Discussions of Mormons and Mormon life, Book of Mormon issues and evidences, and other Latter-day Saint (LDS) topics.

Saturday, November 26, 2005

Mick Jagger on the Impact of Modern Music

Elder Gene R. Cook reports that he once had the experience of talking with Mick Jagger on a flight. One source providing his story is "A Conversation With Mick Jagger" based on a talk Elder Cook gave in 1988. One portion of this story was repeated to us in a recent Stake Conference:
After we visited back and forth a minute or two about what we were doing and all, I finally said something like, "You know, Mick, I have a question for you that I'd like you to answer for me." He said, "Well, I'll be glad to try." Then I said to him, "I have opportunity to be with young people in many different places around the world, and some of them have told me that the kind of music you and others like you sing has no effect on them, that it's okay, and that it doesn't affect them adversely in any way. Then other young people have told me very honestly that your kind of music has a real effect on them for evil and that it affects them in a very bad way. You've been in this business a long time, Mick. I'd like to know your opinion. What do you think is the impact of your music on the young people?"

This is a direct quote, brothers and sisters. He said, "Our music is calculated to drive the kids to sex." I'm sure I had a real look of shock on my face in receiving such a bold response. He quickly added, "Well, it's not my fault what they do. That's up to them. I'm just making a lot of money."
I knew there was something about him that wasn't quite up to Gospel standards.

I ran into this story shortly after pondering the shocking state of the media these days, and the craftiness of the Hollywood gang in glorifying immorality and teaching young people that anything goes. I think there is far more involved than just finding that sex sells. I would not be surprised to learn that they, like Mick, are pursuing an agenda of changing the morals of our youth, and of driving them to sexual activity. That agenda brings rich rewards, of course, if having had a pile of cash in your bank account for a few years is some kind of comfort as you enter into eternity.

2009 Update: There are some legitimate questions about details of this event, so I'm not sure what to make of it at the moment. Until we know more, I guess all I can say is rock on!

230 comments:

1 – 200 of 230   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

This story smells like another Paul Dunn fabrication.

I don't buy it.

Dan the Man said...

I don't think Mick Jagger would deny having a conversation like that.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, Mick Jagger is going to talk like this to Gene Cook.

Give us a break. Another faith-promoting-rumor from the fantasy-land of Mormondom.

John said...

Mick Jagger would talk like that to someone who asked him the right questions. Gene Cook would be someone that would ask the right questions. I don't see what is so hard to believe about this.

AlexG said...

I think that, if this conversation occurred, Mick Jagger was winding up Gene R. Cook. Just imagine, a religious guy that starts talking about degrading standards. I think that Mick Jagger was having a laugh out of him. I have taken this story with a mountain of salt. To me, the important message is the influence that music can have on people. While I do not hold any artist directly responsible, I do think that it is important that we discuss the effect lyrics and music have on teens and youth, especially after so many tragedies, i.e., Columbine, Italy's Satan's Beasts, etc.

Walker said...

It's quite easy to be a skeptic. However, do we have a reason to believe that Gene R. Cook was inventing the story? Not really. There's little use in being skeptical for skepticism's sake. Of course, one can always choose not to believe. But they have no better ground on which to stand than a believer does. Just because Paul H. Dunn made up some whoppers does not mean that every good story is a fabrication.

If we must question the story, alexg offers the most plausible explanation. Even this interpretation leaves some gaps. Did Gene R. Cook tell him how religious he was? As far as McJ knew, Cook could have well been a defender of McJ's music (we do not have a transcript of the conversation, so we cannot know exactly what was said--members of the Church tend to couch true stories in church lingo sometimes).

Bottom line: what's the point of being a skeptic w/o grounds for doing so? Blind faith in skepticism! Fascinating!

Bookslinger said...

Why should this be surprising to anybody? It's certainly in line with what Jagger would say. And it's certainly in line with a lot of the Stones' lyrics.

Sexually suggestive art, music and dance has been with us for ages. Each new generation pushes the envelope and makes the previous generation look pretty staid.

Even things like the murals of Pompeii show us that there is nothing new under the sun.

Elvis was suggestive in his day.

Swing and Jive music pushed the envelope when they first came out.

Before that it was flappers.

Even Jazz music was considered decadent and suggestive when it was new.

I like Jazz and have trouble understanding why it was put down, but maybe it was more due to musical purists not liking the new art-form.

Anways, all those things seem "quaint" to us now, because we have lowered the standards, the envelope has been extended.

And look how much the bar has been lowered since the Stones' hey-day. (I can't believe Mick turned 60 this year.)

The Stones' so-called dirty stuff from the 70's and 80's is pretty mild compared to what's on MTV and similar fare.

Elder Cook's point was that we are influenced by what is around us, and by what we allow into our minds whether by auditory or visual means.

Satan has been tempting mankind for thousands of years. He knows what works. We need to be careful, and choose things that are positive and uplifting, and avoid that which tends to degrade.

And instead of trying to draw absolute lines of what is acceptable and what is not, perhaps a better measure would be "Which way is this going?" which is much easier to discern.

Anonymous said...

Jeff, I got some beautiful land in Florida you would just love. I can offer it to you at a special price.

Mike Parker said...

Well, it certainly is in line with Jagger's actions. The man has had a long string of affairs and in- and out-of-wedlock children. (See his Wikipedia entry.)

I'm constantly amazed and amused at the anti-Mormon critics who post here anonymously and accuse LDS leaders and members of lying and other horrible things. If you're going to stand up for what you believe is the truth, at least grow a spine and give your real name.

Cowards.

Anonymous said...

I'm constantly amazed and amused at the anti-Mormon critics who post here anonymously and accuse LDS leaders and members of lying and other horrible things.
How true, LDS leaders would never lie. Some might stretch the truth at times and get put out to pasture for it, but NONE WOULD EVER LIE!
You hear that you anti-Mormons?? And if you say anyting critical against the church or its leaders, YOU ARE AN ANTI!!

Mike Parker said...

My apologies. You're not just a coward, you're also a troll.

Walker said...

Anon @6:08--

If you actually have something substantive to add to the conversation other caricatures and your version of an entmology lesson ("you are an ant"? I know you can do better), I'm sure it would be welcome. Otherwise, please spare us and you the monotany.

John said...

Regardless of the event having happened or not (and Mr. Yellow Anonymous, we have absolutely no reason to doubt the account other than your derision, which isn't persuasive), Mick Jagger would hardly be upset at seeing this quote. The Cook-provided story is far less important than the attitude Mick and many, many others have in the industry.

On a different note, the definition of the prefix anti-, as defined by Webster:

"1 a : of the same kind but situated opposite, exerting energy in the opposite direction, or pursuing an opposite policy"

"2 a : opposing or hostile to in opinion, sympathy, or practice [anti-Semite] b : opposing in effect or activity [antacid]"

When someone is critical of the church in word or practice, anti-mormon is a perfectly accurate label. If you don't like that label applied to you, quit being anti-mormon.

PS- You forgot to post the rest of Mike's quote. I'm sure it was an oversight, so I'll help you out.

"If you're going to stand up for what you believe is the truth, at least grow a spine and give your real name.

"Cowards."

Anonymous said...

When I was at BYU a few years back, I remember someone in a group of people expressing doubts that this story really took place; then a girl spoke up and said that Gene Cook was her grandpa, and yes, it did happen. Why are people so quick to think that Gene Cook would make this up? Is it so odd for a church leader to find himself next to a celebrity on a plane? Of course not. They both fly in airplanes all over the place, and people have some pretty weird conversations on airplanes (like the one time this Christian co-passenger, a total stranger, cried as she told me about her daughter who'd married a Jew and left behind her Christian faith to join his synagogue).
On another note, as someone born in 1974, I don't know a single piece of music by Mick Jagger and I don't really care about him. However, what about these rap and hip hop singers with lyrics advocating murder? Doesn't it worry you to know that there are a lot of people out there listening to that stuff?

Anonymous said...

I served a mission with Elder Cooks son in SA. His oldest son is now 38 years old. So, if you are saying that someone at BYU years ago said Elder Cook was her grandfather, someone was pulling your leg.
Also, there are parts of that story that are not true. I have spent time in the Cook home. Elder Cook might have said some of these things believing they were true, but some points are just not. Sorry to burst your bubble, but you picked the one GA that I happen to have close ties.

Mormanity said...

I've had some interesting experiences on airplanes myself. In the past year, I've sat next to an amazing girl who was one the first Donald Trump Apprentice show and who was also on Oprah and other TV shows, and had a great conversation about values and life - she was a far cry from Mick, fortunately. I sat next to a CEO of a furniture company and learned his perspectives on the economic challenges in the US. And I sat next to a professional model off to do a swimsuit series on the East Coast who told me quite a lot about her work. I'm sure I missed a great opportunity to opine about the increasing immodesty of swimsuits. Maybe I could have had a Gene R. Cook moment also.

John said...

Jeff, I appreciate your comments on the plausibility of this event. It is entirely plausible that this could have happened. We have exactly zero good reasons to believe it did not. All we have here is some anonymous person's mockery and skepticism.

People, this is getting ridiculous. The scoffing and debating has completely diverted attention from the original point and post to a topic that is wholly without point, yet nonetheless controversial. If someone has PROOF that Elder Cook made this up, by all means, come forth. If not, may I suggest we cease libeling this man by accusing him of lying and return to the original point expressing concern about the impact immoral media is having on us.

Anonymous said...

I would probably think it was a fabrication too, if I hadn't heard a convert to the church who had been a Hollywood scriptwriter tell me that he and his family (apparently this was a inherited tradition) had sought to increase their profits by producing movies which were intended to gradually drive the adolescent demographic away from their parents and families. (I'll do him the service of not posting his name, especially since I haven't asked his permission.)

I certainly don't mean that all writers/producers/musicians think this way, but, judging by their products, I posit that many of them do.

It's kinda disconcerting -- if not scary.

BrianV said...

I know this is completely unrelated to the origional post, but I must share my sitting next to someone story.
I am a convert to the church, two and a half years ago. One of the missionaries that tought me the gospel and I had become good friends with was going home from his mission right after Christmas last year. I wanted to see him off but my wife and I were going to Denver for Christmas break to visit my family. The day after we were to arive home he was to be flying out of his area (which is two hours from our home) and we were not going to get to see him. My wife and I had been sitting next to eachother on the plane except for on the way home from Denver. While waiting to board the plane I overheard some gut saying something about going to the billings temple... It struck my interest and I hoped he would be the one sitting by me since my wife was not going to be. To my supprise he did just that, sat right next to me. What followed was amazing to me. I found out it was my missionary friends uncle. I was able to tell him of my conversion and send something with him to give to my friend. I can't explain how amazing and divinly inspired our meeting was.

Bill said...

As a member (now a former Mormon) I remember being told -

1) Ronald Reagan was taking the discussions

2) The Founding Fathers had appeared to someone in the temple to accept the Gospel

3) Three Nephites were wandering the globe performing miracles

And there were others. This culture of rumors is relevant because a) this story sounds completely bogus, and b) the sentiment "but it could have happened" is dangerous because it promotes lying to justify an end.

Anonymous said...

I see proof of this story in the first hand account given above of one of Gene Cook's grandchildren attending BYU. Of course Gene Cook is 64 years old so his grandchild is a super genius attending University at the age of 13.
Hey it could happen. Plausible very plausible.

Captain M, please let us know why it is that you think M Jagger would deny having a conversation like that?

Anon at 7:23, You are a coward and a troll.

Anon at 7:23 said...

Well, at least I'm not an anti-mormon coward/troll.

Anonymous said...

I remember all the Missionaries in my mission talking about how R. Reagan paid tithing.
These crazy stories just keep getting told over and over again. Makes us feel good though, reasures us as we fight against the enemy. Satan is cunning and you can see the evidence of this on this board here.

Anon at 7:23 said...

Bill: This culture of rumors is relevant because a) this story sounds completely bogus, and b) the sentiment "but it could have happened" is dangerous because it promotes lying to justify an end.

