What I think is rude is the continuing harangue about a book that you have not read and compared to an unsigned article.

What I think is rude is purposely trolling a thread and refusing to discuss the *actual topic* of the thread in question. It's also potentially rude to imply with no evidence that CBS is fabricating stories or quotes.

I'd say this thread should just be locked, but I think that's what the purpose of trolling this thread is. Is there another solution?

I don't know how many here saw the video yesterday that has since - thankfully - been removed.  What I read in the article appears to be a transcript of the interview, verbatim, so I don't think attributing authorship is necessary.  It's a transcript. CBS has published it.   I heard the quote indicated in this written link and it was in Mike's voice with his usual semi-tearful comments as he launches an attack.  

I'd love to think we can move on from the trolling, but I seriously doubt it.

Debbie - I saw no video.  There is a disparity as between the article and the book.  A lot in the media is edited for whatever reason whether for space or time or whatever.  All I can say is that the words are not an overlay as between the book and the article.  Whether things got lost in translation or whatever.  I can't speak to that.  Nor should I be expected to account for the discrepancy as between the two.  

Then show some respect for those of us who saw it and recognize the script - offered by CBS - is a transcript.  It's a blatant discrepancy.

The video was never brought up and I never saw it.  Whose fault is it that there is a discrepancy?  Not mine.  I merely pointed out that it did not match what was in the book, that most who opined here, did not read and declared that they were not going to read.  

That is not disrespect.  That, disrespect (and baiting) was directed towards me.  I took the time to read the book, share some of the insights that I found significant in BB history (such as the last tour that Carl did) and got pounced on.  

CSM - here is the disconnect.  The nameless-byline article has a different version of the account from the book.  Read it or don't read it - your choice.   You have a page to look at.  Can't be more specific than that.  

More specifically, Mike is quoted as having a different version of the account from the book. And like I said above, there are numerous possibilities as to why there is a disjunction.

If it is the case that the article is fabricated, I would be curious as to your thoughts as to why Mike Love's Twitter account linked to what appears to have been an earlier version of the same story from CBS on his twitter account:

https://twitter.com/MikeLoveOFCL/status/776431117133946880

Quite interesting though that that article, which led one Twitter follower to observe that it's a shame how "things were/are so contentious" leading me to believe that the substance of the two articles was probably similar.

Did I say it was fabricated?  I don't think so and do not put words in my mouth.  I said there were discrepancies as between the two which Smiley-morphed into "fabrication." This is Mike's book.  I like what I read in Brian's book preview and will read that, too.  

Have a great weekend!  

What I think is rude is the continuing harangue about a book that you have not read and compared to an unsigned article.

What I think is rude is purposely trolling a thread and refusing to discuss the *actual topic* of the thread in question. It's also potentially rude to imply with no evidence that CBS is fabricating stories or quotes.

I'd say this thread should just be locked, but I think that's what the purpose of trolling this thread is. Is there another solution?

I don't know how many here saw the video yesterday that has since - thankfully - been removed.  What I read in the article appears to be a transcript of the interview, verbatim, so I don't think attributing authorship is necessary.  It's a transcript. CBS has published it.   I heard the quote indicated in this written link and it was in Mike's voice with his usual semi-tearful comments as he launches an attack.  

I'd love to think we can move on from the trolling, but I seriously doubt it.

Debbie - I saw no video.  There is a disparity as between the article and the book.  A lot in the media is edited for whatever reason whether for space or time or whatever.  All I can say is that the words are not an overlay as between the book and the article.  Whether things got lost in translation or whatever.  I can't speak to that.  Nor should I be expected to account for the discrepancy as between the two.  

Excuse me, but I have tried since page one of this thread to get someone who has read the book to explain whether or not there was a disjunction between the two sources. Am I to understand that I can't even ask a question about a book I haven't read?

Your questions are completely fair, and you shouldn't have to have read the book to participate in these discussions.

I find it odd that someone who cites specific page numbers and claims to have read the entire book refuses to actually cite or even paraphrase a very simple point that is in question.

Hey Jude - you have the pages, too, if and when you decide to be read the book.  You have the cites.  I am not paraphrasing anything.  It comes straight from the material.  

