Why did the Rolling Stones choose to play their first warm-up gig on the eve of their 50th anniversary tour in Paris, of all places? Why not London?
I’ll tell you why. Because Britain’s most famous rock band never pass up an opportunity to disrespect their home country.
Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, Ronnie Wood and Charlie Watts make no secret of their hatred of the British Establishment. They’re rock ’n’ roll rebels, after all, even if they do have a combined age of 274. But why do they have to thumb their noses at the British people as well? (To read more, click here.)
Re: My latest Sun column: Why the Rolling Stones are still revolting, aged 274
Posted by Jay on 29-10-2012 09:56:
If Mick Jagger et al weren't the Rolling Stones in their spare time, they'd be categorised as the elderly and given the kind of respect afforded in this country to other old codgers. You'll be old one day y'now!
Talking of old codgers -- does Peter Lilley really read research papers and reviews from Climate Science journals? You know, it worries me when (most) MPs present their 'evidence-based' views on any subject. It's about as reassuring as the science bit in face cream adverts.
Posted by Pharmc504 on 02-12-2012 06:58:
Hello! bedaead interesting bedaead site! I'm really like it! Very, very bedaead good!
Posted by Pharmk325 on 02-12-2012 07:00:
Very nice site!
@NickLinford I made an argument, namely, that free schools represent better value for money than BSF schools did. (42 minutes ago)