I agree, Bill, and I like your logic. In fact, as a member (now a current Mormon) I remember being told -

1) Ronald Reagan was NOT taking the discussions

2) The Founding Fathers had NOT appeared to someone in the temple to accept the Gospel

3) Three Nephites were NOT wandering the globe performing miracles

And there were others. This culture of rumors is relevant because a) these stories sound completely bogus, and b) the sentiment "but it could'NT have happened" is dangerous because it promotes lying to justify an end.

Sorry, Bill. Looks like it's my credulity versus yours. Which of us thinks the other is more gullible?

Anonymous said...

Anon at 8:20, please tell us how you equate being told something as believing something.
Don't think being gullible has anything to do with it. You can't stop people from making things up and exaggerating things. All you can do is retire them from their position. Of course, this is after they have made lots of cashola on the sale of tapes and books. What is it they say about a fool and his money?

Geoff said...

Regarding the claim that the founding fathers of the U.S. appeared at the temple.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilford_Woodruff

Where it states:

"He was baptized for the dead in behalf of the signers of the Declaration of Independence and other founding fathers, after he claimed to receive a vision, visitation or manifestation of the departed spirits of these men."

Anonymous said...

Oops 8:20, looks like they did appear to SOMEONE, that someone being a Prophet. Don't swallow everything they tell you hook line and sinker.

Walker said...

BrianV--

Thank you very much for your story. Tremendous things DO happen, as your story points out. Thanks for allowing good things to happen to you.

Too others--
Oy vey. The spirit of the original post has gone haywire in the hands of mindless, blind skepticism (yes, skepticism can indeed be as blind and as detrimental as blind faith).

If you held the same ridiculously high standards to events, you would eliminate the majority of the world population's existence as well as most of the worlds religions (prove to me that Muhummad saw/didn't see an angel-I dare you). Of course, just because Gene R. Cook couldn't have had a grandaughter at the university level means that he didn't have the conversation with McJ (eyes rolling). Chill, people

Yes, Jeff, I do believe that the media has a frightening amount of influence over the youth. And Mormons ARE NOT immune ("if it would poison a Lamanite, it would poison a Nephite").

BrianV said...

.... I am confused at Anon at 7:23's comment...
I am a member and the three Nephite thing is taught... have you read the BofM here is a quote I pulled off farms

I believe, as the Lord has clearly stated, that the three Nephite disciples will perform a marvelous ministry on the earth until his Second Coming (3 Nephi 28)

BrianV said...

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=113

Bookslinger said...

A poster said that Elder Cook's oldest son was 38. However, he could have had an older daughter. Or, perhaps Elder Cook or one of his children adopted a child older than a baby, and that could have put a grandchild at BYU at the designated time. So one point in favor of Elder Cook.

Another point in favor of Elder Cook is that his address was recorded, and he was speaking publicly of a well-known celebrity. I doubt that he would have gone on record with a made-up story that could have been checked out.

On the other hand, this talk was in 1988, before Elder Paul Dunn got caught stretching the truth in his talks. So maybe Elder Cook thought he could get away with it.

Under the "contra" column I suggest it would have been more likely that Mick Jagger would have been travelling with an entourage and that the seats next to him would have been taken by family, friends, or associates. Though it is in the realm of possibility that he was travelling alone, or was separated from his entourage, those scenarios are less likely.

Bottom line: I think Elder Cook deserves the benefit of the doubt.

And regardless of the accuracy of Mick's alledged statement, the statement certainly applies to today's popular music and rap artists. I don't see how anyone can listen to popular music, or rap, or watch prime time TV and think they are not promoting pre-marital sex.

Anon at 8:20 said...

Apologies, Anon at 8:28 and 8:38 and BrianV, let me clarify myself.

My point was that Bill evidently thought we all were pretty gullible to believe something like what Elder Cook said -- or, for that matter, that three Nephites wander the earth doing miracles, or that the Founding Fathers appeared to Wilford Woodruff in the St. George temple baptistry. He apparently dismissed them with the Elder Cook's alleged account as rumors. The criterion which he used for identification of said rumors was whether they "sound[ed] completely bogus."

Nevertheless, I could just as well dismiss his implicit claims that all of the events he specified DIDN'T happen using his own criterion, i.e. the assertion of their "bogusness" sounds "bogus" to me.

I do indeed believe that the Three Nephites were translated and that the Founding Fathers appeared to Wilford Woodruff. BrianV, I guess I meant I heard them from opponents of the church, not from those inside. I do NOT, however, believe that Ronald Reagan was taking the discussions. But since I have nothing to prove that he wasn't, I'm not going to go around telling people what's bogus and what isn't. I know President Reagan appointed an Ambassador to Finland who was a member of the church, so I know he had at least minimal exposure to Latter-day Saints. I can see that my sarcasm was not as evident as I had hoped.

All sarcasm aside, Paul Dunn's stories were disproved with evidence and his own confession. I echo John's statement that if anyone has proof that these things didn't happen, let him present it. Otherwise, I really don't see how the story's supposed "bogusness" has anything to do with anything.

BrianV said...

thanks for the clarification

Anonymous said...

Yes, I said that Elder Cook's son was 38. I know him. I have spent time with him and his brothers and sisters. He has no older sisters. My friend has adopted no children either. So that poster that said he had the experience of hearing Elder Cook's granddaughter claim this story was true was either lying or mistaken. You are free to look this up in Elder Cook's bio online if you do not believe me.
It is easy to check. After you do check your facts. Please come back and let us know what you find. That might be more helpful than an imaginary score card you have for facts in favor of some posters comments.

John said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
John said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
John said...

The only reference to Elder Cook's granddaughter was made by anonymous @ 6:29. This is what was said:

"When I was at BYU a few years back, I remember someone in a group of people expressing doubts that this story really took place; then a girl spoke up and said that Gene Cook was her grandpa, and yes, it did happen."

Anonymous was at BYU. Does it say anywhere here that the girl went to BYU as well? Does it even say how old she was?

That said, I'm going to echo Walker's statement: Why does the reality of Elder Cook's interaction with Mick Jagger hinge on this granddaughter story being true? For all I know, anonymous at 6:29 is the same anonymous that's been casting doubts from the opening of the thread, using this story as a straw man. I'm not making an accusation, but I'm saying, "So what?"

Bottom line, people: we have no proof one way or another. I choose to believe someone until I know they are lying. Those of you who choose to point the unfounded accusatory finger at Elder Cook, do not pretend that you have evidence. He is a man held in high esteem by many, many people, with a reputation for honesty. I, for one, believe him.

Bill,

"This culture of rumors is relevant because a) this story sounds completely bogus, and b) the sentiment "but it could have happened" is dangerous because it promotes lying to justify an end."

A') The story sounding "completely bogus" to you does not make it relevant to the original topic of the media's impact on us.

B') I agree with your statement. Nevertheless, justifying lying as means to an end is also completely irrelevant to the original topic of the media's impact on us.

Of your two reasons why this "culture of rumors" [I'm assuming you meant this story] is relevant, neither were actually relevant. Can we drop the squabbling over this story?

Bookslinger said...

I'm ashamed that I keep getting caught up in this kind of squabbling. I'm reminded of Proverbs 6:16-19. Among the seven things that are an abomination to the Lord is "he that soweth discord among brethren."

The RfM'ers are here sowing discord starting with the first comment, and I joined in. One of these days, I really am going to stop responding to the trolls.

Anonymous said...

I keep seeing the same individuals on each thread arguing about such silly things. Mark, Walker, Book and Dan. Don't you have anything more important to do than arque with people on some blog?
From reading some of the old posts you same people seem to do it day after day.
Take my advice, relax and get out and enjoy life. Spend time with your families or if you don't have one. Spend time trying to improve yourself.
You will feel much better about yourselves and your direction in life.

Timothy said...

I have to take the side that this story is embellished.

After reading Brother Cook's account, it's all too pat, and reads more like what he wished happened.

Besides, the Rolling Stones have chartered airplanes since the early 70s for their tours, for intl flights between the U.S. and Europe they typically use the Concorde (per press accounts), private jets are the norm for other travel and the possibility of Jagger on a commercial flight is slim. At best he was in first class, which begs the question what Elder Cook was doing in first class!

annegb said...

I've heard this story for years. One I heard was that it was Boyd K. Packer who talked with some rock star, not stating it was Mick Jagger.

I love the Rolling Stones' music. It doesn't make me want to have sex. It makes me want to dance. I think that story is just another myth calculated to scare our youth into virginity.

Dan the Man said...

Captain M, please let us know why it is that you think M Jagger would deny having a conversation like that?


Perhaps you should have read my comment

I don't think Mick Jagger would deny having a conversation like that.

I believe this story has occurred, not once, but multiple times, perhaps not always with an elder or prophet, not always with a musician, not always in a plane, but I have no doubt this situation has played itself out many times. I know because I have talked to marketing people, one who worked for a popular magazine, on my way to Utah. He told me about how they've been slipping more and more sex into their ads and it's been boosting profits.

I this was about a year and a half ago, I am currently 16. No one here has any reason to believe me, but what reasons do they have to believe you?

NateT said...

Is it any suprise people would do this, verasity of the story aside.

Some seek for a world of "polymorphous perversity" for money, others because they see Western Society as inherently repressive and total sexual freedom as a weapon to destroy Western Culture as it is. (If you dont believe me tryreading the works of Herbert Marcuse as a start.) In any case, its the warning that we should heed.

NateT said...

Oh and one more thing. It is often not the art that is as sexual as the culture around it.

While pervious generation's art might seem tame, ie Jazz it is the culture around that music when it was formed that gave it its label.

Joel said...

Elder Cook: "He told me that he was not married but that he had three children and was proud of it. He told me that he had one woman pregnant in Virginia, one in New York, and one in England, as I recall."

Mick Jagger has seven children. We can narrow down the date of the alleged conversation using their birth dates: 1970, 1971, March 1984, August 1985, 1992, 1997, and 1999. By these dates, the conversation happened between March 1984 and August 1985. Elder Cook was president of the Mexico/Central America area during this same approximate period of time.

Jerry Hall was the mother of the child born in 1985 and would have been pregnant during part of this time. I do not know the identity of the pregnant women living in New York and Virginia.

The Undercover album came out in fall 1983. Three videos were made from the album: "She was Hot," "Too Much Blood," and "Undercover of the Night."

According to the Wikipedia entry on the Rolling Stones, the videos were made in Mexico to save money. The Rolling Stones database for 1983 indicates that shooting for the "Undercover of the Night" single was done in Mexico City and Coyocan, Mexico, in late October 1983. Shooting for the two other songs was done in and near Mexico City in January 1984.

I don't know why Jagger would have been excited about music videos. Music videos had been around for decades, and MTV wasn't new.

Walker said...

Joel:

Thanks for actually offering a fair amount of scrutiny to the conversation.

To top it off, I would invite anyone to listen to the actual recording of the talk (you can find on the follwing website--http://web.byui.edu/presentations/presPast.asp?sortType=1--find the devotional in 1988 witht the author of Gene R. Cook). The lightplanet link is indeed "substanstively diff't." So much so that they ADDED sections that were not in the original talk. It was not just an abridgement; it was a change.

Joel's story adds up (assuming I am understanding his conclusions correctly). Let's move on rather than argue over such a point of minutia.

Catherin said...

Yikes! I'm sorry, Jeff. I was the inaccurate "anonymous poster", and I didn't remember the exact familial relationship of the young woman to Gene R. Cook.
For those concerned about me posting anonymously, my name is Catherine and I spent 7 years at BYU - 4 undergrad and 3 of grad school (years 1991-1995 and 1998-2001).
I'm sorry, everyone, for guessing on the familial relationship of Gene R. Cook to the young lady who spoke up in his defense. Otherwise, I wrote down what happened to me. I seriously can't believe how critical some of the responses were.
Now that no one believes me anyway, my husband (no, not my grandfather or uncle or roommate's brother - although I suppose the last might have ended up my husband ;) ) served his mission in Berlin 1995-1997 and he just told me tonight that he heard Elder Gene R. Cook speak at a mission conference and Elder Cook related the above controversial (I don't get why this is so controversial anyway) story about the conversation with Mick Jagger.
So, sorry, sorry, sorry. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea magna culpa! I repeat, yikes!
(And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why I rarely comment on any website anywhere...)