Is there a difference as between the "nameless" interview and the book? Yes, there is.

Are you suggesting CBS fabricated the interview? What are you trying to say?

Are you?

 

Compare the two, it ain't rocket science.

This is extraordinarily rude. And a disjunction between two sources does not automatically follow that one of the sources is fabricated. That's just speculative reasoning.

What I think is rude is the continuing harangue about a book that you have not read and compared to an unsigned article.

Excuse me, but I have tried since page one of this thread to get someone who has read the book to explain whether or not there was a disjunction between the two sources. I haven't commented on the substance of the book whatsoever. If you are suggesting that I have, please demonstrate it. Otherwise, am I to understand that I can't even ask a question about a book I haven't read?

CSM - here is the disconnect.  The nameless-byline article has a different version of the account from the book.  Read it or don't read it - your choice.   You have a page to look at.  Can't be more specific than that. 

Is there a difference as between the "nameless" interview and the book? Yes, there is.

Are you suggesting CBS fabricated the interview? What are you trying to say?

Are you?

 

Compare the two, it ain't rocket science.

This is extraordinarily rude. And a disjunction between two sources does not automatically follow that one of the sources is fabricated. That's just speculative reasoning.

What I think is rude is the continuing harangue about a book that you have not read and compared to an unsigned article.

CD - yes we are all flawed but I am not sure it is our place to point out someone else's flaws..

If you are against people pointing out other people's flaws, I would hope you would say that Mike himself should take that to heart when he regularly points out Brian's flaws with his weight, his voice, his use of Autotune.

Come on CD - the use of autotune - during those C50 CD's - give me a break.  The Youtubes were better.  I am not pointing out personal flaws but technical flaws with technology that was probably unnecessary.  It is the same way people gripe about SIP and the technology used for that.    

So you excuse the Autotune comment. I take it that there is not a single thing that Mike could publicly say about Brian or Melinda that you'd quantify as pointing out their flaws, right? Oh right, you don't like hypotheticals.  Nothing Mike ever says about even Melinda Wilson is remotely of the nature of pointing out what he perceives as her flaws. Ha. Ha. Ha. What about Al supposedly being rude to subordinates? Isn't that Mike pointing out Al's flaw?
 

CD - let' not spin a yarn here. Get the book and see for yourself.  

You are making this personal, as to me. It is not personal.  I think this book has value, as I think Brian's book will have value to enlarge the history of The Beach Boys. Who else is left who can tell the story?

FDP, I am curious to read the book, and I may well get my hands on a copy. Yes, Mike surely has some unique perspective.

But that's irrelevant to what I'm talking about here. You said you're against people saying judgmental things about others, yet you don't seem to think that applies to Mike.

THAT and THAT ALONE is the only thing I'm concerned with discussing here in this thread at this moment, and you don't want to address that.

CD - get the book and compare the article to it.  P. 401.  They are words to compare.  Download it.

What you are doing is THE worst fangirl viral marketing campaign in the history of the internet.

Capped off by Mike's own use of a negative review, and proudly using the "gossip" term (used as an insult in the review, but spun as a positive) on his own page.

The very thing that pisses me off the most and makes me NOT want to read Mike's book, and not engage in conversation with you either, is the outright refusal of addressing why it's ok for Mike to say judgmental things about others, but not ok for others to say judgmental things about Mike. And guess what? I don't need the book to know Mike's said PLENTY of judgmental things about MANY other people. That is common knowledge, and if you need a list of quotes, I'm sure there are hundreds that can be found on this site, without the need for the book to prove my point.

This is not about me.  The topic is an unsigned article connected to the book.  

Is there a difference as between the "nameless" interview and the book? Yes, there is.

Are you suggesting CBS fabricated the interview? What are you trying to say?

Are you?  Just get the book.

I'm going to come right out and say you're just trolling the board at this stage by asking "Are you?"
I believe you're dragging this board and this discussion down. Again.

Once again, the modus operandi appears to be to create acrimony and chaos in any thread related to Mike or his book in order to deflect legitimate discussion and criticism of Mike and his book.

I'm clearly indicating that it's highly unlikely CBS fabricated a Mike Love quote. So I guess you're suggesting CBS fabricated Mike's quote.

