What was Axl's motive for handling the GNR situation the way he did during the last 20 years?

[Roush]

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

[Rustycage]

I think he feels this way because if Slash would have joined the New GNR

If Slash would have joined the New GNR? Insinuating that Slash was indeed given a contract. Hmmm.

than together Axl thinks could have made 100 million dollars with a new record and tour and become the next Rolling Stones. However because Slash didn't join and then said things that Axl didn't agree with to the press, Axl thinks that press believes Slash and since Axl doesn't really do interviews, no one knows Axl's side. All this has somehow caused a big chain reaction where everyone just wants a reunion tour and or new music with the old line up and there for nothing seems to be moving in the GNR camp except for some touring. Now if they were to do a reunion tour they could make 300 to 500 million. Looks like Slash was willing to do it but Axl is still waiting for Slash to apologize. That day will never come because Slash doesn't really know what he needs to apologize for. He did go to Axl's house to try and works some things out and that didn't work out. I'm sure if locked them up in a room they would have a lot to talk about and there would be some apologizing for certain things but, Im not sure how to get them locked up together. There is a lot more to it than this but this is just the outline for it. This is the short version. Also lets not forget the 16 years of life that Axl missed out on because of their differences.

Slash doesn't seem to think he lied.

it just goes to show you how pissed Axl is over the things that he thinks Slash has done to him.

Do you notice how he always says things like "what Axl THINKS Slash has done to him?"

Again, can you point to the specific responses that make you doubtful of Slash and the others version?

[Rovim]

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

[Rustycage]

Slash version of events changes all the time, Marc said Slash doesn't even remember most of it, and that book was not written only by Slash himself. He was fucked up for a lot of the time back then.

Duff's book is even less credible, cause he admitted he forgot about entire legs of the tour back then.

Marc talked about how Axl's version of the truth is just as valid, maybe you can be as open to the possibility not everything Slash and Duff said was accurate, seeing how they're not that credible when it comes to actually remembering shit from that time, while Axl kept journals of the events like Izzy said, and Axl admitted himself.

You're putting together a picture from only the pieces you want to use. That's not the ideal way imo.

I'm putting together the picture that you refuse to provide valid sources for. People provided you a source, you should do the same.

Why don't you find something that points to him being at band practice to discredit Slash? Oh wait, he admitted to never being there.

Maybe you can find where he said Slash's version of events is a lie?

I don't doubt that Axl thinks he is in the right because the man is pretty delusional.

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

You assume so when Marc makes vague comments about Slash. Why is it suddenly forbidden when other members of the band that were actually there back up Slash's side?

[wasted]

The current guys are working on CD III for a simultaneous release of II and III. Let the bullets fly!

[Rovim]

Slash version of events changes all the time, Marc said Slash doesn't even remember most of it, and that book was not written only by Slash himself. He was fucked up for a lot of the time back then.

Duff's book is even less credible, cause he admitted he forgot about entire legs of the tour back then.

Marc talked about how Axl's version of the truth is just as valid, maybe you can be as open to the possibility not everything Slash and Duff said was accurate, seeing how they're not that credible when it comes to actually remembering shit from that time, while Axl kept journals of the events like Izzy said, and Axl admitted himself.

You're putting together a picture from only the pieces you want to use. That's not the ideal way imo.

I'm putting together the picture that you refuse to provide valid sources for. People provided you a source, you should do the same.

Why don't you find something that points to him being at band practice to discredit Slash? Oh wait, he admitted to never being there.

Maybe you can find where he said Slash's version of events is a lie?

I don't doubt that Axl thinks he is in the right because the man is pretty delusional.

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

You assume so when Marc makes vague comments about Slash. Why is it suddenly forbidden when other members of the band that were actually there back up Slash's side?

Oh but when Slash thinks he's right, it's valid? hmmm...

Also, Why do you think Marc needed to be in band practice to know what was going on?

Again: Marc said Axl's version of it is just as valid as Slash's. You don't say that without knowing the people involved. And he did know them.

[Rustycage]

Slash version of events changes all the time, Marc said Slash doesn't even remember most of it, and that book was not written only by Slash himself. He was fucked up for a lot of the time back then.

Duff's book is even less credible, cause he admitted he forgot about entire legs of the tour back then.