Anonymous said...

The audio recording is also here:
http://streaming.byui.edu/presentations/1988_11_29_Cook.wma

Anonymous said...

Mick Jagger has a 35 year old kid? Man, I'm gettin' old!

captveg said...

Rolling Stones music/lyrics are no worse than the Songs of Solomon, IMO. Neither are inspired scripture, both are sexually suggestive, and each has merits making them of interest aesthetically.

Bookslinger said...

Mick is now dating a Mormon!

His current girlfriend, 39 year old L'Wren Scott, (formerly known as Luann Bambrough) grew up Mormon in Roy Utah.

Here's the story:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/content_objectid=13220291_method=full_siteid=50143_headline=-MICK-S-FOUND-A-LOIN-TAMER-name_page.html

Or click here.

How's THAT for bringing the thread back on topic?!

AlexG said...

From what I gather, L'Wren (formerly Luann Bambrough) doesn't seem to uphold a lot of LDS values, i.e., chastity. Not the best, but an interesting twist to the story.

So what if the conversation between Mick Jagger and Gene R. Cook did not took place? The main point behind it is that you listen to what you are hearing. The thoughts of man greatly drive his actions (Proverbs 23:7) The whole point is not if the conversation happened but the principle taught.

AlexG said...

Jeff:

This brings memories of a discussion of music that the sisters of the Relief Society had in my ward. The speaker was arguing that you need to listen carefully to the lyrics to see if the music is uplifting (fair enough) but then she went on to say that the lives of the musicians should also be questioned. This sister is a big classical music fan, so when my wife and I were discussing it, several issues went on. Most of the opera themes have to do with drunkness, inmorality and all the lot. If we just think of any sort of music as perverse, what are the standards? And the life and actions of the musicians are no better. Consider Mozart, Lizst, Brahms, etc. When they weren't running after someone (male or female) they were absolutely wasted.

So should we listen to only instrumental music? Ravel Bolero is considered to be one of the most sexiest pieces of music ever written. But this is only if you think about sex whilst listening it. Music is only music, and it is you (not referering to anyone in particular) who add specific meaning to it.

ltbugaf said...

AlexG: Minor point, but I think you're being reckless in your characterizations of "Mozart, Lizst, Brahms, etc."

annegb said...

Kathryn, I am so going to enjoy my trip to the Bahamas on you when I steal your identity :). Bless your heart.

Wonder if this, guys, maybe this guy sat next to Gene Cook and said he was Mick Jagger but he wasn't and was just pulling Elder Cook's chain? Elder Cook wouldn't have known the difference. He could be laughing his head off somewhere.

Anonymous said...

Sidenote: There is indeed some nasty music out there. Check out these translated rap lyrics here

Warning: They ARE rap lyrics, and fairly explicit.

John said...

"AlexG: Minor point, but I think you're being reckless in your characterizations of 'Mozart, Lizst, Brahms, etc.'"

I completely agree. There are plenty of interesting characters in the "famous classical composers club," but you picked some pretty tame examples.

Anonymous said...

Jeff seems to think Madonna and Britney Spears have serious problems that would qualify them as role models. Maybe some classical composers have more in common with Jeff's system of values and would qualify as role models for his children. Or is Jeff still on his, popular music is a bad influence kick? One day people will learn that every generation says that about popular music. It was said about some of the Operas that some of these composers wrote.

Ian said...

I think that every generation has good music to listen to and bad. Britney spears is not wholesome music by any means, most of the rolling stones is not wholesome music. Look throughout history and you will find some music that is decent and some that is not. Just because music doesn't have the "explicit Lyrics" label doesn't make the music good.

Anonymous said...

you can say anything you want, but please, look at who is credible. This story was told to millions, and Mick never denied it! Gene Cook is extremely credible since Mick is alive to deny this well known story. It is easy to attribute stuff to dead people because you will never know the truth, but here, Mick is around. This happened!

http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/art/cook_jagger.htm

Anonymous said...

I just know it's true... Cant tell yu guys why...

MG said...

This thread seems almost long dead, but for what it's worth, Gene R. Cook came and spoke to our mission and shared this story with us. I served a mission in San Jose, CA from 1990-1992. I don't remember what area I was in or what portion of my mission I was in, but I specifically remember the power of the presentation by Elder Cook when he shared this story. I had heard nothing of this before this time. I remember the power of the message and the effect it had on us as missionaries. It was not until years later that I saw the story on the Internet and remembered the mission conference. I never doubted the Internet account because it matched the first-hand account I heard from Elder Cook.

Why are we so quick to be skeptical of accounts of honest men? Skepticism in and of itself is not a sign of intelligence. The ability of explain away or disbelieve is not a virtue, it is a character flaw. I have learned this as I've tried to replace general skepticism with more humble open-mindedness and willingness to suspend judgment until I have more information.

Most of those critics would have probably dismissed Christ had they been contemporaries with Him. It is this spirit that has rested in the hearts of all those who have rejected the prophets. Satan is the ultimate skeptic. I believe it was one of the deceptions that he used to woo the 1/3 that followed him. Skepticism and arrogance are Satan's counterfeits for competence and confidence. Most of the time it's based on no evidence whatsoever, simply a big ego. It has taken me a long time to see this. Of course, the skeptic will reject this analysis outright, confirming the very argument that he denies.

Anonymous said...

another vote for Brother Cook. :)

Latter-Day Guy said...

I would guess Jagger was just jerking Cook's chain; I doubt he was driving anyone to sex in the mid eighties. His fans were in their 30s & 40s by then. [shudder]

And MG, comments like that last one scare me. You have no evidence of Cook's honesty one way or another. You are relying on his role as an authority. No wonder we Mormons are accused of groupthink.

The real question is this: either Jagger was flying coach, or Cook was going 1st Class. If the latter is true, then what of the widow's mite?

Anonymous said...

I completely agree with the message he's trying to portray and I agree that music can have an impact on you life greatly. However, the story about Mick Jagger is totally bogus. This was made up to give the story some flare so kids would listen as well as give the story shock value. The story has so many holes in it from either side. First of all Mick Jagger flying on some coach flight from Mexico completely alone? I highly doubt it. Also the church never ever singles out specific groups to attack, so why would they do this to the Rolling Stones. Even if they are bad that's not the way the church likes to do things. Singling out Mick Jagger or anyone is something the church just doesn't do but here Gene Cook tries to get away with it just to make his talk good. I've heard this story in seminary as well as some John Bytheway talks and it makes me angrier and angrier everytime I hear it. There's no way this really happened and it was very unfair to Mick Jagger to make up something like this. There's a reason this talk cannot be found in Church Archives

Anonymous said...

Jagger has studied religion all his life, particularly the Apocrypha. Look--if you dare--at the lyrics of 1968's Jumpin' Jack Flash, 1997's Saint of Me and Flip the Switch. One of the most searing attacks of one's conscience can be found in 1996's Paint it Black. There is sarcasm against financial exploitation of religion (1978's Faraway Eyes). Broader themes include how Madison Avenue's goal is to leave us hankering for more materialism, (I Can't Get No) Satisfaction, 1965, contrasted with the need to be happy with what we have--1969's You Can't Always Get What You Want (but if you try sometimes, you might just find, you get what you need).

Jagger mocked his own significance in 1974's It's Only Rock 'n Roll, and the futility of a musician when wars are being fought. Street Fighting Man (1968).

Gimme Shelter (1969) shows how precarious are security and safety in the face of chaos and war.

At the Concert for New York after 9/11, Jagger and Keith Richards played Salt of the Earth (1968), an ode to the hardworking. Oh, that was for free, not money. Couldn't have been the evil, single dimensional Jagger that the Cook story portrays and judges.

These are most of the songs they perform in concert--not designed to drive the kids to sex. Even Brown Sugar (1971) is much deeper than mere sex--showing that base human emotions level social classes.

Start Me Up (1982) and Honky Tonk Women (1969) and Some Girls (1978) are no doubt sexual. The first talks about the nature of the male sex drive, the second that such "women give me the blues" and the third is downright misogynist. Nothing wholesome there, but obvious aspects of being human. With more than 400 recorded songs, nearly all aspects of the human condition are touched somewhere in Jagger and Richard lyrics.

Hey, imagine what Gene Cook's conversation on a plane sitting next to Michaelangelo would be--that pervert, he painted nudes on the Sistine Chapel ceiling!

If the Cook-Jagger conversation took place (and that's a big IF for scores of reasons), Jagger was toying with Cook, pressing buttons to get a rise out of Cook. And apparently Jagger succeeded. If it happened, Jagger's gotten more mileage out of telling the tale than Cook has.

Troy said...

For all you doubters, this story is 100% true. This incident took place in 1985 in Mexico City while I was living there (I am his oldest son). Dad was flying first class from Mexico City to Dallas. Mick was drunk on that flight (which explains many things--ever tried to have an intellectual conversation with a drunk?) My father has never embellished anything to anybody, has never had any reason to. I am witness to every account ever told. The story was first related publicly in November 1988 at Ricks college. Need I say more??

Anonymous said...

Actually, Troy, you do need to say more. In getting your masters degree from the University of Phoenix, did you not learn critical reasoning skills?

Have your father tell us the exact date of this 1985 Mexico City to Dallas flight. The Church would have this on record. Then we can compare it to Jagger's whereabouts on the date of this flight.

By the way, while we're waiting for your father to give us the exact date, riddle me this: what reasons did Paul Dunn have for embellishing stories? and why would your father not have the same reasons?

And, maybe you ought to reserve your witnessing to what you see or hear--not what you've been told by another. That's hearsay.

Troy said...

Anonymous, taking a shot at my education/character? Are you a big fan of Saul Alinski and his playbook?

In any case, let's go ahead and use some standard academic "empirical methods" in an attempt to set you straight. I'll assume that you are already familiar with primary and secondary sources. Let's look at testimony from those who know him best, and let's look at motive.

1). Elder Cook's journals (a primary source) covering the last 30+ years of his ministry have, since his retirement, been turned over to the historical department at the COB. Why don't you go down there and ask to see the record? Any researcher worth his salt can find it.

By the way, if you look at the last two months in 1984 you will find it in the journal verbatim, exactly the way it transpired, and in the same manner as first made public at Ricks College in 1989. The written version and the verbal account have not changed one bit since then.

Do a google search for the "Rolling Stones database 1984", you will find that Jagger was at the Churubusco studios Mexico City in January 1984 shooting a promo by director Julien Temple. He was agian at Churbusco in November 1984 to finalize the release of "video rewind 1984" with the same director.

2). There are numerous secondary sources, from family and others who know his character. put any one of us on the witness stand, and you will quickly realize the impossibility of this account being fabricated considering Elder Cook's ignorance of pop culture. Myself, and other family members will tell you that rock music was not even allowed in our home (a personal choice). My father didn't know whom Mick Jagger was when introduced (despite Jagger's celebrity), and couldn't even identify him in a rock magazine when shown his picture (go back and read the account).

3). What would be the motivation to tell a story like this? I can tell you that Gene Cook never profited from this account (or from any book, for that matter). This story was never published in any book. He didn't tell this account to aggrandize himself. It was merely to teach a gospel principle. I challenge you to find any other account (published or not) by this man that was related to the membership of the church that appears "fishy". Indeed, liars will have a track record.

Do you really believe that he pulled all of these facts our of thin air? Nonsense! We never did subscribe to the Rolling Stone magazine. And I might add, there was no such thing as the internet in the mid 80's.

You want me to opine on Paul Dunn? OK--I never spent time around the man; I don't know his character or motive for what he said in public. Only he can speak to that. Furthermore, I have not read any of his accounts. So to be fair, i'll refrain from commenting--wouldn't that be what YOU call hearsay? In any case, you can't compare what one person has said (right or wrong), and assume that all other people are similar in nature--that's a hasty generalization.

