What Cindy wrote and this* goes together quiet well, imo.
not sure about Ivan, but lets wait and see.

*Jagger is moving to NYC for awhile, the band are booking studio time to start a new album for next year, and best of all, longtime bassist Bill Wyman—who left the band amicably after the Steel Wheels tour in 1992—may rejoin the band for the upcoming tour! "I think he's up for it," Richards says. "We talked about it. I'll let you know when I can."

Some of the fans on the site are utterly puzzling. We've been wondering for months what the tour situation would be, then we finally get a pretty official statement that the tour would happen, indeed, in 2013, and everybody starts with crazy conspiracy-like theories that it's just a trick to bargain for more time?

Come on guys. 2012 is way too busy for a world tour: Euro 2012, London Olympics, shitty economy pretty much anywhere, U.S. elections, not to forget Springsteen tour that would directly compete with Stones' fans. In other words: a good decision to postpone and I can't wait for 2013!

Quote
backstreetboy1
you people are posting some crazy stuff,there is nothing wrong with keiths brain,from a stroke or anything else,didnt anybody read the brilliant book or see him talking to jimmy fallon,he's brilliant,as far as his playing being shitty after the fall,i saw the stones 2 weeks after they filmed shine a light in atlantic city,and keith was on fire.

Um, ok. Keith's deterioration is in everybody's imagination. He is playing just as well as in 1969. yeah, that's the ticket.

there is more to this than just this - i'm waiting for all sorts of editorial green lights before going with a developing story I've been made privy to - yes I hinted (stupidly) at it before - but believe me - there are a few other compelling notches in this story - *one* in particular as i have heard it told



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-16 04:34 by hbwriter.

Quote
hbwriter
there is more to this than just this - i'm waiting for all sorts of editorial green lights before going with a developing story I've been made privy to - yes I hinted (stupidly) at it before - but believe me - there are a few other compelling notches in this story - *one* in particular as i have heard it told

Oh no not this again, f-ing up my life
It was bad the first time
I can't stand it twice

: )

Quote
hbwriter
there is more to this than just this - i'm waiting for all sorts of editorial green lights before going with a developing story I've been made privy to - yes I hinted (stupidly) at it before - but believe me - there are a few other compelling notches in this story - *one* in particular as i have heard it told

And now you've "hinted stupidly" at it again. Jeez, stop with the striptease already. If you know something, just say it. It's just a rock band, not national security. You actually cut yourself off in mid-sentence? Did the CIA take your hand off the keyboard before you could reveal your precious secrets?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-16 04:42 by 71Tele.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
hbwriter
there is more to this than just this - i'm waiting for all sorts of editorial green lights before going with a developing story I've been made privy to - yes I hinted (stupidly) at it before - but believe me - there are a few other compelling notches in this story - *one* in particular as i have heard it told

And now you've "hinted stupidly" at it again. Jeez, stop with the striptease already. If you know something, just say it. It's just a rock band, not national security. You actually cut yourself off in mid-sentence? Did the CIA take your hand off the keyboard before you could reveal your precious secrets?

hahahha right on 71Tele!!!...everyone is getting as bad as those fat guys in black Kiss T-Shirts with no girlfriends about this whole thing...it IS just a band....man if you know something why not just say it??...otherwise why bother saying anything???

micwer wrote:
"not to forget Springsteen tour that would directly compete with Stones' fans"

Speaking of me, I`ve not cared `bout seeing Springsteen since the 80s, although he`s playing 3 places in my country this summer.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
hbwriter
there is more to this than just this - i'm waiting for all sorts of editorial green lights before going with a developing story I've been made privy to - yes I hinted (stupidly) at it before - but believe me - there are a few other compelling notches in this story - *one* in particular as i have heard it told

And now you've "hinted stupidly" at it again. Jeez, stop with the striptease already. If you know something, just say it. It's just a rock band, not national security. You actually cut yourself off in mid-sentence? Did the CIA take your hand off the keyboard before you could reveal your precious secrets?

