Jay Z Sticks It To Gallagher, Doubters

[SolidSnake]

so which one is it? "spoonfeeding" or "inluencing" ??????? stop alternating between the two.

you are a very silly person.

It's both actually...take your pick.

The U.S. spoonfed rock n roll to the entire world (if that wording makes you feel any better about it).

The intention of American rock n roll wasn't to get kids from England (or any other country) to start bands,those kids drew their own influences from what was spoonfed to them.

You've tried being the tough guy around here who knows everything about music,I've risen to your challenges that you claimed I couldn't do...and you have only responded with half baked retorts and haven't bothered to acknowledge at all that perhaps a lot of the accusations and claims you have made in this thread might be inaccurate.

Your last post confirms that.

You're out of ammo and you are now arguing for the sake of it.

oh and...to quote John Lennon:

"Before Elvis,there was nothing".

please stop flattering yourself.

you're arguments are compeltely off balance, I havent challenged you, and you certainly havent risen to any of my points ffs.

what does elvis have to do with anything?

I asked you to give examples of the US spoonfeeding the UK rock n roll, starting from the 60's onwards.

John Lennon also said "I dont believe in elvis", whats your point?

I've said many pages ago that the foundations of rock n roll were invented by black musicians living in america, again you ramble on with your sensationilistic rubbish.

for a brief period in the 50's the US pretty much owned popular music.

all artists influence other artists, it's called the circulation and creation of art, again whats your point? this has nothing to do with spoonfeeding, you complete toss pot.

from the 60's onwards the united kingdom has produced the best rock n roll bands, not the US. FACT

[A Northern Soul]

so which one is it? "spoonfeeding" or "inluencing" ??????? stop alternating between the two.

you are a very silly person.

It's both actually...take your pick.

The U.S. spoonfed rock n roll to the entire world (if that wording makes you feel any better about it).

The intention of American rock n roll wasn't to get kids from England (or any other country) to start bands,those kids drew their own influences from what was spoonfed to them.

You've tried being the tough guy around here who knows everything about music,I've risen to your challenges that you claimed I couldn't do...and you have only responded with half baked retorts and haven't bothered to acknowledge at all that perhaps a lot of the accusations and claims you have made in this thread might be inaccurate.

Your last post confirms that.

You're out of ammo and you are now arguing for the sake of it.

oh and...to quote John Lennon:

"Before Elvis,there was nothing".

please stop flattering yourself.

you're arguments are compeltely off balance, I havent challenged you, and you certainly havent risen to any of my points ffs.

what does elvis have to do with anything?

I asked you to give examples of the US spoonfeeding the UK rock n roll, starting from the 60's onwards.

John Lennon also said "I dont believe in elvis", whats your point?

I've said many pages ago that the foundations of rock n roll were invented by black musicians living in america, again you ramble on with your sensationilistic rubbish.

for a brief period in the 50's the US pretty much owned popular music.

all artists influence other artists, it's called the circulation and creation of art, again whats your point? this has nothing to do with spoonfeeding, you complete toss pot.

from the 60's onwards the united kingdom has produced the best rock n roll bands, not the US. FACT

not that anyone care what i have to say, or that it has anything at all to do with this argument... if i had to do without one or the other, american rock, or uk rock - regardless of where it started (cause it was going to start somewhere). without blinking, i'll take uk tunes/bands.

[ffrankwhite]

so which one is it? "spoonfeeding" or "inluencing" ??????? stop alternating between the two.

you are a very silly person.

It's both actually...take your pick.

The U.S. spoonfed rock n roll to the entire world (if that wording makes you feel any better about it).

The intention of American rock n roll wasn't to get kids from England (or any other country) to start bands,those kids drew their own influences from what was spoonfed to them.

You've tried being the tough guy around here who knows everything about music,I've risen to your challenges that you claimed I couldn't do...and you have only responded with half baked retorts and haven't bothered to acknowledge at all that perhaps a lot of the accusations and claims you have made in this thread might be inaccurate.