Anonymous, one final thing: I'm sure you will agree that any good evidence-based work demands that the author put his/her name to it. I've put my money where my mouth is. So I ask...why don't you do the same?

Mormanity said...

Thanks, Troy! Bonus points for the Saul Alinski reference. Not many people know who this highly relevant and important scoundrel is.

Anonymous said...

Tro Bro,

How is it you were able to adjust the time frame from 2005 (your 7/29 post) to the last two months of 2004 (your 9/8 post) without getting the exact date? Was it because the Rolling Stones database 1985 has no mention of Mexico at all?

You claim that Jagger was "at Churbusco in November 1984 to finalize the release of 'video rewind 1984' with the same director." Not true.

Video Rewind was released on November 14, 1984. That must is correct. Jagger in Mexico in November (or December) 1984? Not true.

The Rolling Stones database 1984 puts Jagger in Mexico City from January 19-25, 1984 to film videoclips for She Was Hot and Too Much Blood. That footage was included in Julien Temple's Video Rewind--released on November 14, 1984.

Jagger was not in Mexico in either November nor December 1984. He was at the premiere of a movie he co-wrote, called Blame It On The Night, on November 1. Then he was in Amsterdam, then New York to work on his solo album, She's The Boss. On November 16 he attended a Frankie Goes To Hollywood concert at The Ritz in New York City. On November 21, he had dinner in NYC with CBS Records executives, before Jagger left for 5 weeks in Rio de Janeiro and Parati, Brazil, for shooting a movie, ‘Running Out Of Luck’, that Temple directed and Temple and Jagger co-wrote. While in Brazil, there were some promo clips filmed with Jagger for Band-Aid.

Want to take another stab at the date the so-called Gene-Mick encounter occurred? How about an exact date this time? Since you changed the year from your first post (1985) to your second (1984), and then your sources don't put Jagger in Mexico in November or December 1984--simply that November 14 was the date that Video Rewind was released, having been filmed in Mexico City in January 1984 some 9 1/2 months different, with this next stab, let's have a year, month and day. Let's get the date of the Mexico City to Dallas flight.

Facts are a thorny thicket for myths and storytellers.

By the way, you might find it interesting that Jagger's girlfriend of the last 8 years, L'Wren Scott, grew up in the devout Mormon household of Ivan Bambrough in Roy, Utah. She was then known as Lauren Bambrough. I guess Jagger is trying to drive the Mormon kids to sex, one girl at a time.

Anonymous said...

I've always wondered about the veracity of this story too. It is one thing to spin a good yarn to help make a point. That's what Elder Paul H. Dunn did. But this one by Elder Gene R. Cook does so at the expense of a person by name, Mick Jagger. If not true, it seems improper in a way that Elder Dunn's embellished stories were not. So I have found it important to try to find out the truth. The time frame discussed in recent posts deserves the time to verify.

As I recall, Elder Cook became the area president for Mexico/Central America in July 1984 when those presidencies were established and filled with members of the First Quorum of the seventy. That's when I understand Elder Cook and his family move to Mexico City.

That would mean the encounter did not occur incident to Mick Jagger's travels to or from Mexico City in January 1984 when shooting videos there.

As Elder Cook's son suggested, I too googled "Rolling Stones database 1984". That brought up two relevant sites. http://www.timeisonourside.com/chron1985.html made no mention of Mexico. http://www.timeisonourside.com/chron1984.html includes three Mexico mentions: "January 16-25, 1984: The Rolling Stones gather in Mexico City, where they film videoclips for She Was Hot and Too Much Blood."; "January 26, 1984: Along with Mick Jagger, Keith and Patti Richards return to New York City, after several months in Mexico. They check into a hotel room in Manhattan for a month."; and "January 27, 1984: Ron Wood and his companion Jo Howard start a month-long holiday in Cancun, Mexico." No mention of Mexico after January 27, 1984.

There is an entry "November 14, 1984: The Rolling Stones' videoclip package, Video Rewind, is released." There is nothing suggesting that Mick Jagger was at Churbusco Studios in Mexico City in November 1984, to finalize the release of "video rewind 1984" with Julien Temple or any other reason.

With greater detail is http://www.nzentgraf.de/books/tcw/1985.htm and http://www.nzentgraf.de/books/tcw/1984.htm. There is no mention of Mexico in the 1985 database. For 1984, there are only two entries with mention of Mexico are:

840118A 18th - 21st and 23rd January: Mexico City, Churubusco Studios (and other sets). Shooting of a promofilm. Director: Julien Temple. Starring: The Rolling Stones, Anita Morris, Jo Howard.
- She Was Hot (MJ/KR)

840124A 24th January: Mexico (near Mexico City). Shooting of a promofilm. Director: Julien Temple,
- Too Much Blood (MJ/KR)

This database too mentions the November 14, 1984 release of Video Rewind:

841114A 14th November: Releasing date of the Rolling Stones video package ‘Video Rewind’(Vestron Video 11016). Director: Julien Temple. BW and MJ present promo videos and more. Incl.
- Midnight Rambler (MJ/KR) -from ‘********** Blues’-movie, part only
- She Was Hot (MJ/KR) -promo 1984
- She’s So Cold (MJ/KR) -promo 1980
- Emotional Rescue (MJ/KR) -mix of both promos 1980
- Waiting On A Friend (MJ/KR) -promo 1981
- interview with KR (Norman Gunston Show Australian TV ‘78)
- Satisfaction (MJ/KR)-Hampton 18.12.81, part only
- Angie (MJ/KR) -promo 1973 (version 1, with MJ sitting)
- Brown Sugar (MJ/KR) -live mix 1972/76/81
- footage from ‘********** Blues’-movie 1972
- Neighbours (MJ/KR) -promo 1981
- Too Much Blood (MJ/KR) -promo 1984
- It’s Only Rock’n Roll (MJ/KR) -promo 1974
- interviews with CW, KR and RW (20/20 US TV 1978)
- Miss You (MJ/KR) -promo 1978, part only
- Undercover Of The Night (MJ/KR)-promo 1983 (version II)
- Start Me Up (MJ/KR) -live mix 1981/82 (f.e. Hampton 81, Leeds 82)
- interview with MJ (after show in Memphis ‘78 (N. Gunston Show 1978)
+ more very short footage through the years

There is, again, nothing suggesting as Troy Cook does that Mick Jagger was at Churbusco Studios in Mexico City in November 1984, to finalize the release of "video rewind 1984" with Julien Temple or any other reason.

Troy said...

Bro?? And yet I still don’t know who you are…interesting! (LOL)

Look, so you don’t like my timeframe. And if I am off by a couple of weeks or months, so what? It doesn’t completely validate your claim that I am wrong. In any case, am I to believe that Jagger’s web-itinerary lists everything he has done in a given week? And since when did Internet research sites become the “end all, be all”? Seems to me that the basis of this line of reasoning is on shaky ground...

That’s why the diary is so pertinent, right? (And I have already told you where to find it). No, I don’t have the journal in front of me to quote you a date, since I don’t live in Deseret. I’ll give you credit though. I’m motivated to go pull the official record again the next time I visit. Upshot-- I should have what you are asking for in the near future.

In the meantime, how about you take me up on my challenge from the previous post?
Or perhaps, with regard to a date and a flight number, you are perfectly contented to “strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel”.

What about the rest of the evidence presented? Reject it out of hand? If you cannot accept but only a date, then methinks you are being intellectually dishonest. That said, the only thorny thicket that I’m seeing here is the one with a narrow trail through the middle…

I guess this begs a larger question: Do you have the time and inclination to do the real homework required on this issue?

If you do, then here’s another lead—It’s what you asked for—make contact with Murdock Travel in SLC and see if you can get your hands on the flight information from the time period in question. You say the church would have this on record, so maybe if you ask nicely they will provide it. Worth a try!

And what about Jagger’s latest girlfriend? Seems quite irrelevant to this discussion…except that you seem to know Jagger and Co. intimately. Why don’t you take that piece of knowledge regarding Mrs. Bambraugh, and make some phone calls to her family up the road? (Alas! another source!)

Anonymity, I wish you success in finding the truth for yourself. If not, then move on to another General Authority or gospel principle to attack. I’m sure you will find many. And enough already with the snide and debasing final thoughts…it does nothing to advance your position or your agenda.

Anonymous said...

Tro Bro, still playing coy that you do not know who I am. Here's a clue, you've told me about this before.

"I should have what you are asking for in the near future." That's promising.

'til we meet, til we meet, til we meet, til we meet' when you have the date.

Anonymous said...

Since Elder Gene R Cook indicated in his telling of the story of Mick Jagger on a flight from Mexico city that Jagger had been there filming a video, I have searched for more found mentions of him in Mexico filming music videos. In addition to those reported in my 11:33 PM, October 02, 2009 post, I found these as the only other mentions in either the 1970s or 1980s:

831026A 26th - 30th October: Mexico City & Coyocan, Mexico. Shootings for a promofilm.
Director: Julien Temple.
- Undercover Of The Night (MJ/KR)-promo 2
Starring: MJ (kidnapped elitist)(detective/reporter)/KR (terrorist)

831200A December: US TV (MTV) ‘Uncovered’. Report on the making of the ‘Undercover Of The Night’-video, incl.
- interview with MJ by J.J. Jackson (Mexico City 10/83)
- interview with KR by J. J. Jackson (Mexico City 10/83)
- interview with Julien Temple by J.J. Jackson (Mexico City 10/83)

So it would appear that if the event reported by Elder Cook took place, it did either incident to the shooting of the videos in late October 1983 for Undercover of the Night or late January 1984 for Too Much Blood and She Was Hot.

---------------

Also, worth at least noting is this from the Mormon Apologetic and Discussion Board. It was posted there in September 2008 (and reported as a response from Jagger's publicist about three years earlier, circa 2005) http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/37610-gene-r-cook-mick-jagger/page__st__20:

"thank you for your e-mail but I can assure you that this a complete fabrication and nothing more than someone having fun with their imagination!

Best regards,

Lucy

LUCY HOPKINS
LD COMMUNICATIONS
(PR, TV & Radio Promotions, Marketing)"

Troy said...

No games played here.
The lesson learned?--2 Ne. 28:31

"Et tu, Brute?"

Anonymous said...

No games, Tro Bro, just waiting on the exact date that Gene took this infamous flight from Mexico City to Dallas. Then those really wanting to know will be able to dig deep into where Mick was on that date. On a flight from Mexico City to Dallas or not. Not a game, but by getting to exact date of the flight, we can then either confirm that Jagger too was on such flight or not. Either way, the truth wins out and sets you free.

Don't keep us waiting too long, Tro.

Anonymous said...

Tro Bro,

To paraphrase one of your sentences,

"If you cannot give a specific date, then methinks Gene has been intellectually dishonest."

Troy said...

It's refreshing to see that you can actually focus (and comment) on something else I have written.

It must kill you to have to wait.

Anonymous said...

Not going anywhere, Tro.

Just sitting tight, waiting for an exact date.

You don't seem like the type that would promise and then not deliver.

Anonymous said...

In Elder Cook’s son Troy’s post of September 8, 2009, he sets forth three numbered reasons why Elder Cook’s story about Mick Jagger is true. One involves the date of the flight from Mexico City to Dallas and the ability to verify it from Elder Cook’s journals at the COB. Another is the improbability of fabrication because of Elder Cook’s naïveté regarding pop culture and Mick Jagger was prior to that flight. Three centers around what possible motivation Elder Cook might have to fabricate the story.

I think the proof will be in the date pudding (pun intended), if once the date from Elder Cook’s journals is produced it can be determined with some certainty if Mick Jagger was on that same flight. The other two points boil down to Elder Cook’s ignorance of Mick Jagger prior to the flight and motive to make up or embellish the account. There are numerous reasons for prevarication, such as getting and keeping the attention of the congregations to which Elder Cook has related the story. Also, making the point more poignant by using details and an actual famous rock star to add credibility. After all, Elder Cook’s use of this story is much more famous in making the point against rock music and its lyrics than the 1970s writings of Randal S Chase or the more analytical approaches that Lex de Acevedo made in pieces he authored in the 1970s and 1980s.