Tele--doesn't work that way - like i said, i'd like to craft this as an official on-the-record story and the paint just ain't dry yet - - still, I did want it known here, among friends (at least some of you), that yeah, there might be more to all of this - the fact that they are announcing what they are, I felt, gave me a tad more license to at least verify that yes there is at least a tangible ISSUE behind the scenes, as I have heard it - more to come but for now, until i get a few more verifications, it would be rumor mongering - be patient

Quote
hbwriter
there is more to this than just this - i'm waiting for all sorts of editorial green lights before going with a developing story I've been made privy to - yes I hinted (stupidly) at it before - but believe me - there are a few other compelling notches in this story - *one* in particular as i have heard it told

Come on, give us a glimmer! You were right about the tour delay.

Is the tour dependent on the successful receipt of a new liver for one of the band members?
Are they in fact recording a new album right now? A tribute album to all those future organ donors out there who may fall asleep at the wheel sometime soon?

Quote
Sipuncula

Quote
hbwriter
there is more to this than just this - i'm waiting for all sorts of editorial green lights before going with a developing story I've been made privy to - yes I hinted (stupidly) at it before - but believe me - there are a few other compelling notches in this story - *one* in particular as i have heard it told

Come on, give us a glimmer! You were right about the tour delay.

Is the tour dependent on the successful receipt of a new liver for one of the band members?
Are they in fact recording a new album right now? A tribute album to all those future organ donors out there who may fall asleep at the wheel sometime soon?

Sip - yes, the tour delay Look, in case anything happens to me before this is done, I have shared the full magilla with one person here, off line, who then has my permission to post - but look - all i wanted to do here, again, was to verify that there is more to this picture - be intrigued - be very intrigued



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-16 05:10 by hbwriter.

Quote
hbwriter

Quote
71Tele

Quote
hbwriter
there is more to this than just this - i'm waiting for all sorts of editorial green lights before going with a developing story I've been made privy to - yes I hinted (stupidly) at it before - but believe me - there are a few other compelling notches in this story - *one* in particular as i have heard it told

And now you've "hinted stupidly" at it again. Jeez, stop with the striptease already. If you know something, just say it. It's just a rock band, not national security. You actually cut yourself off in mid-sentence? Did the CIA take your hand off the keyboard before you could reveal your precious secrets?

Tele--doesn't work that way - like i said, i'd like to craft this as an official on-the-record story and the paint just ain't dry yet - - still, I did want it known here, among friends (at least some of you), that yeah, there might be more to all of this - the fact that they are announcing what they are, I felt, gave me a tad more license to at least verify that yes there is at least a tangible ISSUE behind the scenes, as I have heard it - more to come but for now, until i get a few more verifications, it would be rumor mongering - be patient

If you are truly a journalist why do you have to wait for "official" verification, unless you are employed by the Stones (and you're not), or you are worried about offending them or their organization for some reason? It's called a "scoop". If you have a source and one other source to confirm, that's good enough to publish, even if all you can say is "sources report...". Even if you have only one source, you can say "a source has told me but I have not been able to confirm..." Journalism 101. It's not difficult to read between the lines of what HAS been said and conclude that there is a "tangible issue" (Keith's health?) involved, but we're just talking about a fan internet site here, not the New York Times, so I don't understand all the cloak-and-dagger.

But whatever. It's just the Stones, not friggin' Woodward and Bernstein with Watergate.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-16 05:12 by 71Tele.

Quote
hbwriter

Quote
Sipuncula

Quote
hbwriter
there is more to this than just this - i'm waiting for all sorts of editorial green lights before going with a developing story I've been made privy to - yes I hinted (stupidly) at it before - but believe me - there are a few other compelling notches in this story - *one* in particular as i have heard it told

Come on, give us a glimmer! You were right about the tour delay.

Is the tour dependent on the successful receipt of a new liver for one of the band members?
Are they in fact recording a new album right now? A tribute album to all those future organ donors out there who may fall asleep at the wheel sometime soon?

Sip - yes, the tour delay Look, in case anything happens to me before this is done, I have shared the full magilla with one person here, off line, who then has my permission to post

hbwriter, the package has been delivered. I repeat, the package has been delivered. Now please respond in code.