Your last post confirms that.

You're out of ammo and you are now arguing for the sake of it.

oh and...to quote John Lennon:

"Before Elvis,there was nothing".

please stop flattering yourself.

you're arguments are compeltely off balance, I havent challenged you, and you certainly havent risen to any of my points ffs.

what does elvis have to do with anything?

I asked you to give examples of the US spoonfeeding the UK rock n roll, starting from the 60's onwards.

John Lennon also said "I dont believe in elvis", whats your point?

I've said many pages ago that the foundations of rock n roll were invented by black musicians living in america, again you ramble on with your sensationilistic rubbish.

for a brief period in the 50's the US pretty much owned popular music.

all artists influence other artists, it's called the circulation and creation of art, again whats your point? this has nothing to do with spoonfeeding, you complete toss pot.

from the 60's onwards the united kingdom has produced the best rock n roll bands, not the US. FACT

not that anyone care what i have to say, or that it has anything at all to do with this argument... if i had to do without one or the other, american rock, or uk rock - regardless of where it started (cause it was going to start somewhere). without blinking, i'll take uk tunes/bands.

what, you mean the ones that wouldn't've existed had it not been for America/Americans?

[SolidSnake]

so which one is it? "spoonfeeding" or "inluencing" ??????? stop alternating between the two.

you are a very silly person.

It's both actually...take your pick.

The U.S. spoonfed rock n roll to the entire world (if that wording makes you feel any better about it).

The intention of American rock n roll wasn't to get kids from England (or any other country) to start bands,those kids drew their own influences from what was spoonfed to them.

You've tried being the tough guy around here who knows everything about music,I've risen to your challenges that you claimed I couldn't do...and you have only responded with half baked retorts and haven't bothered to acknowledge at all that perhaps a lot of the accusations and claims you have made in this thread might be inaccurate.

Your last post confirms that.

You're out of ammo and you are now arguing for the sake of it.

oh and...to quote John Lennon:

"Before Elvis,there was nothing".

please stop flattering yourself.

you're arguments are compeltely off balance, I havent challenged you, and you certainly havent risen to any of my points ffs.

what does elvis have to do with anything?

I asked you to give examples of the US spoonfeeding the UK rock n roll, starting from the 60's onwards.

John Lennon also said "I dont believe in elvis", whats your point?

I've said many pages ago that the foundations of rock n roll were invented by black musicians living in america, again you ramble on with your sensationilistic rubbish.

for a brief period in the 50's the US pretty much owned popular music.

all artists influence other artists, it's called the circulation and creation of art, again whats your point? this has nothing to do with spoonfeeding, you complete toss pot.

from the 60's onwards the united kingdom has produced the best rock n roll bands, not the US. FACT

not that anyone care what i have to say, or that it has anything at all to do with this argument... if i had to do without one or the other, american rock, or uk rock - regardless of where it started (cause it was going to start somewhere). without blinking, i'll take uk tunes/bands.

what, you mean the ones that wouldn't've existed had it not been for America/Americans?

again, what does the above have in relation to the the US apparently spoonfeeding rock n roll to the world from the 60's onwards?

NOTHING, AS IT NEVER HAPPENED.

The UK perfected rock n roll, and it was the UK who specifically created the rock n roll sound that we and our favourite bands are influenced by.

there's no denying that american artists influenced some very important bands.

but for fuck sake the stones are incredibly and utterly superior to the likes of chuck berry.

The Rolling Stones perfected the sound of rock n roll and are without a doubt the single most influential entity in terms of hard rock music.

whilst the beatles were the most inventive band, and are the undisputed greatest band of all time.

The Beatles were at the forefront of Rock N Roll in 60's as were The Stones all through to the early 80's, and because of these two bands alone (I havent even mentioned the many other british acts) there is no chance in hell the US ever spoonfed rock n roll to the rest of the world (after the 60's, which is my original fucking point)

to all the lobotomised gibbon's on here, please refrain from posting unless you read carefully, thanks.