The degree of Elder Cook’s pop culture naïveté is something that can be compared to and deduced from what he said in telling the story. The text of the account related by Elder Gene R Cook at Ricks College in 1989 is set forth at pages 11-14 of The Eternal Nature of the Law of Chastity (©2000 Intellectual Reserve). It may be found at http://emp.byui.edu/MarrottR/Cook_Chastity-Jagger.pdf.

The following passages seem to suggest that Elder Cook did know, before the encounter, the name Mick Jagger to be a rock star and some familiarity with rock magazines even if never having subscribed to Rolling Stone magazine.

“How many of you have heard of Mick Jagger? I think almost everyone has as he is one of the most famous rock stars in the world.”

That would be particularly odd phraseology by someone who himself did not know who Mick Jagger was prior to the flight.


“I noticed immediately that he was reading a rock magazine.”

To notice immediately that a magazine being read by someone sitting to Elder Cook’s side is about rock music rather than some other aspect of pop culture indicates some prior familiarity.


“[Jagger] opened up the magazine and pointed to his picture and said, “This is me.” Of course, then I finally realized who he was. I just hadn’t ever thought about sitting next to him, but it was so.”

This suggests Elder Cook did know Mick Jagger was a rock star before the encounter, just had not thought they’d be sitting next to each other on a plane.


“Then other young people have told me very honestly that [Jagger’s] kind of music has a real effect on them for evil and that it affects them in a very bad way. You’ve been in this business for a long time, Mick. I’d like to know your opinion.”

One who did not know who Mick Jagger is would not know how long or short of time had been in the business.


One who wants to add meat to the bare bones of a story constructed to make a point (rock music is evil) could easily do a bit of research and come up with some details. Rock star confesses his music has evil purpose. Talked to rock star while seated on a plane or a bus or whatever. Find the name of a rock star. Add a vaguely identifying detail (the exposed lower calf of his leg looked like he was sick). Give the rock star a purpose for being on the same public transportation. Voilà! much better than stressing the point that rock-music-is-evil in a dry, “believe me” dissertational style.

So this points us right back to the date of the flight.

Troy said...

Anon 9:46,

Nit-pick-nit-pick…
Are you kidding me?

Let us analyze some of your statements:

“There are numerous reasons for (Elder Cook’s) prevarication”.

Are you insinuating that because a story holds my interest (or the members) that it’s a fabrication? Was the first vision a lie? That was an amazing encounter. Throughout church history there have been many brethren who happened upon people of power. Are they all liars then?

“…It can be determined with some certainty if Mick Jagger was on that same flight”.

How? By obtaining a passenger manifest from that era? Good luck.

“How many of you have heard of Mick Jagger? I think almost everyone has as he is one of the most famous rock stars in the world”.
“The following passages seem to suggest that Elder Cook did know, before the encounter, the name Mick Jagger to be a rock star”.

The first quote you took out of context. This was said after the fact, years later. And how does this prove prior familiarity exactly? Hearing of a famous person and actually making a connection to the person upon meeting them years later are two very different things indeed.

GRC: “What’s your name?” and he said, “My name is Mick Jagger.” And I said, not realizing who he was, well, I’m glad to meet you, Mick.” And he said, “I said my name is Mick Jagger.” “…And he opened up the magazine and pointed to his picture, and then I knew finally who he was.”

So famous guy points out his picture in a magazine and a connection is made. A magazine with guys in tights and guitars…I think (at that point) even the ignorant could deduce MJ’s a famous rock star.

Yea, that really sounds like a guy who had prior familiarity with Micky…

“(He)…could easily do a bit of research and come up with some details”.

Easily? And how to you suggest then he would do this? With what information available at that time? And with what extra time? Lord knows (as do I), that GRC had but a few hours with his own family in a typical week. GRC’s fixation was on scripture and little else. If, as you suggest, he was so immersed in researching Jagger, I think the family would have noticed. It’s very likely he would have asked me for some of that info, but did not.

I put forth to you the same challenge issued earlier. Find me a pattern of “prevarication” in any other speech given by GRC. You can’t find one.

So, Anon 9:46, your analysis is baseless pap. But life is all about choices…so believe it or not. Have faith…or not.

And if the truth hit you in the face, I don’t think you would accept it anyway—with or without a date--right?

Anonymous said...

Truth is consistent with facts, not contrary to them. If Mick Jagger was not on the same plane as Elder Cook from Mexico to Dallas, then Elder Cook's account is not true, regardless of whether the point (rock music is evil) is. If Mick Jagger was not on the same place as Elder Cook from Mexico to Dallas, then Elder Cook has borne false witness against Mick Jagger.

On the other hand, if it can be established that Mick Jagger was on the same flight as Elder Cook, then that goes a long way toward validating Elder Cook's account and silencing the nay-sayers.

Either way, the truth is served. I agree with other commenters here that the date that Elder Cook ascribes to the flight then allows for truth seekers to the look into whether Mick Jagger was on a flight from Mexico to Dallas on that same day.

Anonymous said...

Troy Cook argues that Elder Cook did not have the familiarity or the time to have 'immersed himself in researching' Mick Jagger's background to fabricate the story of the encounter on the plane from Mexico City to Dallas.

In looking at the BYU-I text of the speech, Elder Cook did not mention many details that would be peculiar to Mick Jagger. I glean the following as such facts from the text of the talk:

1-The rock star's name was Mick Jagger

2-Jagger is one of the most famous rock stars in the world

3-Jagger is so thin that his leg looked sickly

4-He had been in Mexico making a video

5-Jagger's picture appears in rock magazines

6-Jagger had 3 children and 3 women pregnant, one in Virginia, another in New York and a third in England

7-Jagger's song lyrics include "Do what you want. No one can tell you what to do. You're your own man. Take what you want. Pick what you want."

##1-3, 5, and 6 (to the extent #6 is correct) are the fodder of nearly every bio piece done for rock magazines on Mick Jagger--the sort of facts they suggest in journalism 101 that any reporter get. These facts could be gathered from just a few minutes reading a magazine which Elder Cook by his own account could immediately recognize as a rock magazine.

If the rock magazine that Elder Cook browsed was printed in late 1983 or early 1984, mention of Jagger having filmed a video in Mexico would have been made as well.

Jagger's children, as well documented outside the context of this forensic exercise and thus not motivated to confirm or dispel an alleged encounter with Elder Cook, are:

Karis Hunt Jagger, b. 4 Nov 1970 (mother, Marsha Hunt)

Jade Jagger, b. 21 Oct 1971 (mother, Jagger's wife at the time, Bianca Jagger)

Elizabeth Jagger, b. 2 Mar 1984 (mother, Jerry Hall, whom Jagger later married)

James Jagger, b. 28 Aug 1985 (mother, Jerry Hall, whom Jagger later married)

Georgia Jagger, b. 12 Jan 1992 (mother, Jerry Hall, Jagger's wife at the time)

Gabriel Jagger, b. 13 Dec 1997 (mother, Jerry Hall, Jagger's wife at the time)

Lucas Jagger, b. 18 May 1999 (mother, Luciana Morad, Brazilian model)

If the encounter took place--or the magazine was printed--in the era of 2 Mar 1984 to 28 Aug 1985, Jagger did indeed have 3 children. This time frame fits with Troy Cook's assertion that the encounter took place in November or December 1984.

If it occurred in December 1984, then one woman, Jerry Hall, was pregnant at the time with a child of Jagger. Not three women. And as these matters of Jagger's paternity goes, just as the 1999 birth of Lucas demonstrates, it becomes a very public matter, high amounts of money are claimed (and paid--$10,000,000 in that case), and Jagger's wife at the time, Jerry Hall, divorced over the matter. It seems highly improbable that Jagger had two other women pregnant in 1984 and neither they nor the offspring has come forward to claim their bounty from Jagger.

As for #7, the lyrics. The Rolling Stones, of which Jagger is the lead singer, have what is for them an obscure song, "I'm Free", that might come close to the lyrics Elder Cook quoted:

"I'm free to do what I want any old time...I'm free to get what I want any old time."

It seems that until Troy Cook posts an exact date--or someone else after looking over Elder Cook's diaries--we will be 'reading tea leaves' like in this post.

I suspect that it won't be long now until Troy Cook posts that date, as it was 4 Oct 2009 when he promised that he'd have the exact date of the flight in the near future, when he next visits Deseret.

If for some reason Troy Cook cannot do it, I might have to hire a student at university in Salt Lake City, Utah, to do so and send to me the results of any mentions in those diaries at the COB before 1989 that include mention of Mick Jagger, a rock musician, or a flight to Dallas or Houston from Mexico City.

Anonymous said...

Reading tea leaves? C'mon. Either Mick Jagger was or was not on the same flight as Gene Cook from Mexico City to Dallas or Houston in November or December 1984. Tro Bro believes they were.

How easy or difficult it would have been for Cook to find out background facts about Jagger and whether Cook's general reputation is for telling the truth or lies do not put Jagger on that same plane or off of it. Either Jagger was on that flight with Gene Cook or he was not.

Same too regarding what Gene Cook's motives might have been if Jagger was not on that flight.
The complexities of the human ego give rise to numerous reasons one might stretch the truth or spin a good yarn. Money is only one human motivator. There is a panoply of others.

My interest is not in besmirching Gene Cook nor in vindicating Mick Jagger. My interest is finding out if it took place. It is a fascinating tale told by Gene Cook. All the more fascinating if it is not true.

Was Mick Jagger on a plane that left Mexico City on the same date that Gene Cook (or his journals at the COB) indicates the flight took place? I don't know. Investigating that begins with Gene Cook, or his journals, revealing the exact date of that flight. Tro Bro has promised to provide that in the near future. I trust he'll let us know by the end of this or the next month what is and is not in those journals. (Tro Bro is too smart to report something from those journals that is not factually accurate, given that anyone else could later check those journals to verify such facts.)

Once an exact date is revealed, then various sources for Jagger’s location(s) on that date can then be checked. Those sources that were created before Cook (or his journals) put an exact date on the claimed Mexico City-Dallas (or -Houston) flight will be reliable for this purpose.

Anonymous said...

Whatever happened with this? Did Troy ever get back to us on the actual dates in the journal so this can be fact checked? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?

Anonymous said...

Troy Cook has not yet provided from the journal the exact date of the flight. An interesting thread asking about the date was just closed at http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/46300-gene-cook-mick-jagger-airplaine-conversation/

Troy Cook does not live in Utah, and perhaps when he wrote on October 4 that he would look up the date in the journal on his next visit to "Deseret" would not be until the Thanksgiving or Christmas holiday.

Mormanity said...

There are enough questions unanswered about the details of the encounter that I think it is not unreasonable to be puzzled by the story and wonder if something else is going on here or at least if the dates are way off. It would certainly be easier to resolve the issue if there was secondary evidence confirming that Jagger was on a flight that would fit the details of the story.

Or is it possible, for example, that some rocker wannabe was having fun pretending to be Jagger? I don't know.

I'm not saying it is just a "face demoting rumor", but it's one I have to put on hold for now.

Troy said...

Anon, taking a beat down on the Mormon Apologetics blog eh? Is this one reason for your impatience regarding a date?

It is certainly interesting that in your quest for immediate answers you are willing to accept source material from just about anyone, including Utah Lighthouse Ministries. Can’t say I blame your cynics for the red flags going off regarding your true motive(s).

Fact is, one of you got it right. I do plan to visit at Christmas. If this is an unacceptable delay, you are free to go ahead and hire your college kid.

Or would it be more to your satisfaction if I made a special trip just for you?

I understand rightly that you don’t care for “diversions” and “tea leaves”, so there is little point in my posting here until I’ve had a chance to do some research.

So rather than loitering on this blog every Sunday like buzzards waiting for carrion, how about everybody exercise a little thing called patience?