Is there no room to entertain the possibility of journalist sloppiness with an unsigned article?  Or, just speculation?  

CSM - the account of that is on page 401.  I don't know how much clearer I can be, that it is inconsistent with who-said-what-to-whom as compared to the book.

Actually, this is completely unclear. I have no idea what you're talking about.

The only thing that is clear is that you're still ignoring what people are asking and ignoring the main crux (the CBS interview) of the thread. Still.

Hey Jude -  Get the book. Go to p. 401.  Then compare it to the article.  See for your self.

Why are you refusing to answer this simple question? I already stated *numerous times* that I simply don't have the book in front of me and won't be able to for many many hours to come.

I'm going to assume you don't have the book and/or haven't read it or haven't read it thoroughly until you can produce the quote in question.

I will further suggest that continuing to assert your point without citing or even paraphrasing the quote in question, and referring people to "buy the book" is both a weird, I guess, way to try to goose sales for the book, and effectively trolling at this stage.

If you refuse to address what anyone else is saying in this thread, and can't offer anything else than "go read the book", then please stop posting in this thread. You're not adding anything to the conversation at this stage.

Hey Jude - you are a BB website operator.  The book is part of their history.  You are at a disadvantage to engage in the discussion about this book or articles that have resulted as part of releasing this book.  

And I would strongly suggest that you refrain from posting about this book until such time as you have read it.  Because you are not informed as to it's contents.  

Is there a difference as between the "nameless" interview and the book? Yes, there is.

Are you suggesting CBS fabricated the interview? What are you trying to say?

Are you?

 

Compare the two, it ain't rocket science.

Gotta earn those M&B comps...

No - dear, the checks.  

Is there a difference as between the "nameless" interview and the book? Yes, there is.

Are you suggesting CBS fabricated the interview? What are you trying to say?

Are you?  Just get the book.

CD - yes we are all flawed but I am not sure it is our place to point out someone else's flaws..

If you are against people pointing out other people's flaws, I would hope you would say that Mike himself should take that to heart when he regularly points out Brian's flaws with his weight, his voice, his use of Autotune.

Come on CD - the use of autotune - during those C50 CD's - give me a break.  The Youtubes were better.  I am not pointing out personal flaws but technical flaws with technology that was probably unnecessary.  It is the same way people gripe about SIP and the technology used for that.    

So you excuse the Autotune comment. I take it that there is not a single thing that Mike could publicly say about Brian or Melinda that you'd quantify as pointing out their flaws, right? Oh right, you don't like hypotheticals.  Nothing Mike ever says about even Melinda Wilson is remotely of the nature of pointing out what he perceives as her flaws. Ha. Ha. Ha. What about Al supposedly being rude to subordinates? Isn't that Mike pointing out Al's flaw?
 

CD - let' not spin a yarn here. Get the book and see for yourself.  

You are making this personal, as to me. It is not personal.  I think this book has value, as I think Brian's book will have value to enlarge the history of The Beach Boys. Who else is left who can tell the story?

FDP, I am curious to read the book, and I may well get my hands on a copy. Yes, Mike surely has some unique perspective.

But that's irrelevant to what I'm talking about here. You said you're against people saying judgmental things about others, yet you don't seem to think that applies to Mike.

THAT and THAT ALONE is the only thing I'm concerned with discussing here in this thread at this moment, and you don't want to address that.

CD - get the book and compare the article to it.  P. 401.  They are words to compare.  Download it.

CSM - the account of that is on page 401.  I don't know how much clearer I can be, that it is inconsistent with who-said-what-to-whom as compared to the book.

Actually, this is completely unclear. I have no idea what you're talking about.

The only thing that is clear is that you're still ignoring what people are asking and ignoring the main crux (the CBS interview) of the thread. Still.

Hey Jude -  Get the book. Go to p. 401.  Then compare it to the article.  See for your self.

CD - yes we are all flawed but I am not sure it is our place to point out someone else's flaws..

If you are against people pointing out other people's flaws, I would hope you would say that Mike himself should take that to heart when he regularly points out Brian's flaws with his weight, his voice, his use of Autotune.

