Gene Cook-Mick Jagger airplaine conversation

[ToGo]

It wouldn't have surprised me if Mick Jagger had bragged about what he did, even if he wasn't being literal. He probably was trying to shock a straight-laced Mormon. In listening to the talk though I

[AKS]

I quite enjoy the song myself. It's cool, it's eloquent, and a cautionary tale. At no point have I said it drives kids to sex (see post #25).

My apologies. I misunderstood your post.

[Markk]

Rolling Stones music is pretty tame compared to the sexually explicit music we have today. Their songs each could have been said to have different meanings. . . depending on who you are asking. Todays music however is such a different story, I mean listen to a song such as "Right Round" by Flo Rida. . . I don't think it can be interpreted any differently.

Hi Redifinded,

I would guess you are younger than I, the Stones are one of the first RR groups to for lack of a better term to "explore" sexual boundaries, when I was young, it was a given that Mick was bi-sexual ( him and David Bowie) I don't know if it was true but the PR was there. The Stones were, along with groups like the Kinks, "bad boys" and led the hippies out of the summer of love mode to the reality of what sex, drugs, and rock and roll was all about. As a "wanna be hippie", meaning I was in jr high at the height of when this movement was taking off, there is no doubt that Mick Jagger and the Stones were a force in leading the youth of that generation astray, absolutely no doubt about it, I lived it.

The Hells Angels were the Stones bodyguards and stabbed a person to death while they were playing. This is the unofficial death to the Summer of Love.

So are they tame compared to today's music, yes, but they opened the doors, and today music is a direct bi product of groups like the Stones.

In hindsight Cook should have thrown him off the plane...(just joking...I think...LoL)

[Redefined]

Hi Redifinded,

I would guess you are younger than I, the Stones are one of the first RR groups to for lack of a better term to "explore" sexual boundaries, when I was young, it was a given that Mick was bi-sexual ( him and David Bowie) I don't know if it was true but the PR was there. The Stones were, along with groups like the Kinks, "bad boys" and led the hippies out of the summer of love mode to the reality of what sex, drugs, and rock and roll was all about. As a "wanna be hippie", meaning I was in jr high at the height of when this movement was taking off, there is no doubt that Mick Jagger and the Stones were a force in leading the youth of that generation astray, absolutely no doubt about it, I lived it.

The Hells Angels were the Stones bodyguards and stabbed a person to death while they were playing. This is the unofficial death to the Summer of Love.

So are they tame compared to today's music, yes, but they opened the doors, and today music is a direct bi product of groups like the Stones.

In hindsight Cook should have thrown him off the plane...(just joking...I think...LoL)

Totally realize this! Guess, it just goes to show how the times have changed.

[ToGo]

Now you're waffling.

As has been noted, whether this particular incident happened or not is hardly important in the greater scheme of things. Yet you seem to attach great importance to it. Why?

The reason I ask, of course, is that there are enemies of the Church out there who delight in pouncing on any small thing they can in order to trash the Church. They also attach great importance to very small things. Hence, I consider it a very valid question to ask of you.

What are your intentions with this? I'm starting to doubt that it's just to satisfy curiosity.

And another question, since you brought it up: Exactly what circles do you run in where this would come up quite a bit?

I take it from your continued diversions, jwhitlock, that you have not checked those journals. That is what my question was, and remains.

[ToGo]

There is a difference between being a public persona and a private citizen. Mick Jagger is a very public and well-known figure, and his lifestyle is well reported and open. Therefore saying that naming him is "venal" is preposterous. It would be very different if Cook were to name his next door neighbor under the same circumstances.

So, ma'am, you interpret the commandment to be, Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy non-famous neigbour, but it is okay if he be famous?

[ToGo]

Amen. Been there, dunn that!

Facts be damned, full steam ahead!

[AKS]

Hi Redifinded,

I would guess you are younger than I, the Stones are one of the first RR groups to for lack of a better term to "explore" sexual boundaries, when I was young, it was a given that Mick was bi-sexual ( him and David Bowie) I don't know if it was true but the PR was there. The Stones were, along with groups like the Kinks, "bad boys" and led the hippies out of the summer of love mode to the reality of what sex, drugs, and rock and roll was all about. As a "wanna be hippie", meaning I was in jr high at the height of when this movement was taking off, there is no doubt that Mick Jagger and the Stones were a force in leading the youth of that generation astray, absolutely no doubt about it, I lived it.