Troy said...

Mormanity, I must admit I'm a bit surprised...

Secondary evidence aside for a moment, which talks by the bretheren do you take on faith, and which ones not?

Help me understand your reasoning.

Anonymous said...

Jeff Lindsay certainly does a good job of speaking for himself. Until he does, I proffer this observation: Brother Lindsay appears to accept on faith all talks of the Brethren, as he initially embraced Elder Cook's story of meeting Mick Jagger on an airplane.

However, when the facts behind a story included in a talk are shown to be on shaky, sand-shifting ground, Brother Lindsay also appears to be able to take a step back and acknowledge that there are reasonable questions about that factual background.

Anonymous said...

Is it possible that elder gene cook could end this specualtion and tell his son via phone or email the date of the airplane trip with mr. jagger?
for my info does anyone know whether elder cook has recently given this talk, or perhaps the last time he told of his encounter with mr. jagger. given the persistence of the rolling stones in "rock" land, the story would seem to be useful as a means to warn young people of several generations, how certain rock music and stars for that matter can influence their thinking and acting.
thanx
kairos

Anonymous said...

The Rollings Stones' appeal is to people who are now if their 50s and 60s, not the 'youth' of the Church.

For the youth, the story would have to be changed to Elder Cook was seated on a plane next to Fergie of the Black Eyed Peas.

Anonymous said...

The opportune time might be now, kairos, but it is doubtful that Elder Cook would be able to put a date on the encounter without himself checking the journals. And, I for one have more confidence in what Troy Cook will say the date to be after he reviews those journals.

Anonymous said...

I think the Jagger imposter hypothesis (rocker wannabe having some fun posing as Jagger on Cook's flight) won't have legs.

The imposter would have to be a dead ringer for Jagger's looks. Cook said that the person seated next to him pointed to a picture in a rock magazine he was thumbing through and said that's "me". Not only would Cook have had that comparison, but also the images of what the real Jagger looks like from the TV special that Cook and his wife then watched on TV a few nights later. That also would have given Cook a sampling of Jagger's voice to compare against the voice of the person seated next to Cook on the plane.

There is a I-was-the-Jagger-imposter post of May 10, 2009 on a blog (http://www.myregisblog.com/2009/05/pranks-at-church.html) to this effect. However Matsby, the poster, is only 30 years old, thus would have only been 10 years old or younger at the time of the flight. So it truly was a prank posting.

Anonymous said...

Mormanity--

When Troy Cook checks Elder Cook's journals and makes photocopies of the entries he finds (which I am sure he will as verification of what he finds in them), will there be a way that Troy can upload those copied pages to this discussion for us all to see them?

Troy said...

Try not to get ahead of yourself. Or for that matter, put words in my mouth.

For while I have every intention of looking up facts, the only thing you guys have self-assuredly been clamoring for is a date. Accordingly, that is all I’m looking for.

The rest of this story you already have (or rather, you portend to be able to obtain) by means of some remarkable process. So you want a date, I’ll see what I can dig up. Anything more than this is irrelevant. I will have done what I said I would do.

And if there is any additional information deemed to be of import, then that information is to be had by those whom I can trust.

So for me, this debate is soon to be over.

Anonymous said...

"And if there is any additional information deemed to be of import, then that information is to be had by those whom I can trust." Troy's 4:49 PM, November 27, 2009 post

Trust to do what?

Anonymous said...

Merry Christmas, Troy!

Don't forget to bring us back that morsel from Deseret. You know, the exact date of the flight that Gene took the flight with Jagger from Mexico City to Texas.

Troy said...

Update:

I have been looking over the diary. Bottom line--I will need some more time.

Anonymous said...

No problem, Troy. You've always been a man of your word. Your update this evening is one more proof of it.

You will no doubt have the specific date in a reasonable time. I'll keep checking in.

Here's hoping you have a rollicking New Year's Eve, and enjoy the rest of your Christmas break before school starts back up on Monday.

Troy said...

Anon 10:29

A prosperous new year to an old friend…

May I suggest a mutual 2010 resolution? Since you seemingly know me so well, perhaps you should contact me personally-- and explain to me why you think this charade is necessary for you personally.

I have been honest with you. It’s time for you to come out of the shadows, man up, and contact me.

You have the means to do so.

Anonymous said...

The time will come, but it is not yet now. Happy New Year!

Anonymous said...

Out of curiosity, how much more time does Troy need? What dates in the diaries have already been checked? What do we know at this point? Anyone? Anyone? Troy? Anyone?

Anonymous said...

if the plane travel involving elder cook and mick jagger did not take place the impact to elder cook's credibility is enormous.
i am hoping troy can put to rest not only the date,which he says he is only committed to providing from his father's diaries, but as he peruses said dairies, compelling evidence may be brought forth of the event taking place as elder cook has portrayed it.
in this internet info real time sharing world, failure to have evidence for the event will harm the lds church's credibility as well.
time for troy's a thorough "date" investigation is certainly appropriate;my hunch is that at least one senior apostle has already started his investigation.
kairos

Anonymous said...

"Out of curiosity, how much more time does Troy need? What dates in the diaries have already been checked? What do we know at this point?"

We know very little, except that Troy has been looking over the diary and needs more time.

From Troy's prior posts, it would seem likely that he has reviewed 1984 and 1985 dates of the diaries and not found any reference to the flight with Jagger. More time is needed for Troy to pursue 'Plan B'.

Troy said...

Ghosts in the darkness…

Anon 12:06, Are my intentions still unclear? I’m not going anywhere; so allow the patient process of research to take place. I would like to “get it right” so as to “put it to rest”.

In any case, this post has been around since 2005, so what’s your hurry?

Anon 11:37, you needn’t worry about GRC and church credibility. It is convenient for the Decker’s and Tanners of the world to select one principle, one person in authority, and pick it/him apart—and then say the whole church is at risk. It’s a copout. Look to the prophet.

Questionable commentary by J.G. Kimball, P.H. Dunn, and G.P. Lee did little to damage the credibility of the church. But the work continues unimpeded, last I checked.

As for the Twelve, they wouldn’t waste their time on this issue. Only if a GA were to make statements deemed apostate might they find reason to investigate. And even if they were so inclined to do so in this case, they wouldn’t have waited 25 years.

Anon 8:02, I appreciate that you can read my mind. Fabulous. There is no plan B. If you must know, there are some minor software issues related to converting over old data. Hope to resolve issue soon. At the moment, I’m focused on 1984.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Troy, for the update.

For some reason, I think 1983 might be the year. Can't quite put my finger on why I think 1983. Just a haunch I guess.

Anonymous said...

the plot thickens- software issues to be resolved and time needed to fix the data problem.
guess i am naive- i sorta saw troy wandering over to his dad's library and pulling out a couple of journals from the shelves, perusing them, and bracketing the time frame for the alleged flight/jagger encounter.
guess we are now into scanners/database sorts/software extractions/diary-journal translations etc.
another naive scenario on my part-at Christmas time over hot chocolate: "hey dad- any chance you can tell me within a year the day you flew on the plane in mexico with mick jagger?"
if the response is "mick who?" then trouble's a brewing as the far side put's it.
kairos

Anonymous said...

Hey, Troy, just checking in. Hopefully the software issues have been figured out and conversion of the old data is coming along.

Anonymous said...

Day 26 since TroBro told us he needed more time, but didn't say how much more time. It's a computer conversion issue, we're told, but no specifics.

Each passing day makes Gene's tale grow taller. Soon it will be stretched so tall it will break and topple.

TroBro, time's running out on Gene's credibility. Prove the credits wrong. Post the actual date that the flight with Mick Jagger from Mexico City took place.

Troy said...

Anon 8:58--

You sir, who likes to accuse others because a quest for truth doesn’t meet your timetable. You sir, who accuses a person of a lie, and then says that the tale gets taller-- without any basis for making such a claim (what new information has been provided?). You sir, who attacks credibility while at the same time hides behind a cloak of anonymity.

It is you sir, who gives new meaning to the term “whining hypocrite”.

I am under no obligation to provide you details about how my research is proceeding, other than it’s going nicely. I’m not under any illusions with regard to how much time it may take. As stated before, I’m only obligated to provide one thing.

So my time is running out eh? So what is my due date professor?

Anonymous said...

Fascinating.

Troy checks in here to 'check the pulse', chafes that the extra time is being measured, but does not provide what he has promised--the exact date.

It's looking like Troy learned over the holidays that Elder Cook's diaries don't contain any entry about a flight with the Mick Jagger encounter on a flight from Mexico City.

It seems our Jeff Lindsay nailed it some time age, "Until we know more, I guess all I can say is rock on!"

Troy said...

Fascinating indeed!

I’m attacked if I allow too much time go by without an update...
I’m attacked when I do post an update...

Is there anyone left here willing to reason?

Anonymous said...

Do the diaries reveal a date for the Jagger encounter flight, or not? If so, what is the date? If not, does Elder Cook have a recollection of the date?

Anonymous said...

actually- i think troy should take wahtever time/effort he needs or can afford given job,family etc.
if he concludes finding anything definitive about the jagger encounter is impossible/too difficult given the source materials locations/availability to access/whatever then so be it.
i hope he can at some point let us know what he was able to determine or not determine.
if he finds a smoking gun, particularly if it causes problems to reveal the material, so be it.
there is a facts issue here, a truth issue and a reputation issue.
troy alone can weigh what to reveal.
as i follow this thread, i hope troy can deliver the goods and confirm his father's encounter, which then makes the truthfulness of it much more than any paul dunn story.

thanx for working on this troy!

kairos

Anonymous said...

Let the chips fall where they may. I agree. It is a matter of factual truth. There either is or is not a diary entry recording the encounter with Mick Jagger.

But it is becoming painfully evident that Troy is clutching the chips in his hands and not letting any of them fall.

He finds it more worth his time to protest here that some are anxious for the factual truth about the date of the Jagger encounter or are becoming increasingly suspicious that the diaries do not record the Jagger encounter, than simply to let us know what time periods have been reviewed and turned up nothing so far.

It is only natural to become suspicious as more and more time passes and instead of providing any information, Troy simply protests, more and more adamantly, that he's being treated unfairly when others are inquiring about where he's at in the process or are speculating about what the lack of any status reports might mean.

On a side note, I do imagine that Troy's enjoying the process of reading his father's diaries. Years ago I enjoyed a similar chore when drafting/rewriting handwritten reports prepared by my father of his travels abroad for various government agencies. At moments, it seemed I was almost there. Troy might be getting slowed down in his review of the diaries for the exact date of the Jagger encounter by reading and re-reading interesting entries that have nothing to do with Mick Jagger. In any event, it would be more beneficial for Troy's purposes here (defending his father's reputation and veracity) to report occasionally Troy's progress through the diaries (i.e., which time periods have been reviewed with no entry about Jagger), than to simply allow observers' and posters' natural speculation to conclude that nowhere in the diary is there such an entry.

Anonymous said...

So what do we know yet? Nothing, except that Troy gets testy if asked.

Anonymous said...

troy
are you searching this on your own w/o your dad's knowledge?
if yes -then why not ask him; if no then it seems he could help you pinpoint the time frame or give you detailed info on the flight etc.
i really hope you are not trying to mine this data w/o your dad's involvement. somehow i thought your dad was indisposed so he could not get the facts readily. if he is available would it be proper for someone of us to ask him via mail or email to provide the facts people seem to want to know.
if the jagger affair was so prominent as to have your dad speak of it more than a few times, then it seems he would be able to share a bit. i would also like for your dad to comment on whether he tried to contact mick jagger months or years afterwards-you know never give up on trying to bring someone into the kingdom.
sorry if this seems long, but i am just recently apprised of the story your dad told about his meeting sir mick.
kairos

Anonymous said...

Troy knows more than he's telling.

It might be that the software issues are fixed, search for the words "Jagger" and "Mick" come up empty.

It might be that there is an entry that mentions Jagger on a flight, but not quite the way the tale has been spun by Elder Cook.

It might be that the diaries include a detailed account of the Jagger account that corroborate what Elder Cook has told.