Marc talked about how Axl's version of the truth is just as valid, maybe you can be as open to the possibility not everything Slash and Duff said was accurate, seeing how they're not that credible when it comes to actually remembering shit from that time, while Axl kept journals of the events like Izzy said, and Axl admitted himself.

You're putting together a picture from only the pieces you want to use. That's not the ideal way imo.

I'm putting together the picture that you refuse to provide valid sources for. People provided you a source, you should do the same.

Why don't you find something that points to him being at band practice to discredit Slash? Oh wait, he admitted to never being there.

Maybe you can find where he said Slash's version of events is a lie?

I don't doubt that Axl thinks he is in the right because the man is pretty delusional.

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

You assume so when Marc makes vague comments about Slash. Why is it suddenly forbidden when other members of the band that were actually there back up Slash's side?

Oh but when Slash thinks he's right, it's valid? hmmm...

Also, Why do you think Marc needed to be in band practice to know what was going on?

Again: Marc said Axl's version of it is just as valid as Slash's. You don't say that without knowing the people involved. And he did know them.

When other members say the same thing, it's more valid because they were there. Marc states that he wasn't at band practice so all of the drama that went on there he can't respond on.

What Marc does clarify is that "if Slash would have joined New GNR." That shows that one of Slash's motivations actually occurred. The main thing you've been trying to grasp.

I did a quick browse but can you provide the quote where he said Axl was right?

[Roush]

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

Absolutely. It is Common Sense 101.

If 10 people say 'A' happened, and 2 people say 'B' happened -- would you not consider both sides, and then take into consideration option 'A' based on the higher number of eyewitness accounts? No offense intended, but this is really basic, problem solving. It sounds like you're going with Axl's account of things without any evidence, and only because you want to believe Axl's side of things.

[AxlRose14]

Are you trying to say that he lied about his reason for leaving?

Well, are you insinuating that Axl has lied? So the guy that rarely talks and the one who doesn't do a hundred interviews about why he left is the one that's wrong..cmon, you can't be that naive. Two sides to every story.

Are you trying to say that he lied about his reason for leaving?

No, I'm trying to understand how it's possible. Why so defensive?

Not defensive. I just don't see why you are so resistant to the information. First you thought it was made up and no one could provide sources and now you don't think it's possible to sign something to keep the band going only to reflect on it later and get upset. And btw, that is pretty much what happened.

Slash agreed to it to try and work it out and get things moving but it only got worse so he said fuck it. The Axl dictatorship is what drove him away. Those are his words.

I could post the pages of the book where he explains it but I know I'd be banned for some kind of copyright issue. Just read it yourself.

You are textbook defensive. You're pissed off at Axl, probably for making you wait two hours longer than you planned on seeing the band, and you're siding with Slash. A breakup is never one person. It takes two to tango.

Duff said himself that the band was so stoned, nothing was getting done.That's just as much Slash bro. Axl and Slash had both always admitted that they had been in charge when it came to Use Your Illusions, so it works both ways.

Fuck yeah Axl made it a dictatorship. Fuck yeah he controlled everything, and fuck yeah it was his band. He had no choice. It's already been pointed out in this thread that Slash was on the verge of suicide and was in a bad spot with his drug use. Axl Rose never forced him to do drugs, he needed to leave, even if it was only for a short period of time. Axl probably got sick and tired of taking 3 years to make a record, at the time. Boy he must have been frustrated it ended up taking 15.

Slash struggled with heroin and alcohol addictions during this period.

Exaggeration. Being under the influence through this legal process would make the contracts null. Even self intoxication is considered duress, if you can prove it and that the one offering the contract knew it. Considering that, stop throwing in your bullshit speculation just to cloud the issue. Axl's nuts are safe in this discussion. Settle down.

Slash was on and off heroin for a bit. He kicked it cold turkey when he needed to. One thing remained constant...He never allowed drugs to destroy his loyalty to GNR. You keep claiming that and it's bullshit.

Again, textbook defensive. You bash the Axl fans, and you only take Slash's side. Your whole argument doesn't stand, because your using reasons of the split from Slash's book. Not even anything from Axl to decide who's lying or not. Axl chooses to respond in his way, and you just don't like it.

Slash's book is just his perspective. I would have more of an issue about Axl being controlling had he done the whole sign the name over thing in 1994. Yes, a year makes a difference when you got nothing! Yeah I could understand stanging in Slash's shoes he was pissed about gilby, paul, and zakk. But then again, the band had decided to eventually fire gilby anyways, Slash included. Slash wanted him too, it's more likely Slash lambased Axl on that one.