[Zint]

so which one is it? "spoonfeeding" or "inluencing" ??????? stop alternating between the two.

you are a very silly person.

It's both actually...take your pick.

The U.S. spoonfed rock n roll to the entire world (if that wording makes you feel any better about it).

The intention of American rock n roll wasn't to get kids from England (or any other country) to start bands,those kids drew their own influences from what was spoonfed to them.

You've tried being the tough guy around here who knows everything about music,I've risen to your challenges that you claimed I couldn't do...and you have only responded with half baked retorts and haven't bothered to acknowledge at all that perhaps a lot of the accusations and claims you have made in this thread might be inaccurate.

Your last post confirms that.

You're out of ammo and you are now arguing for the sake of it.

oh and...to quote John Lennon:

"Before Elvis,there was nothing".

please stop flattering yourself.

you're arguments are compeltely off balance, I havent challenged you, and you certainly havent risen to any of my points ffs.

what does elvis have to do with anything?

I asked you to give examples of the US spoonfeeding the UK rock n roll, starting from the 60's onwards.

John Lennon also said "I dont believe in elvis", whats your point?

I've said many pages ago that the foundations of rock n roll were invented by black musicians living in america, again you ramble on with your sensationilistic rubbish.

for a brief period in the 50's the US pretty much owned popular music.

all artists influence other artists, it's called the circulation and creation of art, again whats your point? this has nothing to do with spoonfeeding, you complete toss pot.

from the 60's onwards the united kingdom has produced the best rock n roll bands, not the US. FACT

not that anyone care what i have to say, or that it has anything at all to do with this argument... if i had to do without one or the other, american rock, or uk rock - regardless of where it started (cause it was going to start somewhere). without blinking, i'll take uk tunes/bands.

what, you mean the ones that wouldn't've existed had it not been for America/Americans?

again, what does the above have in relation to the the US apparently spoonfeeding rock n roll to the world from the 60's onwards?

NOTHING, AS IT NEVER HAPPENED.

The UK perfected rock n roll, and it was the UK who specifically created the rock n roll sound that we and our favourite bands are influenced by.

there's no denying that american artists influenced some very important bands.

but for fuck sake the stones are incredibly and utterly superior to the likes of chuck berry.

The Rolling Stones perfected the sound of rock n roll and are without a doubt the single most influential entity in terms of hard rock music.

whilst the beatles were the most inventive band, and are the undisputed greatest band of all time.

The Beatles were at the forefront of Rock N Roll in 60's as were The Stones all through to the early 80's, and because of these two bands alone (I havent even mentioned the many other british acts) there is no chance in hell the US ever spoonfed rock n roll to the rest of the world (after the 60's, which is my original fucking point)

to all the lobotomised gibbon's on here, please refrain from posting unless you read carefully, thanks.

ENGERLAAAAAAAAAAAAAND

...there...feel better?

you win

[SolidSnake]

im glad we've established that I am the JEDI, whereas you are the mere young padawan.

thank you.

[ffrankwhite]

again, what does the above have in relation to the the US apparently spoonfeeding rock n roll to the world from the 60's onwards?

i didnt say it nor was i addressing it, so what the fuck are you talking about??? 'ave i gotta get all english wiv ya, ya daft cunt?

The UK perfected rock n roll, and it was the UK who specifically created the rock n roll sound that we and our favourite bands are influenced by.

perfected it did they? well excuse me for having an opinion of my own but i dont think rock n roll ever got better than Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis (equalled maybe but not surpassed)..England either immitated rock n roll or expanded on it (which isnt a bad thing, as i say, my favorite bands are from England, check the sig, check the avatar, is it not obvious?)

but for fuck sake the stones are incredibly and utterly superior to the likes of chuck berry

ya might wanna ask Keith Richards about that...perhaps flip on Hail Hail Rock n Roll..