It might be that the software issues haven't been figured out yet, and Troy hasn't been able to conduct the computer searches.

Troy said...

12:54 and 9:54

You are spot on. Your analysis of the situation is refreshing. Yes, I do have a busy life. I don’t have much free time to post updates all the time, as some of you do. When I do have time to work on this, my approach to seeking factual information has been multi-faceted.

I have looked through all of the “thought lists” (not a diary) to see if there is more to glean from the story beyond the published 1989 Ricks College devotional account. There is not.

I have talked to GRC about this event in person, and plan more discussions over the phone. I want to know his recollections and feelings that are not written down. My approach to this has to be done in my own way, and tactfully so. I’m not about to jump up and down, holler, and beg information as some here suggest I do.

I have opened and read some of the journals, but not all. To be sure, there are some great recollections from Uruguay, Ecuador, and Peru. Looking at Mexico too. There is more work to be done. Now, I’m no computer guru by any means, so converting old files necessitates the use of a sibling for some of this.

So, why the extra work on my part? Since apparently I “hold all the chips”, it is only wise to tuck them away until I have strong hand to play. But alas! Looks like I just dropped one or two of them with this posting.

Anon 11:02, 10:56—Is this sufficient for the time being? I doubt it. I’m sure you will speculate something else you think I’m withholding. Fine with me…exercise that God-given first amendment. May I suggest another hobby in the meantime?

Anonymous said...

Was there a "thought list" about the Jagger encounter?

Do the thought lists bear a date when they were composed?

Anonymous said...

The only date the "thought list" has is the date the Jagger story was broadcast--11/29/88.

This does not help anyone.

Troy said...

Sorry, the last posting was mine.

Anonymous said...

i only want to help here but am naive as to how GA's put talks together in the days elder cook was "working".
did they use the legal yellowpads and scratrch out an outline, then fill in with lots of their own research,particularly specific scripture quotes or quotes from other GA's,etc-then the GA finalizes the talk and it is off to word processing,edit, finalize and present and file away.
it seems to me that elder cook, in the talks i have read by him uses a lot of stories -snow shoveling with his yound sons; a teen named raymond who did this and that etc.
now for a jagger story of the length elder cook put together, it seems that a major diary/journal entry had to be be available or the dialogue with jagger would have been sketchy. i would bet a temple recommend that most GA's have files for all talks they have given- folders with thought material, news clips, bible quotes, jokes whatever.
a GA of elder cook's stature may have had access to COB secretaries/word processing but those files in the COB would not have all the background material -that stuff would be in the possession of the writer. also GA's often give similar talks/speeches at different times to different groups-thus the need to keep old/previous material. and then the journals-where are they kept?-are they locked up,been given to a university where are they?
all this leads to digging a little deeper and asking elder cook to frame the time in which he began to think, then write about the incident.
i hope troy is successful in his efforts and his dad cooperative in a good sense.
and we can close out the saga of a mormon meets a rolling stone who is definitely "rough".

Anonymous said...

are the journal/diaries of GRC available for public view at a university,eg marriott collection uof u? or at the church office bldg in GA emeritus files? or are they in GRC home/library?
can someone/troy tell us where and who may access them like joe doe or a lds scholar,GRC family member?
i am now worried about an "18 minute gap" ala nixon watergate tape erasures by his secretary if you know what i mean.
thanx

Anonymous said...

On Sept 8, 2009, Troy wrote:

"1). Elder Cook's journals (a primary source) covering the last 30+ years of his ministry have, since his retirement, been turned over to the historical department at the COB. Why don't you go down there and ask to see the record? Any researcher worth his salt can find it.

'By the way, if you look at the last two months in 1984 you will find it in the journal verbatim, exactly the way it transpired, and in the same manner as first made public at Ricks College in 1989. The written version and the verbal account have not changed one bit since then.'

Anonymous said...

i am confused- did troy post this last comment saying the 1984 journals for the last months of that year are written exactly as the ricks 1988 speech/talk at ricks college was given?

help!!!

Anonymous said...

The post line says it was "Troy" and it seems consistent both in writing style and the apparent purposes of Troy. But I think it is for Troy to answer your question and claim the Sept 8, 2009 post as his or as someone that posted under his name.

Anonymous said...

Troy wrote the Sept 8, 2009 post out of hubris and blind confidence in the outcome, before he actually began looking at GRC's journals and 'thought lists.'

That kind of loyalty by a son is admirable, even if misplaced.

Anonymous said...

Good point. From this thread, I have confidence in Troy's integrity greater than that which I have in Elder Cook having told the truth of a Jagger encounter on a flight. It is taking Troy time coming to grips with what he's learned from Elder Cook's journals, but I would be surprised if what we eventually hear from Troy will be spinning of why there is no Jagger encounter entry.

Anonymous said...

so i understand the GRC journals are available in the COB somehwere- once Troy has identified the jagger entries, is it possible my son in SLC could somehow access those particular journals entries and make a xerox copy-just wondering?

Anonymous said...

I think that your son would be able to go to the COB, specifically to the historical department and ask to see Elder Gene R. Cook's journals. Troy's October 8 post suggests that is where they are, and that they would be available for inspection there by anyone asking.

If your son does so, perhaps the photocopies could be uploaded somewhere on the Net, and you could then post a link for us all to see.

Anonymous said...

thanx- once troy does the yeoman's work to get the date of the flight, hopefully he will identify which journal(s) have the jagger encounter details; this would allow my son to ask for specific journals to review and not have to wade thru 10 years worth- which he is not willing to do.

Anonymous said...

As each day passes with no specific date being revealed, it is looking more and more like there is no entry in Elder Gene R. Cook's journals that records the Jagger encounter.

Prior to late '88 or '89 when Elder Cook first told the Jagger encounter tale, GAs and next tier officials sufficed themselves with spinning the yarn about unnamed rock stars that were the straw men for their stories and easily outwitted in the chance encounter with a church official.

Elder Cook gave his straw man the name of a well known rock star, Mick Jagger. This made the tale all the more interesting and "real" to eager young LDS minds listening.

Perhaps the epithet to this saga can be summed up in a new appellation for GRC: "Elder Gene R. Cook, Mythical Slayer of Rock Stars."

Unfortunate son, Troy, must be agonizing over the fact there is no journal entry (and thus no specific date) to back up his father's tale.

Troy said...

2:56—Completely at peace with myself here. Contented with the fact that a resolution is near.

Interesting to note that since my last entry it looks like more of the same old speculative, tabloid pap. Give me a break.

Anonymous said...

What needs to be resolved? Is there a specific date? or is there a problem that needs resolving?

Anonymous said...

how hard is it to get into the history dept at the cob to read the GRC journals? is an appt necessary? credentials of some type? TR ? central number to call?
hours of operation particularly saturdays?
is a person monitored while searching?
are requests made in writing- like "I would like to review the journals of GRC for 1984?"
are notes allowed to be taken? can one pay a nominal fee to have copies made?

so many questions-there has got to be a church policy/regulation somewhere-anyone know where to read it?

Troy said...

8:27
To be clear: I "resolve" to bring this thing to closure soon, that's all. Whether or not you choose to believe me or not at that point is your concern.

If there are/were problems, I would have told you. The software issue is evidence of that.

9:30, I cannot answer your questions. My gut tells me that not just any Joe can walk into records dept. (remember a guy named Hoffman?)

If you need a quick "fix" however, perhaps you could call the COB public affairs dept and ask.

Anonymous said...

Troy of 6:53 PM on Feb 10, 2010: “Contented with the fact that a resolution is near.”

Troy of 10:44 PM on Feb 10, 2010: “To be clear: I 'resolve' to bring this thing to closure soon, that's all.”

That you'd do such semantic dancing less than 4 hours apart is disappointing, and dims the prospects of whether the "resolution" will be in fact be a specific date that GRC's journals reveal for the Jagger encounter or admission that those journals contain no contemporaneous entry of the Jagger encounter.

Maybe it was a dream that GRC had, like Lehi's dream. Only here, there was a great and spacious airplane.

Troy said...

11:01--
A nice fancy “spin” you’ve placed on my words. Really now, your continual reverting back to speculative nonsense says more about your character than it does mine.

And how petty juvenile is it to come after me because I post twice in a day?

Imagine, if only for a still small moment, what further gospel knowledge truths you might have if only you had the temperament for it.

Anonymous said...

troy-are you looking at a week or a month or longer before you post the "resolution" as you put it?

not pushing, justing asking :-)

thanx

Anonymous said...

Asking for a specific time frame in which there will be revealed a specific date of the Jagger flight?

"Resolution" is nigh at hand--whenever that might be.

Anonymous said...

If GRC's journals included an entry about meeting Mick Jagger on a flight from Mexico City to Texas, Troy would have found it by now and posted the specific date for the flight.

I would love to be proven wrong (i.e., Troy posts the specific date), and Troy would no doubt like to prove me wrong. But until that 'pig flies', the only reasonable conclusion for an observer is that there is no such entry. The "thought list" for the 1989 talk contains nothing more than the scratchings of a fevered imagination. Until a specific date is posted, it appears that the story GRC tells is merely a 'Gospel Truth', not a factual truth.

Anonymous said...

how old is GRC?

is he or has he published any books for the church or otherwise?

thanx

Anonymous said...

Yes, GRC has authored the following published books:

1-Raising Up a Family to the Lord

2-Receiving Answers to Our Prayers

3-Searching the Scriptures: Bringing Power to Your Personal and Family Study

4-Living by the Power of Faith

Anonymous said...

thanx for the book titles- i found his age on wiki, born in 1941 so he is relatively young;but he spent an awful lot of time as a GA ,35+ years-God bless for hanging in there that long!
that's also a bookcase full of journals if he was faithful to that endeavor on a regular basis.

btw :do any of his books contain the jagger encounter or a story/essay on the dangers of rock music to teens/young adults?

thanx

Anonymous said...

Has it been determined by troy or otherwise that GRC was an avid journal keeper,like daily entries and if so was he keeping detailed or "shorthand" type notes in his journals during the jagger story time frame which i think has been pinned down to 1984 or 1985? is that correct?

finally such an event would,at least to me, have a major impact on one's family members when GRC told it. i recall his saying in the ricks'talk that he and his family tuned in to a TV special shortly after his encounter to specifically see mick j.
my point is that anyone in the family who was journal keeping age most probably cited the story as told by dad in their own journal.
i thus recommend troy ask his mom/siblings to seek any info about the jagger affair she may have written in her own journal.
quite nicely there seems to be potential instances of corrobrative evidence for or against in family member journals.

i remember when alfred hitchcock sat in coach of an american airlines flight and upon departing we let him pass his weighty self down the row as we hummed "bu dump uh dump ti dump" his tv show's theme song. he smiled strongly.
i actually wrote that in my journal- june 30th 1968 as i returned from the vietnam war on a flight from san francisco to atlanta. but i never spoke on the plane with him nor gave a talk/discussed it except to friends later.

anon

Anonymous said...

To sum up, Troy’s posts:

7/29/09: ‘For all you doubters, this story is 100% true. This incident took place in 1985 in Mexico City while I was living there (I am his oldest son). Dad was flying first class from Mexico City to Dallas.’

8/9/09: ‘1). Elder Cook's journals (a primary source) covering the last 30+ years of his ministry have, since his retirement, been turned over to the historical department at the COB. …’

‘By the way, if you look at the last two months in 1984 you will find it in the journal verbatim, exactly the way it transpired, and in the same manner as first made public at Ricks College in 1989. The written version and the verbal account have not changed one bit since then.’

10/4/09: ‘Look, so you don’t like my timeframe. And if I am off by a couple of weeks or months, so what? It doesn’t completely validate your claim that I am wrong. In any case, am I to believe that Jagger’s web-itinerary lists everything he has done in a given week? And since when did Internet research sites become the ‘end all, be all’? Seems to me that the basis of this line of reasoning is on shaky ground...