Come on CD - the use of autotune - during those C50 CD's - give me a break.  The Youtubes were better.  I am not pointing out personal flaws but technical flaws with technology that was probably unnecessary.  It is the same way people gripe about SIP and the technology used for that.    

So you excuse the Autotune comment. I take it that there is not a single thing that Mike could publicly say about Brian or Melinda that you'd quantify as pointing out their flaws, right? Oh right, you don't like hypotheticals.  Nothing Mike ever says about even Melinda Wilson is remotely of the nature of pointing out what he perceives as her flaws. Ha. Ha. Ha. What about Al supposedly being rude to subordinates? Isn't that Mike pointing out Al's flaw?
 

CD - let' not spin a yarn here. Get the book and see for yourself. 

You are making this personal, as to me. It is not personal.  I think this book has value, as I think Brian's book will have value to enlarge the history of The Beach Boys. Who else is left who can tell the story?

The fans gave them the feedback about how their music was valued.

Exactly. Fan feedback. Thanks for pointing that out, FDP.

Brian at C50 got a ton of applause and adulation from fans, the kind of thing that Mike was used to getting at his own shows. I cannot imagine that went over well with Mike. He felt undervalued, his low self esteem instinct kicked in, and he blew up the reunion. Not *just* because of that, but I'm sure it didn't help things. A (flawed) human thing to have happen, yet very sad.

CD - you are calling someone a "flawed" human.  Last time I checked that would fall under being judgmental.  

And as to whether it is relevant to discuss the book -CBS  was interviewing Mike about the book.   It is the book that prompted the interview. He discussed a variety of items including Manson.  

Nobody said it isn't relevant to discuss the book in a thread about Mike's CBS interview about the book. The problem is that you're contending nobody should bring up the CBS interview itself.

As for calling someone flawed, stating that we're ALL flawed is not judgmental. It's a fact.

Yes, we are all flawed.  Do we need to get insulting?  

The CBS interview referred back to the early CBS Sunday morning tape.  The touring situation is a high-stakes/high-pressure.  And exhaustion, day-after-day.

People sometimes have "words" when they get stressed out.  And, I do think that (as someone said earlier) the person's report had the narrative in the wrong person.  It was not between Melinda and Mike - it was between Melinda and Jacqui.

And -I do not even see a "by line."  Who wrote it?

S/he may have looked at a copy of the book and "moved the players around." Or, mixed-up what happened.  There is more to learn from in that book about the Beach Boys, than spotlighting this event.    

But Mike is being directly quoted. Are you saying he's being misquoted?

CSM - the account of that is on page 401.  I don't know how much clearer I can be, that it is inconsistent with who-said-what-to-whom as compared to the book.

If you download the book you will be able to check what I wrote, as against what was written in that anonymous (no by-line) CBS article.
He is being quoted but that is not what is in the book.

Yes, which is why I'm asking if it is your contention that he is being misquoted in this interview.

CSM - I think I already responded. 

Is there a difference as between the "nameless" interview and the book? Yes, there is.

CD - yes we are all flawed but I am not sure it is our place to point out someone else's flaws..

If you are against people pointing out other people's flaws, I would hope you would say that Mike himself should take that to heart when he regularly points out Brian's flaws with his weight, his voice, his use of Autotune.

Come on CD - the use of autotune - during those C50 CD's - give me a break.  The Youtubes were better.  I am not pointing out personal flaws but technical flaws with technology that was probably unnecessary.  It is the same way people gripe about SIP and the technology used for that.   

The fans gave them the feedback about how their music was valued.

Exactly. Fan feedback. Thanks for pointing that out, FDP.

Brian at C50 got a ton of applause and adulation from fans, the kind of thing that Mike was used to getting at his own shows. I cannot imagine that went over well with Mike. He felt undervalued, his low self esteem instinct kicked in, and he blew up the reunion. Not *just* because of that, but I'm sure it didn't help things. A (flawed) human thing to have happen, yet very sad.

CD - you are calling someone a "flawed" human.  Last time I checked that would fall under being judgmental.  

And as to whether it is relevant to discuss the book -CBS  was interviewing Mike about the book.   It is the book that prompted the interview. He discussed a variety of items including Manson.  