"when the turtle turns, the wise bird flies to the well"

Quote
71Tele

Quote
hbwriter

Quote
71Tele

Quote
hbwriter
there is more to this than just this - i'm waiting for all sorts of editorial green lights before going with a developing story I've been made privy to - yes I hinted (stupidly) at it before - but believe me - there are a few other compelling notches in this story - *one* in particular as i have heard it told

And now you've "hinted stupidly" at it again. Jeez, stop with the striptease already. If you know something, just say it. It's just a rock band, not national security. You actually cut yourself off in mid-sentence? Did the CIA take your hand off the keyboard before you could reveal your precious secrets?

Tele--doesn't work that way - like i said, i'd like to craft this as an official on-the-record story and the paint just ain't dry yet - - still, I did want it known here, among friends (at least some of you), that yeah, there might be more to all of this - the fact that they are announcing what they are, I felt, gave me a tad more license to at least verify that yes there is at least a tangible ISSUE behind the scenes, as I have heard it - more to come but for now, until i get a few more verifications, it would be rumor mongering - be patient

If you are truly a journalist why do you have to wait for "official" verification, unless you are employed by the Stones (and you're not), or you are worried about offending them or their organization for some reason? It's called a "scoop". If you have a source and one other source to confirm, that's good enough to publish, even if all you can say is "sources report...". Even if you have only one source, you can say "a source has told me but I have not been able to confirm..." Journalism 101. It's not difficult to read between the lines of what HAS been said and conclude that there is a "tangible issue" (Keith's health?) involved, but we're just talking about a fan internet site here, not the New York Times, so I don't understand all the cloak-and-dagger.

But whatever. It's just the Stones, not friggin' Woodward and Bernstein with Watergate.

Tel--I'm not waiting for "official" anything form the Rolling Stones or anyone connected to them - when you have sources and they share things, it is incumbent upon you to verify, as best as you can, what they say/imply etc- my typical rule? triple source - but regardless, i'm trying to learn more and so i will leave it at that - and for the record - in today's day and age - there is not much difference from a fan site vs. the NYT in terms of exposure - that is to say, the same potential number of eyes can see something on the internet - hell, the Times is a pay site so it'd be easier here!

(and if you really think i have said "nothing" then look again)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-16 05:22 by hbwriter.

perhaps the big secret is that they are waiting for Mick Taylor to get through the induction phase of the Atkins diet so he will be ready to tour...

the dog is turning red...

Quote
hbwriter

Tel--I'm not waiting for "official" anything form the Rolling Stones or anyone connected to them - when you have sources and they share things, it is incumbent upon you to verify, as best as you can, what they - my typical rule? triple source - but regardless, i'm trying to learn more and so i will leave it at that - and for the record - in today's day and age - there is not much difference from a fan site vs. the NYT in terms of exposure - that is to say, the same potential number of eyes can see something on the internet - hell, the Times is a pay site so it'd be easier here!

Not to mention, IORR has a bigger circulation.

Quote
hbwriter

Quote
71Tele

Quote
hbwriter

Quote
71Tele

Quote
hbwriter
there is more to this than just this - i'm waiting for all sorts of editorial green lights before going with a developing story I've been made privy to - yes I hinted (stupidly) at it before - but believe me - there are a few other compelling notches in this story - *one* in particular as i have heard it told

And now you've "hinted stupidly" at it again. Jeez, stop with the striptease already. If you know something, just say it. It's just a rock band, not national security. You actually cut yourself off in mid-sentence? Did the CIA take your hand off the keyboard before you could reveal your precious secrets?

Tele--doesn't work that way - like i said, i'd like to craft this as an official on-the-record story and the paint just ain't dry yet - - still, I did want it known here, among friends (at least some of you), that yeah, there might be more to all of this - the fact that they are announcing what they are, I felt, gave me a tad more license to at least verify that yes there is at least a tangible ISSUE behind the scenes, as I have heard it - more to come but for now, until i get a few more verifications, it would be rumor mongering - be patient

If you are truly a journalist why do you have to wait for "official" verification, unless you are employed by the Stones (and you're not), or you are worried about offending them or their organization for some reason? It's called a "scoop". If you have a source and one other source to confirm, that's good enough to publish, even if all you can say is "sources report...". Even if you have only one source, you can say "a source has told me but I have not been able to confirm..." Journalism 101. It's not difficult to read between the lines of what HAS been said and conclude that there is a "tangible issue" (Keith's health?) involved, but we're just talking about a fan internet site here, not the New York Times, so I don't understand all the cloak-and-dagger.