Paul was the closest thing to getting Izzy. Hell, they brought izzy back and ridded of paul, and still could produce nothing. Zakk Wylde is an idea that any GNR fan jizzed at at that time, whether anyone has the fucking balls to admit it or not. In the end, Zakk himself said the stuff they did sounded like judas priest on steroids. So imagine appeitite or snakepit but even harder, yeah that's not GNR. Chinese Democracy was, and songs like This I love were absolutely necessary.

Taking one guys side is just wrong. It was both of them and they both wanted control. Duff was in the middle. And hey, where's matt and dizzys say in the whole thing? Hell, where's pauls? Axl shouldn't have put paul's solos in the rolling stones cover for sure without at least consulting the band, I do see that point. Then again, Slash and the guys should have had more focus on probably picking an izzy replacement. It goes both ways.

Both guys are wrong. Axl shouldn't have made it a dictatorship, but the bandmates should have gotten sober. Axl should have allowed for that. Everyone should have been more compromising, but drugs, booze, and ego's tore them apart. Everyone should have been focused on the betterment of guns n roses. Instead, they're allin charge of their own band. Velvet Revolver, comprised of guys who claimed they hated Axl cuz he made gnr a dictatorship, completely fell apart and left slash matt and duff wanting Axl back.

Dalsh.....great post. Full of logic and reasonable points.

Rovin.....you hit the nail on the head. Sure, a few people will never accept Axl continuing to use the name without the members who created the classic songs. But I fully believe that if Axl had released 3-4 albums by now he that would have stopped a huge portion of the naysayers.

If Axl let this band put its imprint on GnR, then people would be debating which band put out better music. Instead of just arguing about whether they were a cover band or not.

CD was a great record. Try listening moron

Are you capable of posting without insulting people? You calling people names doesn't make them feel bad and it doesn't make your point any stronger.....it just makes you look immature.

But if you want to throw out the term moron.......you didn't address the point at all, and I've been one of the biggest supporters of CD of anybody on this forum. I've posted a 100 times that it is the best rock album of the last decade, that I hope the next album is like a twin of CD, and that Axl and this band could release kick ass music every two years. So not only is your insult simply wrong and juvenile, but applying it towards me....well, it just makes you look ignorant as well.

Free advice kid. Instead of trying so hard to be funny and witty and always insulting people, focus on the actual topics and people will stop thinking of you as a silly cupcake.

First off, the only cupcake around here is you, ya fucking douche. Second, I'd call you by your username but you're not even mature enough to respond properly. Then again, you responded to me attacking you once with two seperate posts, so knowing I got under your skin, I'm happy. Now shut the fuck up, leave, and never come back ya fucking toxic waste of life. Exactly.

[Rustycage]

Yes I did tell Slash and Slash said apologize for what? The problem is when 2 people have a falling out, the best way to work it out is with a good counselor that does that for a living. They would then see that they had some differences of opinion and also I'm sure there would be some apologizing on both sides. Slash for some of the things that he said about Axl and Axl for some of the things that happened that got Slash upset.

Axl for some of the things that happened that got Slash upset.

Axl for some of the things that happened that got Slash upset.

Doesn't look like he is saying Slash is lying about the version of events that upset him.

[AxlRose14]

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

Absolutely. It is Common Sense 101.

If 10 people say 'A' happened, and 2 people say 'B' happened -- would you not consider both sides, and then take into consideration option 'A' based on the higher number of eyewitness accounts? No offense intended, but this is really basic, problem solving. It sounds like you're going with Axl's account of things without any evidence, and only because you want to believe Axl's side of things.

Well whether you like it or not, or how pissed you are at Axl, Marc Canter's opinion means more than anything slash has written or said. He's in the middle, friends with both guys, so he can give you both sides to the story. and 10 to 2? Is that the score card? Well, if dbags like vicky hamilton are in that, then fuck it, it doesn't mean shit and is all bullshit. She forever has it out for Axl, hell, she probably fucked him and he didn't want a relationship. Prolly wrong, but im sure theres more to the fact gnr just dictched her. She's a bitter, ugly, old, whiny bitch.