Nobody said it isn't relevant to discuss the book in a thread about Mike's CBS interview about the book. The problem is that you're contending nobody should bring up the CBS interview itself.

As for calling someone flawed, stating that we're ALL flawed is not judgmental. It's a fact.

Yes, we are all flawed.  Do we need to get insulting?  

The CBS interview referred back to the early CBS Sunday morning tape.  The touring situation is a high-stakes/high-pressure.  And exhaustion, day-after-day.

People sometimes have "words" when they get stressed out.  And, I do think that (as someone said earlier) the person's report had the narrative in the wrong person.  It was not between Melinda and Mike - it was between Melinda and Jacqui.

And -I do not even see a "by line."  Who wrote it?

S/he may have looked at a copy of the book and "moved the players around." Or, mixed-up what happened.  There is more to learn from in that book about the Beach Boys, than spotlighting this event.    

But Mike is being directly quoted. Are you saying he's being misquoted?

He is being quoted but that is not what is in the book. The scenario is not what was in the book account.  Those words were reportedly spoken "about" Mike not "to" Mike.  The book account was mis-reported as far as who said what, and to whom it was said.    

And we don't even know who wrote it. Can you find a by-line? I cannot.  

The fans gave them the feedback about how their music was valued.

Exactly. Fan feedback. Thanks for pointing that out, FDP.

Brian at C50 got a ton of applause and adulation from fans, the kind of thing that Mike was used to getting at his own shows. I cannot imagine that went over well with Mike. He felt undervalued, his low self esteem instinct kicked in, and he blew up the reunion. Not *just* because of that, but I'm sure it didn't help things. A (flawed) human thing to have happen, yet very sad.

CD - you are calling someone a "flawed" human.  Last time I checked that would fall under being judgmental.  

And as to whether it is relevant to discuss the book -CBS  was interviewing Mike about the book.   It is the book that prompted the interview. He discussed a variety of items including Manson.  

FDP - For crying out loud... I, MYSELF am a flawed human too! Am I being judgmental against myself? Let's just be real here. We all have flaws, including Mike. Difference is, I'll cop to mine, Brian cops to his, but Mike LARGELY doesn't cop to his, and blames everyone else.

Have you ever, in your personal life, known someone who regularly doesn't own up to crappy things they do? Like all the friggin' time? Blame-shift-o-rama?  It's A THING. It happens. And it's not pretty, as in this case.

CD - yes we are all flawed but I am not sure it is our place to point out someone else's flaws...Something like, "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone."  It is not up to us to tell anyone else to beg for forgiveness.  What is up with that kind of thinking?  I don't care if you hate Mike.  That is your prerogative.  

There is a lot of really great BB stuff in that book. And excuse me for insulting you in the hypothetical, I think that you are a damn fool if you don't read it if you are a lifer fan.  (only kidding with the insult)  

The fans gave them the feedback about how their music was valued.

Exactly. Fan feedback. Thanks for pointing that out, FDP.

Brian at C50 got a ton of applause and adulation from fans, the kind of thing that Mike was used to getting at his own shows. I cannot imagine that went over well with Mike. He felt undervalued, his low self esteem instinct kicked in, and he blew up the reunion. Not *just* because of that, but I'm sure it didn't help things. A (flawed) human thing to have happen, yet very sad.

CD - you are calling someone a "flawed" human.  Last time I checked that would fall under being judgmental.  

And as to whether it is relevant to discuss the book -CBS  was interviewing Mike about the book.   It is the book that prompted the interview. He discussed a variety of items including Manson.  

Nobody said it isn't relevant to discuss the book in a thread about Mike's CBS interview about the book. The problem is that you're contending nobody should bring up the CBS interview itself.

As for calling someone flawed, stating that we're ALL flawed is not judgmental. It's a fact.

Yes, we are all flawed.  Do we need to get insulting?  

The CBS interview referred back to the early CBS Sunday morning tape.  The touring situation is a high-stakes/high-pressure.  And exhaustion, day-after-day.

People sometimes have "words" when they get stressed out.  And, I do think that (as someone said earlier) the person's report had the narrative in the wrong person.  It was not between Melinda and Mike - it was between Melinda and Jacqui.

And -I do not even see a "by line."  Who wrote it?