The Rolling Stones perfected the sound of rock n roll and are without a doubt the single most influential entity in terms of hard rock music

and you're telling me this, why?

whilst the beatles were the most inventive band, and are the undisputed greatest band of all time

right so the Stones perfected the sound of rock n roll and are the most influential in terms of HARD ROCK and the Beatles are the greatest of all time. OK, now explain to me what exactly it is that The Stones did to the sound of rock n roll, what tweaks or alterations they made to the sound of rock n roll that entails perfecting it? i'd really like to know...

see what your problem is, you seem to think this is some fucking race war here and people like Zint (dare i speak for him) are like...slagging off england or the relevance of england or englands contribution to rock n roll music, which he's not. point of fact, you'll be hard to put to find someone who digs that shit as much as him and, as for myself where im not a huge huge Stones fan (although im on my way there) im an fucking huge fan of the beatles, the who, the sex pistols, the entire english punk rock scene...to me those three bands are as good as it can possibly get.

no one has even skirted around slagging off england or english bands through history, they'd be stupid to do so but honestly, some of the fucking statements you're making are just fucking ridiculous!!! if the Stones "perfected" rock n roll then why the fuck is it that entire movements have come about since the stones (Punk Rock for example) which is/was HUGELY significant to the sound of modern rock music, totally informs it to this day expanded the genre no end with all its offshoots. if the Stones were so the final word in rock n roll, why the fuck were they rendered totally fucking irrelevant by the late 70s by The Sex Pistols and the punk rock?? dont get me wrong, i love what i've heard here but dont gimme that guiding light shit...that shit aint the truth...

Edited July 4, 2008 by ffrankwhite

[Zint]

im glad we've established that I am the JEDI, whereas you are the mere young padawan.

thank you.

The only thing established with that statement is your mentality.

fawk..

[SolidSnake]

erm I wasnt really talking to you, calm down please. (frank)

Edited July 4, 2008 by SolidSnake

[SolidSnake]

whilst the beatles were the most inventive band, and are the undisputed greatest band of all time

if the Stones "perfected" rock n roll then why the fuck is it that entire movements have come about since the stones (Punk Rock for example) which is/was HUGELY significant to the sound of modern rock music, totally informs it to this day expanded the genre no end with all its offshoots. if the Stones were so the final word in rock n roll, why the fuck were they rendered totally fucking irrelevant by the late 70s by The Sex Pistols and the punk rock?? dont get me wrong, i love what i've heard here but dont gimme that guiding light shit...that shit aint the truth...

LOL

I love the sex pistols, and the fact I need only mention 2 british bands to argue, says it all.

Anyway back to the above, which is another ridiculous post. Jesus christ mate, Some Girls and Tatoo You are two of the most celebrated stones albums of the late 70's and 80's.

rendered useless? if any band was rendered useless it was the sex pistols in 1978, they did afterall seaze to exist after being together for 18 months.

what a terribly poor argument.

of course the whole punk sene was incredibly influential and also BRITISH.

but I see no reason to mention it when I've got the stones and the beatles at my disposal.

jesus, this is getting boring and far too easy.

[ffrankwhite]

I love the sex pistols, and the fact I need only mention 2 british bands to argue, says it all.

Oh what, im supposed to start reeling off names of british bands now am i, this is the "who knows more" game is it? i tell ya man, you get off in some fuckin odd ways. i aint here to fucking impress you.