But whatever. It's just the Stones, not friggin' Woodward and Bernstein with Watergate.

Tel--I'm not waiting for "official" anything form the Rolling Stones or anyone connected to them - when you have sources and they share things, it is incumbent upon you to verify, as best as you can, what they say/imply etc- my typical rule? triple source - but regardless, i'm trying to learn more and so i will leave it at that - and for the record - in today's day and age - there is not much difference from a fan site vs. the NYT in terms of exposure - that is to say, the same potential number of eyes can see something on the internet - hell, the Times is a pay site so it'd be easier here!

(and if you really think i have said "nothing" then look again)

Far be it for me to question your journalistic practices, Chris...you gotta do what you gotta do, but you ARE teasing us.

Tell you what, why don't you email what you know to me privately at jpc58@msn.com, with the understanding that it's just rumor at this point, and I give you my word of honor that I will not post it here or anywhere else.

Hey, I had to try.

duly noted (seriously - i may surprise ya - stranger things have happened) my other MO here is this - don't always believe the crap they tell ya, you know? there's always more to the story, and it doesn't always come out - but i think it should and i hope it will - i'm doing my part, i promise - and I do feel a special connection to this board as many of us have shared lots of great exchanges together - so stay tuned



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-16 05:50 by hbwriter.

There's also the fact that if someone tells you privately that they heard from an insider, family member, etc. tour dates or session dates being discussed and then someone else tells you what they were privy to because of their job and you proceed to post the news online for all to see just so you can be first, you no longer get any scoops because you're now cut off.

The other side of it is the fact that these guys are the age of pensioners and just about everyone in the band has had serious health scares in recent years. It can and does change on a dime. Folks who come here saying there will be a tour this year aren't always just saying "done deal." In several instances it has come very close to fruition over the last couple years before falling apart for various reasons. This year was no exception. We came very close to having concert dates to enjoy in 2012. If I were to speculate, I would bet against 2013 working out because it is yet another year older for all concerned, but I am pleased there will be more previously unreleased (officially and otherwise) music to enjoy later this year.

It does seem as if tension is running so high these days, we're ready to beat up on one another if something that was predicted doesn't pan out or even worse if someone teases us with knowledge we don't share.

It is interesting that Ron, Keith and especially Mick have said that they "hope" they will be able to perform.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
There's also the fact that if someone tells you privately that they heard from an insider, family member, etc. tour dates or session dates being discussed and then someone else tells you what they were privy to because of their job and you proceed to post the news online for all to see just so you can be first, you no longer get any scoops because you're now cut off.

The other side of it is...

It does seem as if tension is running so high these days, we're ready to beat up on one another if something that was predicted doesn't pan out or even worse if someone teases us with knowledge we don't share.

The still other-side of it is that despite the leaks that you and Gazza were
privvy too, that spoke of a 2012 tour, they were just disinfo. You and Gazza
were being used, unwittingly and innocently, as disinfo agents. That's how
Mick rolls. At no point (yet) has Mick been even remotely serious about
touring for the 50th, no matter what he has told Keith or any other insider.

That doesn't mean he won't at some point decide to tour with the Stones again.
I just mean that it hasn't even come close yet.

As hbwriter has indicated, quit believing what is being said. Watch only
what is being done.

(That doesn't mean that I am at this point giving any credibility whatsoever
to the story that hbwriter is chasing down. It might just be another layer of
disinfo. We'll see.)

Quote
hbwriter
duly noted (seriously - i may surprise ya - stranger things have happened) my other MO here is this - don't always believe the crap they tell ya, you know? there's always more to the story, and it doesn't always come out - but i think it should and i hope it will - i'm doing my part, i promise - and I do feel a special connection to this board as many of us have shared lots of great exchanges together - so stay tuned

For what it's worth, also my source indicates there's more to the whole picture, which seems to fit with your comments here. But concerning more details - he is as careful as you are, which is ok with me. So I can only guess. Probably TeddyB1018's post gives a good hint. Is Charlie "hoping" too they will be able to perform or is the emphasis on "hope"?

which brings to mind this "apology" keith has just issued...

what i want to know is when is mick going to apologize to himself for approving
keith's book before it was published.

until mick jagger apologizes to mick jagger for that colossal cruelty,
i'm afraid all hope is lost regarding any stones tour. if mick can't get
along better than that with himself...