I need unbiased opinions, not ppl pissed off at axl for being yelled at for not doing their fucking jobs

[Rustycage]

AxlRose14 tldr. Plus, your name is where I stop reading. I prefer to discuss a little more objectively than you usually do.

But anyways, Duff cleaned himself up before the big shit went down so get your facts straight.

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

Absolutely. It is Common Sense 101.

If 10 people say 'A' happened, and 2 people say 'B' happened -- would you not consider both sides, and then take into consideration option 'A' based on the higher number of eyewitness accounts? No offense intended, but this is really basic, problem solving. It sounds like you're going with Axl's account of things without any evidence, and only because you want to believe Axl's side of things.

Well whether you like it or not, or how pissed you are at Axl, Marc Canter's opinion means more than anything slash has written or said. He's in the middle, friends with both guys, so he can give you both sides to the story. and 10 to 2? Is that the score card? Well, if dbags like vicky hamilton are in that, then fuck it, it doesn't mean shit and is all bullshit. She forever has it out for Axl, hell, she probably fucked him and he didn't want a relationship. Prolly wrong, but im sure theres more to the fact gnr just dictched her. She's a bitter, ugly, old, whiny bitch.

I need unbiased opinions, not ppl pissed off at axl for being yelled at for not doing their fucking jobs

How about you provide some sources that claim Slash is lying? Oh wait fuck it. "AxlRose14"

[Rovim]

Slash version of events changes all the time, Marc said Slash doesn't even remember most of it, and that book was not written only by Slash himself. He was fucked up for a lot of the time back then.

Duff's book is even less credible, cause he admitted he forgot about entire legs of the tour back then.

Marc talked about how Axl's version of the truth is just as valid, maybe you can be as open to the possibility not everything Slash and Duff said was accurate, seeing how they're not that credible when it comes to actually remembering shit from that time, while Axl kept journals of the events like Izzy said, and Axl admitted himself.

You're putting together a picture from only the pieces you want to use. That's not the ideal way imo.

I'm putting together the picture that you refuse to provide valid sources for. People provided you a source, you should do the same.

Why don't you find something that points to him being at band practice to discredit Slash? Oh wait, he admitted to never being there.

Maybe you can find where he said Slash's version of events is a lie?

I don't doubt that Axl thinks he is in the right because the man is pretty delusional.

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

You assume so when Marc makes vague comments about Slash. Why is it suddenly forbidden when other members of the band that were actually there back up Slash's side?

Oh but when Slash thinks he's right, it's valid? hmmm...

Also, Why do you think Marc needed to be in band practice to know what was going on?

Again: Marc said Axl's version of it is just as valid as Slash's. You don't say that without knowing the people involved. And he did know them.

When other members say the same thing, it's more valid because they were there. Marc states that he wasn't at band practice so all of the drama that went on there he can't respond on.

What Marc does clarify is that "if Slash would have joined New GNR." That shows that one of Slash's motivations actually occurred. The main thing you've been trying to grasp.

I did a quick browse but can you provide the quote where he said Axl was right?

It's not more valid cause they were there, cause they're not as objective and they were high for a lot of the time.

You seem to prefer trusting one over the other, but I don't see any real reason to do so, especially when you have an objective person telling you it wasn't as black and white.

And I can't find the Marc comment, but I'm 100% sure he said it, it was a sig here too.

[Rustycage]

Provide the source please. Others did it for you.

Dude, stop with the whole "they were stoned" crap. Duff was clean when all of the nasty stuff happened. Izzy was clean before his permanent departure.

[Gunzen]

I can't believe you guys are seriously talking about this shit again. Wow, never in my life have I seen so much gossip about things you actually know next to nothing about. You guys do realize most of the things you are talking about are half truths and misnomers. It is here-say by drug addicts. Yet you dissect it over and over again, as if it was the word of God.

20+ years guys. Amazing, have fun talking about shit you don't know for sure ever happened.

Edited December 31, 2012 by Gunzen

[Rovim]

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

Absolutely. It is Common Sense 101.

If 10 people say 'A' happened, and 2 people say 'B' happened -- would you not consider both sides, and then take into consideration option 'A' based on the higher number of eyewitness accounts? No offense intended, but this is really basic, problem solving. It sounds like you're going with Axl's account of things without any evidence, and only because you want to believe Axl's side of things.

I want to believe you're capable of actually going into this discussion with an unbiased view, but you're telling me that just because more people believe Slash, then it must be true.