Anyway back to the above, which is another ridiculous post. Jesus christ mate, Some Girls and Tatoo You are two of the most celebrated stones albums of the late 70's and 80's.

im sure they are but how does that alter the fact that they were at that point in time and still are today, basically an anachronism?

rendered useless? if any band was rendered useless it was the sex pistols in 1978, they did afterall seaze to exist after being together for 18 months.

you dont have to last forever to render what was before you as useless. the sex pistols opened the floodgates, they didnt have to carry on ad infinitum, thats the point, they bought in this whole crop of bands, this movement that totally changed music. THAT was my point and it stands..always has.

of course the whole punk sene was incredibly influential and also BRITISH.

again, just like rock n roll, it aint england and it aint america...the answers somewhere in the middle and the contribution is even as far as im concerned, you can argue it either way and hundreds of books have been written about the subject and sides have been taken and when its all said and done, some jumped up limp noodle (that'd be you) slingin' his shit around on an internet like he's some kinda intellectual bad ass aint gonna make a fuckin hot turds worth of difference because it is what it is, England had a contribution just as America did.

i notice this with a lot of English fans of music, this sort of little man syndrome where ya feel ya gotta say the world fucking begins and ends with England. the sad part about all this shit is that England have an IMMENSE contribution, more than comparable to Americas and history bears witness to that but, a certain element of y'all really let the side down, the sort of moronic, lets-boo-the-other-nations-national-anthem-at-a-boxing-match type element...its just fucking sad and boring and it really shows you up.

like i said, sad cuz the facts are there are Englands contribution is fucking huge but why is it that you cant brag up your own shit without running down anothers? i dont understand that, i dont understand what it is in a person that precipitates that kinda response...baffling, it really is. Little man syndrome perhaps? who knows...but really, do your country a favor and dont speak for it, theres people that do it a helluva lot better, you're just making a good crop look bad. just a tip

[SolidSnake]

I love the sex pistols, and the fact I need only mention 2 british bands to argue, says it all.

Oh what, im supposed to start reeling off names of british bands now am i, this is the "who knows more" game is it? i tell ya man, you get off in some fuckin odd ways. i aint here to fucking impress you.

Anyway back to the above, which is another ridiculous post. Jesus christ mate, Some Girls and Tatoo You are two of the most celebrated stones albums of the late 70's and 80's.

im sure they are but how does that alter the fact that they were at that point in time and still are today, basically an anachronism?

rendered useless? if any band was rendered useless it was the sex pistols in 1978, they did afterall seaze to exist after being together for 18 months.

you dont have to last forever to render what was before you as useless. the sex pistols opened the floodgates, they didnt have to carry on ad infinitum, thats the point, they bought in this whole crop of bands, this movement that totally changed music. THAT was my point and it stands..always has.

of course the whole punk sene was incredibly influential and also BRITISH.

again, just like rock n roll, it aint england and it aint america...the answers somewhere in the middle and the contribution is even as far as im concerned, you can argue it either way and hundreds of books have been written about the subject and sides have been taken and when its all said and done, some jumped up limp noodle (that'd be you) slingin' his shit around on an internet like he's some kinda intellectual bad ass aint gonna make a fuckin hot turds worth of difference because it is what it is, England had a contribution just as America did.

i notice this with a lot of English fans of music, this sort of little man syndrome where ya feel ya gotta say the world fucking begins and ends with England. the sad part about all this shit is that England have an IMMENSE contribution, more than comparable to Americas and history bears witness to that but, a certain element of y'all really let the side down, the sort of moronic, lets-boo-the-other-nations-national-anthem-at-a-boxing-match type element...its just fucking sad and boring and it really shows you up.

like i said, sad cuz the facts are there are Englands contribution is fucking huge but why is it that you cant brag up your own shit without running down anothers? i dont understand that, i dont understand what it is in a person that precipitates that kinda response...baffling, it really is. Little man syndrome perhaps? who knows...but really, do your country a favor and dont speak for it, theres people that do it a helluva lot better, you're just making a good crop look bad. just a tip

how do you expect people to react when others claim "culture was invented by the US"

and "the US spoonfed rock n roll to the rest of the world"

Jesus.

[Zint]

What does elvis have to do with anything?

I love it when you play dumb when you get painted into a corner.

What does Elvis have to do with anything??...jesus!

