You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#121 Re: Guns N' Roses » RRHoF Discussion (Izzy/Slash/Axl Press Statements) » 688 weeks ago
It tells me they were two junkies that couldn't prove anything. Just what I said. Doesn't mean it didn't happen.
I find that impossible to believe considering the other people around when this alleged incident occurred.
Sorry, but I am not in the business of proving negatives. I look at evidence and try to figure out what could have happened.
But if you like to live in a world of fairies and evil witch-like Axls, get down with your bad self.
#122 Re: Guns N' Roses » RRHoF Discussion (Izzy/Slash/Axl Press Statements) » 688 weeks ago
You best start confronting yourself. You're in the same dream world Axl is in.
I think our conversation is at an end.
#123 Re: Guns N' Roses » RRHoF Discussion (Izzy/Slash/Axl Press Statements) » 688 weeks ago
killingvector wrote:buzzsaw wrote:So he swindled his band mates instead. How honorable...
I see you have finally shown your hand.
If he 'swindled' his bandmates, then S&D have the courts at their disposal to reverse that. Unless of course they weren't swindled at all.
LOL - finally showed my hand? I did it several posts ago. Heck, several years ago. Same way I know your hand based on your denial that ANYTHING happened. Slash and Duff just smiled and gave Axl whatever he wanted because he was such a good guy...
Proving it is quite different than knowing it happened. The burden of proof is on two guys that were junkies. There's no way thay will be able to prove anything.
Well, they never tried to prove it. What does that tell you?
#124 Re: Guns N' Roses » RRHoF Discussion (Izzy/Slash/Axl Press Statements) » 688 weeks ago
killingvector wrote:I could honestly care less about other's perceptions. I wish Axl would speak more about what happened to quell the tide of these myths.
But the writing is on the wall for anyone that wants to read it.
If you didn't care about other people's perceptions, this conversation wouldn't even be taking place.
True enough. Sometimes I can't help myself when I see so many cling to so many unproven or blatantly false beliefs.
Confronting ignorance does not, however, validate those beliefs. Confronting ignorance deprives it of sustenance.
#125 Re: Guns N' Roses » RRHoF Discussion (Izzy/Slash/Axl Press Statements) » 688 weeks ago
killingvector wrote:Axl brought business books on tour, learned the industry, and fought hard to protect his livelihood.
Very few people realize how involved he was in not getting swindled.
So he swindled his band mates instead. How honorable...
I see you have finally shown your hand.
If he 'swindled' his bandmates, then S&D have the courts at their disposal to reverse that. Unless of course they weren't swindled at all.
#126 Re: Guns N' Roses » RRHoF Discussion (Izzy/Slash/Axl Press Statements) » 688 weeks ago
killingvector wrote:buzzsaw wrote:Perception is more important than reality. The sooner you figure that out, the better off you'll be. Lack of evidence does not equal fiction...that's the mistake you're making here.
Perception is very strong, but the moment we bow down to the grumblings of the mob is the moment the earth is back at the center of the Universe and the planets rotate on epicycles. Perception is not more important than reality. Scientology operates with your level of reason; should we embrace that?
If there is no evidence that an event occurred, to assert that the event occurred is a logically incorrect statement.
The sooner you believe your rational mind, the sooner you will see that perception plays no role in finding truth.
How about this then...the REALITY is that most people's perceptions of something are more important than the reality. If you want to really understand people, you have to step away from science. People don't operate scientifically. For all the years of psychology and studying people, nobody can still explain why people do the things they do.
You want to operate in utopia; it doesn't work that way. There is a LOT of evidence that at the very least, something "shrewd" happened among people that should have been looking out for each other...and likely on both sides. You can deny it all you want, but that is the truth. When that is the truth, whoever "wins" in that situation is going to be villified. That's the way it goes. Don't want the burden? Don't do the act.
I could honestly care less about other's perceptions. I wish Axl would speak more about what happened to quell the tide of these myths.
But the writing is on the wall for anyone that wants to read it.
#127 Re: Guns N' Roses » RRHoF Discussion (Izzy/Slash/Axl Press Statements) » 688 weeks ago
Was Axl more savvy with business and possibly got the junkies to sign something they didn't realize or no longer had the energy to fight (given they knew his previous petulant beaviour when he didn't get hs own way), maybe.
Is this illegal? Quite possibly not depending on the circumstances, Or if it was at the very least it's very hard to prove.
Was it unethical of Axl - quite possibly.
If they were under the influence and Axl knew this, the contract can be ruled null and void by the courts.
Going back to the suit from several years ago, S&D never argued coercion or any defense based on their inability to negotiate contracts because of substance abuse problems.
Remember, Duff has gone to business school and understands contract & contract law very well. If there was an angle there, it would have been exploited.
#128 Re: Guns N' Roses » RRHoF Discussion (Izzy/Slash/Axl Press Statements) » 688 weeks ago
KV How do you honestly know that some form of coercion never happened?
I don't know for sure it did I dont know for sure it didn't!
Read the S&D brief from several years ago. It deals with old and new partnerships and why each existed.
#129 Re: Guns N' Roses » RRHoF Discussion (Izzy/Slash/Axl Press Statements) » 688 weeks ago
Perception is more important than reality. The sooner you figure that out, the better off you'll be. Lack of evidence does not equal fiction...that's the mistake you're making here.
Perception is very strong, but the moment we bow down to the grumblings of the mob is the moment the earth is back at the center of the Universe and the planets rotate on epicycles. Perception is not more important than reality. Scientology operates with your level of reason; should we embrace that?
If there is no evidence that an event occurred, to assert that the event occurred is a logically incorrect statement.
The sooner you believe your rational mind, the sooner you will see that perception plays no role in finding truth.
#130 Re: Guns N' Roses » RRHoF Discussion (Izzy/Slash/Axl Press Statements) » 688 weeks ago
Just because something can't be proved in court to their burden of proof doesn't mean it didn't or some version of it never happened.
It was never introduced at court, friend.
It wasn't a failed theory, it was never a theory. Never an aspect of their case.
If it happened, the multiple eyewitness accounts would have given them the biggest piece of evidence to get the name back.
But none of it surfaced.
As Dexter said, it didn't happen.