Slash talked way more then Axl did, saying a lot of things, out of bitterness. Things that Marc said he needed to apologize to Axl for.

He made it seem like Axl was to blame for everything, so you see... I don't buy whatever Slash is selling just because he was there and a lot of people agree with him. Common sense 101

[Rustycage]

I can't believe you guys are seriously talking about this shit again. Wow, never in my life have I seen so much gossip about things you actually know next to nothing about. You guys do realize most of the things you are talking about are half truths and misnomers. It is here-say by drug addicts. Yet you dissect it over and over again, as if it was the word of God.

20+ years guys. Amazing, have fun talking about shit you don't know for sure ever happened.

Quotes from autobiographies aren't hearsay. LOL

LOL @ "misnomers." How the in hell does that apply here?

Also LOL @ you saying they are half truth right after saying that no one here knows what happened as if YOU do.

If you can't handle the conversation(which you have so quickly shown that you can't), then don't read it.

Edited December 31, 2012 by Rustycage

[Rovim]

Provide the source please. Others did it for you.

Dude, stop with the whole "they were stoned" crap. Duff was clean when all of the nasty stuff happened. Izzy was clean before his permanent departure.

Source for what? What more do you need? and you can make it seem like it was no big deal, but when you're a junkie, it changes a whole lot of shit. Shit that is relevant to what we're talking about.

[Rustycage]

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

Absolutely. It is Common Sense 101.

If 10 people say 'A' happened, and 2 people say 'B' happened -- would you not consider both sides, and then take into consideration option 'A' based on the higher number of eyewitness accounts? No offense intended, but this is really basic, problem solving. It sounds like you're going with Axl's account of things without any evidence, and only because you want to believe Axl's side of things.

I want to believe you're capable of actually going into this discussion with an unbiased view, but you're telling me that just because more people believe Slash, then it must be true.

Slash talked way more then Axl did, saying a lot of things, out of bitterness. Things that Marc said he needed to apologize to Axl for.

He made it seem like Axl was to blame for everything, so you see... I don't buy whatever Slash is selling just because he was there and a lot of people agree with him. Common sense 101

Jesus. More twisting.

Marc said that Axl would only forgive him IF SLASH APOLOGIZED. Not that "he SHOULD apologize."

He never said Axl was to blame about everything. Yet again you clearly haven't read the book that you claimed to earlier in this topic.

You buy what Marc says in vague comments about times and events he admitted to not being around.

[Roush]

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

Absolutely. It is Common Sense 101.

If 10 people say 'A' happened, and 2 people say 'B' happened -- would you not consider both sides, and then take into consideration option 'A' based on the higher number of eyewitness accounts? No offense intended, but this is really basic, problem solving. It sounds like you're going with Axl's account of things without any evidence, and only because you want to believe Axl's side of things.

I want to believe you're capable of actually going into this discussion with an unbiased view, but you're telling me that just because more people believe Slash, then it must be true.

Slash talked way more then Axl did, saying a lot of things, out of bitterness. Things that Marc said he needed to apologize to Axl for.

He made it seem like Axl was to blame for everything, so you see... I don't buy whatever Slash is selling just because he was there and a lot of people agree with him. Common sense 101

Actually, if you read the Dexter chats -- Axl has said more in detail about the break-up than Slash has.

Why do you assume everyone who endorses Slash's account is a liar? Do you have sources?

Why do you color Slash as bitter, when Axl has been quoted calling Slash "cancer", and shouldering blame on him (along with Duff, and Stephanie) for inhibiting his writing process (in a recent article)? In fact, Slash has moved on (judging by interviews) more so than Axl. Whenever Slash is asked about reunions, or break-ups -- he dodges the question. And he certainly doesn't refer to Axl as a terminal disease.

[Rovim]

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

Absolutely. It is Common Sense 101.

If 10 people say 'A' happened, and 2 people say 'B' happened -- would you not consider both sides, and then take into consideration option 'A' based on the higher number of eyewitness accounts? No offense intended, but this is really basic, problem solving. It sounds like you're going with Axl's account of things without any evidence, and only because you want to believe Axl's side of things.

I want to believe you're capable of actually going into this discussion with an unbiased view, but you're telling me that just because more people believe Slash, then it must be true.

Slash talked way more then Axl did, saying a lot of things, out of bitterness. Things that Marc said he needed to apologize to Axl for.