John Lennon also said "I dont believe in elvis", whats your point?

He also said "I don't believe in the Beatles"..what's your point??

John Lennon is quoted as saying "before Elvis,there was nothing".

hence...before American rock and roll,there was nothing.

In terms of rock and roll,it's true.

for a brief period in the 50's the US pretty much owned popular music.

For half the decade,not a brief period...and not "pretty much" owned,DID own.

all artists influence other artists, it's called the circulation and creation of art, again whats your point? this has nothing to do with spoonfeeding, you complete toss pot.

What's your point? what's your point?...jesus,if you haven't figured it out yet,I'm not sure you will.

America GAVE your country rock and roll man...it started on these shores.Consider it a treasured gift.

When smug nationalists come on this forum going "check out this link where Liam and Noel totally shit all over American music haha"...you're going to hear from people.

Who the fuck do THEY or YOU think you are tossing shit like that around??..ON AN AMERICAN BAND FORUM I might add (oh the irony).

again, what does the above have in relation to the the US apparently spoonfeeding rock n roll to the world from the 60's onwards?

Hey now...you're the one who twisted this to "spoonfed from the 60's onward".

NOTHING, AS IT NEVER HAPPENED.

Yeah the 60'S hippie/psychedlic movement and incurring bands originated in England...ok

from the 60's onwards the united kingdom has produced the best rock n roll bands, not the US. FACT

And your school is better than my school,your neighbourhood is better than my neighbourhood,your dad can beat up my dad.

How old are you??..12?

there's no denying that american artists influenced some very important bands.

but for fuck sake the stones are incredibly and utterly superior to the likes of chuck berry.

No...American artists influnced THE very important bands and artists.

Oasis are innovators of fuck all.

the beatles were the most inventive band, and are the undisputed greatest band of all time.

Well I agree with you on that.

The Beatles were at the forefront of Rock N Roll in 60's as were The Stones all through to the early 80's, and because of these two bands alone (I havent even mentioned the many other british acts) there is no chance in hell the US ever spoonfed rock n roll to the rest of the world (after the 60's, which is my original fucking point)

Sorry man...but the 60's Beatles and Stones are creations of American rock and roll,pyschedelia,blues.

FACT

[SolidSnake]

Sorry man...but the 60's Beatles and Stones are creations of American rock and roll,pyschedelia,blues.

FACT

rubber soul

revolver

sgt peppers

the white album

abbey road

creations of american rock and roll??????????????????????????????

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhahAHAHA

a

aahahahAHahAhaha

a

a

ahahAHAHA

please just stop you absolute fool.

[SunnyDRE]

Sorry man...but the 60's Beatles and Stones are creations of American rock and roll,pyschedelia,blues.

FACT

rubber soul

revolver

sgt peppers

the white album

abbey road

creations of american rock and roll??????????????????????????????

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhahAHAHA

a

aahahahAHahAhaha

a

a

ahahAHAHA

please just stop you absolute fool.

Dude, your only arguement is the Beatles and the Stones.

The Beatles and the Stones.

America has everybody else!!!!

Edited July 4, 2008 by SunnyDRE

[Zint]

Sorry man...but the 60's Beatles and Stones are creations of American rock and roll,pyschedelia,blues.

FACT

rubber soul

revolver

sgt peppers

the white album

abbey road

creations of american rock and roll??????????????????????????????

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhahAHAHA

a

aahahahAHahAhaha

a

a

ahahAHAHA

please just stop you absolute fool.

Interesting album choices you made...all albums made after Dylan told them "you aren't saying anything".

But good job on twisting the original statement (you excel at that).

You wouldn't HAVE your Beatles and Stones if it wasn't for American rock and roll.

Know who Paul McCartney's all time rock idol is??

Buddy Holly

John Lennon??

Chuck Berry and Elvis Presley

Keith Richards??

Chuck Berry, Little Richard

Eric Clapton??

