren't interested
BJ’s only real family is his fans, and we defend him all the time! His parents were clearly true assholes, especially his mother, who was a bitch, to say the least. She was a nut-job from all I have read about her and she mistreated Brian his entire life. She sure as shit wasn’t going to defend him after he died, although his father did just a bit.
sway wrote
We all know that Stu DID have a major role (maybe not as much as Brian)in the newly formed Stones
We do? I never knew that or heard of any of that about Stu in the early days until Keith made the claim a few years ago. Stu was never the leader of the band in the early days and he didn’t do anything to make it seem that he was. Yes, after Keith and his mates fired him from the lineup, I had heard stories of him doing stuff like that as their main roadie, but never in the early days. The most I ever heard about Stu in ’62, ’63, besides his great piano playing for them, was that he also was their driver. That was it. So please, fill me in on how he played a major role in the band when they first formed? Can you back this up? What did he do besides the 2 things I already noted?
P wrote
I would agree that the plaque wording could have been better, and I believe it will be but Wyman's choice of wording in complaining about it, was poor. Wyman called it 'disgusting', and he said so publicly.
That may not have been my words, since the town just made a mistake, but, to many fans, and at least one member of the Stones, yes, the way Keith treats Brian is disgusting, and Keith’s lies in the past more than likely lead to that town’s leaders getting the story wrong.
DA wrote:
Because, ultimately, we always hear the same side of the story. Were Brian still with us, it would be interesting to hear what portrait he would paint of Keith in those days. And it would be interesting to hear if Keith would still be saying all those nasty things about Brian or if he would be a little more selective in his "memories"(!)
Of course Keith won’t be saying that shit today if Brian was still with us. That is what disgusts me with Keith, he says this shit about a guy who is dead and can’t counter his lie! Dead men can’t talk, and Keith knows it, so he pisses on the guy’s grace. That is disgusting!
L of the J wrote in response to "He really played little part in the progressive records the Stones did in 1966-67.":
Uh... didn't he write the songs with Mick? I'd say that plays a big part in the process.
Yes, and that’s true, and a great point…..but, it’s been said that Mick wrote most of the lyrics back then and Keith wrote the music. But now today we know that Keith had help with writing the music thanks to Brian and Bill, yet they weren’t credited at all for their work. There won’t be songs from that period like JJF, RT, and PIB, 3 of the biggest hits of that time for them, without the help Brian and Bill gave to writing the music. Keith didn’t even write the music to RT or PIB, yet only he got the credit for it.
Note: Do not hit the "Post Message" button more than once, even if it is taking a long time to post your message. Doing so may cause a double post to appear and could slow down your posting time even more.
Download your free, customizable Burton Networks Message Board now!
© 1998 - 2022 by Keno Internet Services, except where otherwise noted. All rights reserved.