Again with the dangling carrot stories?

Why even mention it? You have to "clear" the story with a thousand sources before you can share it here but by then either the info would have already slipped out through another source or you finally tell us but only after when the storm has settled and we've moved on to another rumor. I understand you're excited but honestly, calling dibs on a story waaaaaay before you can even say two words about it--- benefits no one. Don't announce you may have something, don't give us a heads up to "stay tuned"...just come in and post it when you're ready.

Quote
superrevvy

Quote
Rocky Dijon
There's also the fact that if someone tells you privately that they heard from an insider, family member, etc. tour dates or session dates being discussed and then someone else tells you what they were privy to because of their job and you proceed to post the news online for all to see just so you can be first, you no longer get any scoops because you're now cut off.

The other side of it is...

It does seem as if tension is running so high these days, we're ready to beat up on one another if something that was predicted doesn't pan out or even worse if someone teases us with knowledge we don't share.

The still other-side of it is that despite the leaks that you and Gazza were
privvy too, that spoke of a 2012 tour, they were just disinfo. You and Gazza
were being used, unwittingly and innocently, as disinfo agents. That's how
Mick rolls. At no point (yet) has Mick been even remotely serious about
touring for the 50th, no matter what he has told Keith or any other insider.

That doesn't mean he won't at some point decide to tour with the Stones again.
I just mean that it hasn't even come close yet.

As hbwriter has indicated, quit believing what is being said. Watch only
what is being done.

(That doesn't mean that I am at this point giving any credibility whatsoever
to the story that hbwriter is chasing down. It might just be another layer of
disinfo. We'll see.)

How do you fit into this disinfo conspiracy?
I think Mick wants you to believe that a 2012 tour really was never considerd by him, that Keith has not had any mini strokes, but that there is an issue with prescription drugs. Moreover he wants you to spread that opinion.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-16 10:40 by Limbostone.

i got back last night after 9 days of business trip in Basel and ...
i don't know if i must be happy or not.
the news itself is good,
but one year is longtime. anything can happen and some of the boys
don't look in great shape
we'll see.
i agree with those who say " i will believe when mick will say there will be a tour "
only at that moment i will be happy

Quote
andrea66
some of the boys
don't look in great shape

Well, Mick just danced for the president, Ronnie runs about in his own tv show (see [www.iorr.org]), Charlie has just been playing his jazz all over Europe en Bill is the one that of all Rolling Stones did Honky Tonk Women most recently.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
hbwriter
there is more to this than just this - i'm waiting for all sorts of editorial green lights before going with a developing story I've been made privy to - yes I hinted (stupidly) at it before - but believe me - there are a few other compelling notches in this story - *one* in particular as i have heard it told

And now you've "hinted stupidly" at it again. Jeez, stop with the striptease already. If you know something, just say it. It's just a rock band, not national security. You actually cut yourself off in mid-sentence? Did the CIA take your hand off the keyboard before you could reveal your precious secrets?

@hbwriter

I think you always deliver very interesting informations but this kind of behaviour lacks humility.
I think that the solemn and secret tone you use too often goes on people nerves,myself included ,no offense mean .
If you have things to say,well ,I am sure everybody will be very glad to hear them but if you can't,well,just don't begin.


@71tele :

<<Jeez, stop with the striptease already. <<
lol! I wouldn't have thought about it like this but it's a good way to call it .Some tease is always good but after a while it's considering to be a "p***k teaser" ,isn't it ?



I am a Frenchie ,as Mick affectionately called them in the Old Grey Whistle Test in 1977 .



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-16 11:41 by SwayStones.

Quote
CindyC
To be honest - I am fine if they don't tour again. I've seen them a bunch of time and am very happy that I got to see them even once. Besides if the only reason they're doing it is because it's an anniversary or whatever, then just as well they don't. If he and Mick can't stand each other, and are sharing a stage trying to fake it, well, I don't really want to see that.



That being said, if they get together because they really want to, I will certainly be a very happy girl.

+ 1