American Blues

Brian Jones (ya know...the guy who started the Rolling Stones??)

American Blues

...the band's NAME came from American blues

And I noticed we're starting to get around to punk rock (I've been waiting for that!!)

John Lydon??

...considers Alice Cooper the perfect rock band,the ultimate rock band of all time

Oh and...I can name you a whole SHITLOAD of British punks who were inspired to pick up a guitar...after the Ramones landed on your shores and completely blew them away.

Joe Strummer included.

[SolidSnake]

Sorry man...but the 60's Beatles and Stones are creations of American rock and roll,pyschedelia,blues.

FACT

rubber soul

revolver

sgt peppers

the white album

abbey road

creations of american rock and roll??????????????????????????????

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhahAHAHA

a

aahahahAHahAhaha

a

a

ahahAHAHA

please just stop you absolute fool.

Dude, your only arguement is the Beatles and the Stones.

The Beatles and the Stones.

America has everybody else!!!!

yes of course the beatles and the stones are the only two bands the UK has ever produced.

why should I waste my time listing 100 or so bands, especially when arguing against simplestons such as yourself, when I could just mention two of the very best.

run a long now.

[SolidSnake]

Sorry man...but the 60's Beatles and Stones are creations of American rock and roll,pyschedelia,blues.

FACT

rubber soul

revolver

sgt peppers

the white album

abbey road

creations of american rock and roll??????????????????????????????

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhahAHAHA

a

aahahahAHahAhaha

a

a

ahahAHAHA

please just stop you absolute fool.

Interesting album choices you made...all albums made after Dylan told them "you aren't saying anything".

But good job on twisting the original statement (you excel at that).

You wouldn't HAVE your Beatles and Stones if it wasn't for American rock and roll.

Know who Paul McCartney's all time rock idol is??

Buddy Holly

John Lennon??

Chuck Berry and Elvis Presley

Keith Richards??

Chuck Berry, Little Richard

Eric Clapton??

American Blues

Brian Jones (ya know...the guy who started the Rolling Stones??)

American Blues

...the band's NAME came from American blues

And I noticed we're starting to get around to punk rock (I've been waiting for that!!)

John Lydon??

...considers Alice Cooper the perfect rock band,the ultimate rock band of all time

Oh and...I can name you a whole SHITLOAD of British punks who were inspired to pick up a guitar...after the Ramones landed on your shores and completely blew them away.

Joe Strummer included.

Ive seen bob dylan's no direction home DVD, and in no way whatsoever does it mention bob dylan directly telling John lennon that he was too quiet.

and even if he had, what complete moron would think that the beatles would have never released those landmark albums if it werent for bob dylan's 4 words.

also why do you keep repeating yourself?

I'v mentioned the importance of the influence of US music several times, are you slow?

Edited July 4, 2008 by SolidSnake

[SunnyDRE]

Sorry man...but the 60's Beatles and Stones are creations of American rock and roll,pyschedelia,blues.

FACT

rubber soul

revolver

sgt peppers

the white album

abbey road

creations of american rock and roll??????????????????????????????

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhahAHAHA

a

aahahahAHahAhaha

a

a

ahahAHAHA

please just stop you absolute fool.

Dude, your only arguement is the Beatles and the Stones.

The Beatles and the Stones.

America has everybody else!!!!

yes of course the beatles and the stones are the only two bands the UK has ever produced.

why should I waste my time listing 100 or so bands, especially when arguing against simplestons such as yourself, when I could just mention two of the very best.

run a long now.

You couldn't name 100 that mattered worldwide if you tried.

I could name 1,000 American bands that important worldwide.

[SolidSnake]

Sorry man...but the 60's Beatles and Stones are creations of American rock and roll,pyschedelia,blues.

FACT

rubber soul

revolver

sgt peppers

the white album

abbey road

creations of american rock and roll??????????????????????????????

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhahAHAHA

a

aahahahAHahAhaha

a

a

ahahAHAHA

please just stop you absolute fool.