The Hells Angels were the Stones bodyguards and stabbed a person to death while they were playing. This is the unofficial death to the Summer of Love.

So are they tame compared to today's music, yes, but they opened the doors, and today music is a direct bi product of groups like the Stones.

In hindsight Cook should have thrown him off the plane...(just joking...I think...LoL)

That the Stones "explored sexual boundaries" has little to do with RR. That their fame gave them a forum (if your post is accurate) to lead the youth astray has little to do with rock. Lets face it, as far as music goes the Rolling Stones are rather blah and uninteresting. Sure they have some catchy songs but where are the key changes? Changes in texture and tempo? So that a band like the stones used PR to sensationalize certain aspects of Jaggers life is not surprising. They needed to sell records.

[Markk]

Totally realize this! Guess, it just goes to show how the times have changed.

Totally, it's kind of funny that I can remember wanting to get a "block" hair cut, that is basically a Beatles cut. I went to the local barber and told him to block it and he did and when i went home my Mom grabbed me and took me back to the barber and had him tapper my neck, and I'm sure she let the barber have it.

Point being my hair wasn't even close to being long by today's standards, but it was accepted and assimilated into our culture, the same with music, the Stones and groups like them, started a mess.

The Bible calls this the searing of the conscious, we look back and it's easy to say that the Stones weren't really that bad, but in reality they were, it's just that our consciousness get seared. I would love to see today's youth listening to the Beatles sing " I want to hold your Hand" verses the garbage that is out there.

Take Care

Mark

[Deborah]

So, ma'am, you interpret the commandment to be, Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy non-famous neigbour, but it is okay if he be famous?

The only one trying to say what was said was false is you. I was addressing your comment about mentioning the name of someone.

[Deborah]

So why so much conjecture about the "fit" of the story, and so much resistance to someone simply asking what Elder Cook's journals put as the date of the flight so Jagger's whereabouts on that date can be checked?

Good grief are you really that dense? Who cares about the date of the flight except you. I was addressing the point that others were saying the words weren't that provocative.

[Smith]

I take it from your continued diversions, jwhitlock, that you have not checked those journals. That is what my question was, and remains.

I suggest you find another note on the keyboard and start banging that. This one is getting rather boring. It has been shown plenty that there is no grounds for a false witness type accusation against Elder Cook so stop trying to defame him. But if you are so hell bent on it then you go do your spade work and once you have evidence shout it to the world. Stop expecting others to have your cynical suspicion

[ToGo]

I suggest you find another note on the keyboard and start banging that. This one is getting rather boring. It has been shown plenty that there is no grounds for a false witness type accusation against Elder Cook so stop trying to defame him. But if you are so hell bent on it then you go do your spade work and once you have evidence shout it to the world. Stop expecting others to have your cynical suspicion

I have simply asked if anyone here has checked the journals for a date? So far, no one has indicated that they have. On the other hand, someone that has may yet post that they have checked the journals and be able to shed light on it. This inquiry is a step toward finding out. The 'circling of wagons' when someone has simply asked if anyone here has checked suggests a sensitivity bordering on paranoia.

[Deborah]

I have simply asked if anyone here has checked the journals for a date? So far, no one has indicated that they have.

Because no one cares. Obviously you aren't getting the message. You are the one exhibiting paranoia.

[sethpayne]

Because no one cares. Obviously you aren't getting the message. You are the one exhibiting paranoia.

But shouldn't we care? If Cook did embellish the story, I think we should be concerned.

And, if the story is true, then what is the harm in checking it out?

Seth

P.S. I find the story a bit unbelievable, but plausible.

[ToGo]

Because no one cares. Obviously you aren't getting the message. You are the one exhibiting paranoia.

I did not ask if anyone cared, just if anyone had checked those journals. Ma'am, I will assume from your diversions that you have not checked those journals.

[Hestia]

I did not ask if anyone cared, just if anyone had checked those journals.

Do not come on here and make unsubstantiated accusations. This is a warning and suggest you not do it again.