He made it seem like Axl was to blame for everything, so you see... I don't buy whatever Slash is selling just because he was there and a lot of people agree with him. Common sense 101

Jesus. More twisting.

Marc said that Axl would only forgive him IF SLASH APOLOGIZED. Not that "he SHOULD apologize."

He never said Axl was to blame about everything. Yet again you clearly haven't read the book that you claimed to earlier in this topic.

You buy what Marc says in vague comments about times and events he admitted to not being around.

I read the book, and I'm not twisting anything. Marc said to Slash that it wasn't cool that he talked shit about him in the media, and he needed to apologize for that, to which Slash declined. Marc said that he didn't want to, cause it's really important for Slash to look cool.

I buy what I buy, it's just as valid as you buying every piece of information that comes from Slash's mouth. Probably even more, cause Marc is actually objective.

[Rustycage]

Provide the source please. Others did it for you.

Dude, stop with the whole "they were stoned" crap. Duff was clean when all of the nasty stuff happened. Izzy was clean before his permanent departure.

Source for what? What more do you need? and you can make it seem like it was no big deal, but when you're a junkie, it changes a whole lot of shit. Shit that is relevant to what we're talking about.

A source for the things you claim. It's shitty for you to beg for sources because you haven't read up about the band but then turn and expect everyone to buy your story without providing direct sources of your claims.

The whole issue of the contracts that made Slash leave happened when Duff was clean so your persistent reliance on the junkie excuse is garbage. Izzy was also clean around the time that Axl went apeshit according to them. If ever being a junkie means your outlook is distorted then you can't believe Axl. Nearly everyone says he is delusional and HE WAS ALSO A JUNKIE.

Drop the junkie excuse. It's the modus operandi of people like brainfart. It's a distortion to save face in their arguments.

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

Absolutely. It is Common Sense 101.

If 10 people say 'A' happened, and 2 people say 'B' happened -- would you not consider both sides, and then take into consideration option 'A' based on the higher number of eyewitness accounts? No offense intended, but this is really basic, problem solving. It sounds like you're going with Axl's account of things without any evidence, and only because you want to believe Axl's side of things.

I want to believe you're capable of actually going into this discussion with an unbiased view, but you're telling me that just because more people believe Slash, then it must be true.

Slash talked way more then Axl did, saying a lot of things, out of bitterness. Things that Marc said he needed to apologize to Axl for.

He made it seem like Axl was to blame for everything, so you see... I don't buy whatever Slash is selling just because he was there and a lot of people agree with him. Common sense 101

Jesus. More twisting.

Marc said that Axl would only forgive him IF SLASH APOLOGIZED. Not that "he SHOULD apologize."

He never said Axl was to blame about everything. Yet again you clearly haven't read the book that you claimed to earlier in this topic.

You buy what Marc says in vague comments about times and events he admitted to not being around.

I read the book, and I'm not twisting anything. Marc said to Slash that it wasn't cool that he talked shit about him in the media, and he needed to apologize for that, to which Slash declined. Marc said that he didn't want to, cause it's really important for Slash to look cool.

I buy what I buy, it's just as valid as you buying every piece of information that comes from Slash's mouth. Probably even more, cause Marc is actually objective.

Since you read the book, can you tell me what it was that had Slash running up a fairway naked?

[Roush]

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

Absolutely. It is Common Sense 101.

If 10 people say 'A' happened, and 2 people say 'B' happened -- would you not consider both sides, and then take into consideration option 'A' based on the higher number of eyewitness accounts? No offense intended, but this is really basic, problem solving. It sounds like you're going with Axl's account of things without any evidence, and only because you want to believe Axl's side of things.

I want to believe you're capable of actually going into this discussion with an unbiased view, but you're telling me that just because more people believe Slash, then it must be true.

Slash talked way more then Axl did, saying a lot of things, out of bitterness. Things that Marc said he needed to apologize to Axl for.

He made it seem like Axl was to blame for everything, so you see... I don't buy whatever Slash is selling just because he was there and a lot of people agree with him. Common sense 101

Actually, if you read the Dexter chats -- Axl has said more in detail about the break-up than Slash has.

Why do you assume everyone who endorses Slash's account is a liar? Do you have sources?