Dude, your only arguement is the Beatles and the Stones.

The Beatles and the Stones.

America has everybody else!!!!

yes of course the beatles and the stones are the only two bands the UK has ever produced.

why should I waste my time listing 100 or so bands, especially when arguing against simplestons such as yourself, when I could just mention two of the very best.

run a long now.

You couldn't name 100 that mattered worldwide if you tried.

I could name 1,000 American bands that important worldwide.

shut up, you sound like a 12 year old.

you're posts are shocking, as proven by the countless amount of people who have laughed at you in this thread.

[JeanGenie]

pink floyd?

sure..

You don't think the NYC mid 60's Warhol-scene influence didn't seep into what Floyd were doing?

Not enough to write their efforts on your flag.

[SolidSnake]

ouch.

[Marky]

Despite Glastonbury diss, Gallagher says he's a fan of the rapper

Despite saying that Jay-Z was \"wrong\" for Glastonbury, Oasis' Noel Gallagher has said that he is, in fact, a fan of the rapper.

Speaking to BBC Newsbeat, the Manchester legend said that if offence was caused by his previous remarks about the Glastonbury headliner, journalists shouldn't ask him questions in the first place.

"For the record, I Iike Jay-Z," he said. "That's my opinion. If it offends people, don't ask me any more questions. I should do these things and answer like every two-bit pop star."

Jay-Z opened his Glastonbury set last Saturday (June 28) with samples of Gallagher saying he had "no chance" at the festival, then covered Oasis' massive 1995 hit 'Wonderwall'.

- NME.com

[Zint]

pink floyd?

sure..

You don't think the NYC mid 60's Warhol-scene influence didn't seep into what Floyd were doing?

Not enough to write their efforts on your flag.

on my flag??

Sorry man...but the 60's Beatles and Stones are creations of American rock and roll,pyschedelia,blues.

FACT

rubber soul

revolver

sgt peppers

the white album

abbey road

creations of american rock and roll??????????????????????????????

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhahAHAHA

a

aahahahAHahAhaha

a

a

ahahAHAHA

please just stop you absolute fool.

Interesting album choices you made...all albums made after Dylan told them "you aren't saying anything".

But good job on twisting the original statement (you excel at that).

You wouldn't HAVE your Beatles and Stones if it wasn't for American rock and roll.

Know who Paul McCartney's all time rock idol is??

Buddy Holly

John Lennon??

Chuck Berry and Elvis Presley

Keith Richards??

Chuck Berry, Little Richard

Eric Clapton??

American Blues

Brian Jones (ya know...the guy who started the Rolling Stones??)

American Blues

...the band's NAME came from American blues

And I noticed we're starting to get around to punk rock (I've been waiting for that!!)

John Lydon??

...considers Alice Cooper the perfect rock band,the ultimate rock band of all time

Oh and...I can name you a whole SHITLOAD of British punks who were inspired to pick up a guitar...after the Ramones landed on your shores and completely blew them away.

Joe Strummer included.

Ive seen bob dylan's no direction home DVD, and in no way whatsoever does it mention bob dylan directly telling John lennon that he was too quiet.

and even if he had, what complete moron would think that the beatles would have never released those landmark albums if it werent for bob dylan's 4 words.

also why do you keep repeating yourself?

I'v mentioned the importance of the influence of US music several times, are you slow?

I love how you get fuckin rammed in the face with all kinds of info...completely ignore it,and find one little thing to go on an insulting tirade over.You're very clever at getting out of the corners you continually get yourself backed into.

And where did I say that the Bob Dylan reference came from No Direction Home?

And he didin't say Lennon was too quiet,he said the Beatles weren't saying anything...BIG difference.

Edited July 4, 2008 by zint61

[SolidSnake]

so what if the beatles were sat in a room and said nothing?

it means fuck all.

why do you cling on to such rubbish information?