S/he may have looked at a copy of the book and "moved the players around." Or, mixed-up what happened.  There is more to learn from in that book about the Beach Boys, than spotlighting this event.    

The fans gave them the feedback about how their music was valued.

Exactly. Fan feedback. Thanks for pointing that out, FDP.

Brian at C50 got a ton of applause and adulation from fans, the kind of thing that Mike was used to getting at his own shows. I cannot imagine that went over well with Mike. He felt undervalued, his low self esteem instinct kicked in, and he blew up the reunion. Not *just* because of that, but I'm sure it didn't help things. A (flawed) human thing to have happen, yet very sad.

CD - you are calling someone a "flawed" human.  Last time I checked that would fall under being judgmental.  

And as to whether it is relevant to discuss the book -CBS  was interviewing Mike about the book.   It is the book that prompted the interview. He discussed a variety of items including Manson.  

The C50 tour was miracle and triumph of the music for how long it went on with such infighting.  

That's because - they are ALL professionals and did not want to let the fans down.  

Disagree. The industry was unfortunately laughing at these guys (or rolling their eyes) at the end of the tour because they all came across as total amateurs business-wise and PR-wise, and the fact that their tour signified half a century in the business only highlighted the irony of still not having their s**t together.

The more info comes out about C50, the more it seems like it was a lucky accident the thing held together. I think Joe Thomas ponying up a big fat check at the outset is probably the main thing that held it together.

Does anybody really think Mike would have quit the tour? If he had, he would likely have been sued like nobody in the band has ever been sued before.

Hey Jude - Industry?  The same industry that threw them to the wolves and under the bus?  The industry that stole their catalog?  I saw 7 of those C50 shows, each one better than the one before.  If I had to guess there were a lot of industry people who made a ton of dough off that tour and are pissed that the spigot was shut off.  The fans gave them the feedback about how their music was valued.

The C50 tour was miracle and triumph of the music for how long it went on with such infighting.  

That's because - they are ALL professionals and did not want to let the fans down.   

When Mike went on CBS and made the comments directed at Melinda, it went out to however many million viewers were watching, listening, or reading that linked transcript from the CBS program. He cannot assume everyone watching had his book in hand, or even knew he had a book on the market until that segment was aired. Therefore, that's the context - what he said on CBS.

And I'll say again, if Mike is going after Brian's wife on a television appearance adding to all of the comments since 2012 placed in his various interviews promoting his concerts within dozens of newspapers and various outlets, not to mention whatever went on via legal actions, is it surprising that Mike isn't getting invitations from Brian to write songs? If Mike goes after Brian's wife, family, etc in public, and it's been ongoing for years, why or how would Mike be disappointed if they don't have a personal relationship? We're still talking about real people with real emotions and feelings.

GF - there is so much in that book, I found to be very informative.  Maybe a thread should be set up to address that.  And keep comments confined to "If you read this..." please comment.  

It is intense to read, I found, after going throat 400+ pages.  The interviews are beyond the book.  Those relationships are like them walking off-stage after a show.  They go back to their own lives.  That is for the parties to figure out.  It can't be "vicariously" worked out on a message board. I think it is inappropriate. That is my opinion.  Blood is still thicker than water.  

If you read the book, I think your heart will be touched as Carl explains to Brian how they were kept away from him and were not rejecting him. I think you will gain another insight into the history of the band.    

I started a thread on the book, and made specific and sometimes extensive comments based on the actual pages of the book, giving my opinions and impressions of those specific sections in the book, with more to follow. As a result, I've apparently been publicly accused of charging the author with plagiarism, which I never did, and in other cases been accused by you personally among others of claiming posters here like you and Cam had a hand in writing it - a charge which is as laughable as it is false since everything I wrote is still on this board...and available to review in the thread about the book.

My most recent comments on the book are specific to what Mike said to CBS, and the notion of why Brian would be expected to invite Mike to write songs or do much of anything else after seeing his wife be the subject of Mike's comments, on top of Mike saying he was being "controlled" and drugged as recent as the past month in a public interview, and a laundry list of comments made toward his family and assorted issues peppered throughout interviews supposed to be promoting Mike's concerts.