Why do you color Slash as bitter, when Axl has been quoted calling Slash "cancer", and shouldering blame on him (along with Duff, and Stephanie) for inhibiting his writing process (in a recent article)? In fact, Slash has moved on (judging by interviews) more so than Axl. Whenever Slash is asked about reunions, or break-ups -- he dodges the question. And he certainly doesn't refer to Axl as a terminal disease.

I don't color Slash as bitter. Slash said that himself! he admitted he was bitter right after the breakup. And I don't assume anyone that supports Slash is a liar. That's just you putting words in my mouth.

And I'd say 'not in this lifetime' is moving on. At least in one aspect of it.

You said yourself you don't "buy" what other people say when they agree with Slash. Yet you cite Marc as an "objective source". Why the disparity? What delegitimizes the people who endorse Slash's account of things?

"Not in this lifetime" is not a personal attack. Unlike blaming someone, 20 years later, for inhibiting your writing ability, and likening said individual to cancer.

[Rovim]

Wow, so if I don't remember a small piece of information from the book, does that mean I never really read it?

Axl was never a junkie at the level of Slash and Izzy.

The problem here imo, is that you don't stop and consider that maybe it was not exactly like Slash said it was in the book, and the power play by Slash, thinking he will be welcomed back to the band speaks volumes to me.

I'm not going to provide sources to what Marc said cause I'm too lazy for that, but you calling them stories don't make it untrue.

It's well known information. Especially the comment about how both of their views are valid.

And btw, the insults are not needed.

Brainsaber is one of Warchild's alternate accounts. You can smell the crazy.

I can say the same thing on Axl's thoughts on the matter. Marc supports Axl's view on it as much as if not more as Slash's.

And he actually knows Axl, so what's your point?

He was close to both of them.

More people corroborate Slash's story than Axl's.

Then it must be true.

Absolutely. It is Common Sense 101.

If 10 people say 'A' happened, and 2 people say 'B' happened -- would you not consider both sides, and then take into consideration option 'A' based on the higher number of eyewitness accounts? No offense intended, but this is really basic, problem solving. It sounds like you're going with Axl's account of things without any evidence, and only because you want to believe Axl's side of things.

I want to believe you're capable of actually going into this discussion with an unbiased view, but you're telling me that just because more people believe Slash, then it must be true.

Slash talked way more then Axl did, saying a lot of things, out of bitterness. Things that Marc said he needed to apologize to Axl for.

He made it seem like Axl was to blame for everything, so you see... I don't buy whatever Slash is selling just because he was there and a lot of people agree with him. Common sense 101

Actually, if you read the Dexter chats -- Axl has said more in detail about the break-up than Slash has.

Why do you assume everyone who endorses Slash's account is a liar? Do you have sources?

Why do you color Slash as bitter, when Axl has been quoted calling Slash "cancer", and shouldering blame on him (along with Duff, and Stephanie) for inhibiting his writing process (in a recent article)? In fact, Slash has moved on (judging by interviews) more so than Axl. Whenever Slash is asked about reunions, or break-ups -- he dodges the question. And he certainly doesn't refer to Axl as a terminal disease.

I don't color Slash as bitter. Slash said that himself! he admitted he was bitter right after the breakup. And I don't assume anyone that supports Slash is a liar. That's just you putting words in my mouth.

And I'd say 'not in this lifetime' is moving on. At least in one aspect of it.

You said yourself you don't "buy" what other people say when they agree with Slash. Yet you cite Marc as an "objective source". Why the disparity? What delegitimizes the people who endorse Slash's account of things?

"Not in this lifetime" is not a personal attack. Unlike blaming someone, 20 years later, for inhibiting your writing ability, and likening said individual to cancer.

But if it did hurt his writing abilities, I don't see anything wrong in saying that it did. Marc is an objective source to me and to others too.

I said I don't buy every little thing Slash says. Some things I do agree with.

The cancer thing was just in poor taste, but I did get what he meant, he was just saying how much unwanted he is to Axl in his life. I wouldn't use that way of describing it.

Edited December 31, 2012 by Rovim

[Rustycage]

It was actually a pretty awesome part of the book.

You can claim to be unbiased and you may have appeared that way at the beginning but I'm not buying it now.

Until you provide some sources of someone claiming Slash, Duff and Izzy are lying, I think you're trying to "sell something."

You take the word of someone that was more of an outsider than the band members on events when they were clean simply because "he knew them." SMH. As informative as Marc is, there are plenty of things he admits to not being present to witness.