My comments on the book have also been along the lines of what I wish Mike had included in the book, among them the lightning-rod issues like Mike giving seed money to fund the PMRC in the 80's, the 2005 lawsuit which Mike lost and lost big, and the lack of more inter-personal inner workings that were at play within the band during the Smile era.

I've also commented on the lack of context given that June 2012 email that we're told scuppered the extension and further booking of C50 shows, specifically what other emails if any correspondence came prior to the oft-cited email quoted in the book, and what was the context in which that email appeared. My comments on that are based on wondering how a lone email within what was a multi-million dollar corporate structure running C50 and affecting dozens of participants on the tour could be cited as if it came out of the blue with no precedent. I'm one who is curious to learn more about what led to it, and what else may have come prior to it within the chain of operations on that tour as of June 2012.

That's context.

GF - The book is over 400 pages.  It is Mike's account and not a reflection of what others think should be in the book.  The section on the lawsuit which was initiated by Landy with his devious plot to have Brian's kids disinherited, was originated by Landy.  

There are two email exchanges and one is from early June and one from late June.  I thought there was only one.  

IIRC  - three and a half weeks seemed too long to "call back" the first email of "no more shows for us" - which looked pretty final to me.  So, what I learned in the  book, is that there were TWO emails.  

On June 1st (it related to shows in Israel) which was turned down (the "no more shows for Wilson") and a June 25th email to "disregard the previous message." That is found on pp. 401-402.  

The info I am relying on is what is in front of me and not legal advice or counsel.***

The 2005 lawsuit had nothing to do with Landy. Why did you just dodge that entirely and bring Landy into it?

2005.

What if anything came before the email you reference from the book?

As a reader of the book...can I not say "I wish he had talked about that?" as a reaction? Or do we just take everything at face value?

Someone asked you a direct question about something that *is* in the book, and you dodged their question, and further gave the answer "buy the book". How about answering their question, since you said you wanted to discuss what was in the book, and someone asked a specific question about what was actually in the book?

Did Mike on CBS contradict what is in the book about this 'partner' confrontation at C50? Simple question...why duck it?

GF - The overall dispute was over C50 - if someone writes an email that says on June 1st they are done, and the other party "relies on it" - and 25 days elapse, that puts the whole situation in a very different light.  I think the retraction was too late. (not legal advice)***

The suit in 2005 did not prevail. It is not in the book.  The book is enough to deal with.  I am not dodging anything,  I am not interested in discussing it or going on some other tangent.  I'd  like to hear what people think about things such as Carl's last days on the concert tour, it's impact on the band, how they carried on post.  Most do not want to discuss that but get into the soap opera/drama mode over "hot words" that got resolved.  It turned out just fine - but that is not drama.

My head is still exploding over how premeditated Landy was.  More than I ever imagined.  

 

[“Yeah. She once told me that ‘Brian’s not your partner. I’m your f****ng partner.’ That’s what she said,”]

Hey Jude - I am dealing strictly with the contents of the book.  

Okay, filledeplage.  Since you have read the entire book, I have a question for you.

In the CBS news interview, Mike says this:

“Yeah. She once told me that ‘Brian’s not your partner. I’m your f****ng partner.’ That’s what she said,” Love said.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/beach-boys-mike-love-opens-up-drama-with-cousin-brian-wilson/

Another poster who I assume has also read the book (I could be wrong, that's why I'm asking you) says that Melinda didn't speak these words to Mike.  Rather, Melinda was speaking to Mike's wife and the exchange was more along these lines:

Melinda "storms" to Jacquelyne, says Ambha can't sing a Brian lead
Mike's wife replies, "Mike already discussed the matter with his partner, Brian.”
And Melinda answers, “Mike’s not his fucking partner. I’m his fucking partner.”

Two very different accounts of what I assume to be the same event.  
One version says Melinda told Mike that Brian wasn't Mike's partner, and that she (Melinda) was Mike's partner.
The other version says that Melinda told Mike's wife that Mike's not Brian's partner, and that she (Melinda) was Brian's partner.
Which of these two versions is in Mike's book?

Cheers

Did you really hope to get a real answer to a question by FdP?

You are looking for a particular response.  Sorry. You can get the book.