‘That’s why the diary is so pertinent, right? (And I have already told you where to find it). No, I don’t have the journal in front of me to quote you a date, since I don’t live in Deseret. I’ll give you credit though. I’m motivated to go pull the official record again the next time I visit. Upshot-- I should have what you are asking for in the near future.’

11/27/09: ‘For while I have every intention of looking up facts, the only thing you guys have self-assuredly been clamoring for is a date. Accordingly, that is all I’m looking for.

‘… So you want a date, I’ll see what I can dig up. Anything more than this is irrelevant. I will have done what I said I would do.

‘And if there is any additional information deemed to be of import, then that information is to be had by those whom I can trust.

‘So for me, this debate is soon to be over.’

11/31/09: ‘Update:

‘I have been looking over the diary. Bottom line--I will need some more time.’

1/12/10: ‘Are my intentions still unclear? I’m not going anywhere; so allow the patient process of research to take place. I would like to ‘get it right’ so as to ‘put it to rest’.’

1/26/10: ‘I am under no obligation to provide you details about how my research is proceeding, other than it’s going nicely. I’m not under any illusions with regard to how much time it may take. As stated before, I’m only obligated to provide one thing.’

1/27/10: ‘I’m attacked if I allow too much time go by without an update...
I’m attacked when I do post an update...’

1/30/10: ‘I do have a busy life. ... When I do have time to work on this, my approach to seeking factual information has been multi-faceted.

‘I have looked through all of the ‘thought lists’ (not a diary) to see if there is more to glean from the story beyond the published 1989 Ricks College devotional account. There is not.

‘I have talked to GRC about this event in person, and plan more discussions over the phone. I want to know his recollections and feelings that are not written down. My approach to this has to be done in my own way, and tactfully so.

‘I have opened and read some of the journals, but not all. To be sure, there are some great recollections … . Looking at Mexico too. There is more work to be done. Now, I’m no computer guru by any means, so converting old files necessitates the use of a sibling for some of this.

‘So, why the extra work on my part? Since apparently I ‘hold all the chips’, it is only wise to tuck them away until I have strong hand to play.’

2/10/10: ‘Completely at peace with myself here. Contented with the fact that a resolution is near.’

Later on 2/10/10: ‘To be clear: I ‘resolve’ to bring this thing to closure soon, that's all. Whether or not you choose to believe me or not at that point is your concern.

‘If there are/were problems, I would have told you. The software issue is evidence of that.’

Troy said...

10:04,

Not sure what the intention is with summary quotes. Maybe just boredom?

I am finished with all research. I have a date. I need a few days to write up my findings.

Anonymous said...

Probably just boredom. But with your announcement that you have a date, it kind of has the effect of a drum roll before you reveal the date and your findings in the next few days.

Anonymous said...

thanx for your efforts troy- i for one am wanting to get this closed.

Troy said...

This strange odyssey has concluded. Let me say first what an enlightening study in psychology this has been. And along the way, I have learned quite a bit about myself too. Some of you have been patient with me while others not. Some level headed, some not. One of you a former acquaintance, another one an apparent sophist, and yet another schooled in the language of the ivory tower. Or could it be that perhaps all of you are one in the same? In any case, sadly, our back and forth didn’t much bode well where trust building could have been an asset.

So thanks, those of you willing to accept it. You have taught me more about the nature of man than I thought possible. Here’s to the good, the bad, and the ugly.

But I am not without my faults too—I’ll readily admit to them here. If this makes me a target, then cast a stone. I’ve accomplished what I said I would do. You will always know where I stand. Nevertheless, I’m expecting a predictable response. I may not change any minds here, but I could be wrong…someone might just surprise me.

I digress…

First, the process used here. To begin with, one of my goals was to find out as much as I could independently. This was often difficult. I started looking at 1985 and then worked backwards to 1983. Next, I asked other family members if they had any memories of the MJ encounter. Finally, I asked my father to go into his journals and find for me the date in question, and give me some recollections. Twice over several months I looked at the online journal and other documentation at home, on my own. On other occasions, phone calls were made. I had my answer (date) in January, and that date was personally verified to me by GRC on February 16.

First, what you wanted-- straight from the journal. The MJ /GRC encounter happened on October 30, 1983. This was a Sunday. GRC was returning from a stake conference in Mexico City. From here, back to SLC via Dallas. The conference was in the morning, the flight in the afternoon. MJ was alone, he had no entourage.

All of the pertinent information from the 1989 Ricks devotional address was included in the diary (minus intro’s, the importance of good music section, and closing statements, etc.), In addition, quite a few personal feelings on the encounter were written down at length, but I will not include them here. They are important only to me (and it isn’t what you asked for). However, some other details NOT included in the devotional address but included in the journal are the following:

MJ stated that he could make a video at Churubusco for about $100K, as opposed to $300K, if he were to make a video in the U.S.

MJ drank a lot of champagne to the point of inebriation. As a consequence, he started to talk very loudly.

MJ stated that he “…did not believe in any consequences, or a God”.

Two statements made in the devotional address, but with greater clarity were these:
He (MJ) stated, (direct quote) “Rock music was designed to promote sex to a degree among the people”.

He (MJ) stated that, “… he had two missionaries in England teach him about Mormonism”. (The two missionaries who taught Jagger wrote to GRC some years later and confirmed this statement). In the letters, both men stated that they in fact did teach him some discussions). There is no mention of these elder’s names.

Troy said...

Now, allow me to respond to the date “time frame” in question. Yes, I (and another sibling) was apparently off by a whole year, but I knew that this encounter took place in the fall season, and was right about that. I was told it was soon after gen. conference. This was back before I began the process of journal searching. Therefore, if you are looking for a mea culpa on that, then I guess you have one. Anyway, I believe my “year error” (1984) was due to the following reasons:

In 1983 I was not living with my family at all, and did not first hear about the encounter until my return in 1984. It was fresh in my mind after my return.

It did not seem logical to me that GRC would travel the great distances from SLC- Mexico most weekends, beginning in 1983 until the whole family finally moved to Mexico City in 1985. This seemed to me too long a time span to travel that far, without the family actually living closer to the area HQ. But it was so.

One of you posted the following on October 6, 2009:

831200A December: US TV (MTV) ‘Uncovered’. Report on the making of the ‘Undercover Of The Night’-video, incl.
- interview with MJ by J.J. Jackson (Mexico City 10/83)
- interview with KR by J. J. Jackson (Mexico City 10/83)
- interview with Julien Temple by J.J. Jackson (Mexico City 10/83)

”So it would appear that if the event reported by Elder Cook took place, it did either incident to the shooting of the videos in late October 1983 for Undercover of the Night or late January 1984 for Too Much Blood and She Was Hot”.

So, October 30, 1983—You may be thinking: “How convenient”. Perhaps it appears that way, but I’m 100% this time. I saw the date written down myself, including the additional details, and the same entry was later verified by GRC while reading it back to me. No spin here—just the truth.

All the chips are down. The ball is in your court. Work your magic and let’s see where you place Jagger on the 30th.

Anonymous said...

Thank you, Troy, for your posting the date and the explanatory text that you have.

The anonymous posters in this thread since last July are not all one and the same person. I can attest to there being at least two, as I have anonymously posted and I have not been the poster of all the anonymous posts. Whether there are just two anonymous posters (or more), I could not say.

As for me, the fact of "1985" off of memory, or even "November or December 1984" with a bit refinement but yet primarily off memory is of no importance that you have identified the date, with the benefit of the journals and your conversations with GRC, to be October 30, 1983. Memory conflates events and time frames, particularly when dealing with more than 20 years.

I appreciate that in addition to knowing that there is a specific date, that there is a detailed journal entry by GRC which lends more credence to details than if GRC had been trying to dredge them up from a 5 or 6 year memory only when preparing the "thought list" for the event.

It is fortunate in this quest for the factual truth that you, GRC's son, have had access to a known source for the specific date information, his journals. Now with that specific date information, a meaningful attempt can now be made to try to pinpoint Jagger's whereabouts on that specific date. I don't know that Jagger keeps a journal, and not being his son, access by me would be doubtful at best. I do however plan to request through Jagger's publicist whether he has any sort of journal or log, and for access.

That will not be the only place that I search for verification on the other end of this story. I will be in contact with the studio in Mexico, contacting publicists for the other members of the Rolling Stones regarding schedules any might have for that time frame, and contacting the publicist for the producer of the video for production notes.

I will also be searching the internet.

I am sure you can appreciate that the task on this end has a broader scope in that there does not come to mind a single, ready source to check for verification. I invite any other readers/posters in this thread to post their suggestions for possible Jagger leads to check out and/or checking them out and reporting back.

Again, thank you, Troy, for providing the date.

Anonymous said...

off the top of my head, i cannot see GRC waiting 5 years to come up with a blockbuster talk on the jagger encounter. reading grc's talks, he like paul dunn uses lots of stories "i will mention a young man namedXXX or sister WWWWW i recently spoke to" etc; no way he would wait 5 years to get on the front pages with a mick jagger story!!

why it would take 3 months to get the info troy provides is either being extra cautious or some spinning and checking on jagger info on the internet.
no way do i beileve grc held the type of conversation he reported in the ricks talk- if it happened that way, he should get down on his knees ask God to forgive him for being an arrogant mormon instead of a humble disciple.
btw if Jesus had been seated for 2 1/2 hours next to jagger or cook neither would have been the same!!

there is more to this than given by troy and guess what the truth, the whole truth will come out.
now i hope those journals for oct -nov 1983 dont suddenly have pages missing.

Anonymous said...

there is no mick jagger tv special from oct 83 thru all of 1984. so what mick jagger tv special did grc and his wife watch(as reported in the ricks 1988 talk) that turned them off to mj-did not happen!!

Anonymous said...

I think two things are in order first.

One is to try to verify Jagger's whereabouts on October 30, 1983.

Second would be to have someone go to the COB in SLC, the Historical Department, and ask to look at GRC's journals for October 30, 1983, and then make a copy of the complete entry to post on the internet. (Interestingly, Troy mentioned that GRC's journals were online, but that would likely take some kind of password access.)

Only after this groundwork is established should we begin drawing conclusions.

Anonymous said...

can troy verify the actual location of the 1983 oct-dec etc journals, not transcribed ones?- i would guess grc holds those at home perhaps for personal reasons or has or will give them to byu or some other institution.
thus the question-where are the the holographic journals and can they be accessed moderately easily?

if the hand written journals are not available where are the transcribed ones and how can they be accessed?

Anonymous said...

Troy,

The first response worth noting that I have received from an unofficial Rolling Stones chronographer is positive for Jagger perhaps having been on a flight from Mexico City to Dallas on 10/30/1983:

"the date and the destination of the flight makes sense. After shooting the video, Jagger probably reunited with Jerry [Hall],who comes from Mesquite (near Dallas), Texas and then they flew to Europe. The dates from the video shoot [Oct 26-30, 1983] are most probably exact, as they were originally reported at the time from [a] very reliable" source.

I will report more as I discover it.

Anonymous said...

By the way, Troy, did GRC's journal specify the LDS stake that was having its conference that GRC was returning from on October 30, 1983?

Anonymous said...

Another update, this time from the publisher and principal writer of the Rolling Stones' official fan magazine, Beggars Banquet:

"Yes, I did report in Volume 2, Number 1 of Beggars Banquet that Mick and Keith were in Mexico City during that time (Oct 26-30, 1983). It's not out of the realm of possibility that Mick might've next gone to Dallas, being that Jerry Hall's family is there, but I have no recollection of it. I did write that Mick and Jerry went to Paris (and then London) after Mexico City, but it's possible they took a quick detour to Dallas that I didn't report on.

"If it's in my notes from 26+ years ago, I unfortunately can't locate them right now. (But knowing my penchant for details, I probably wold have included such a detour in my reportage.) Point being, I can't confirm or deny that he was on that flight. Wish I had something definitive for you."

Troy said...

Thanks for the updates. On a future visit, I will try to get the stake conference in question.

Anon 4:25, We have been down this road before. The original journal now belongs to the church. A second digitized copy is at the Cook home.

Anonymous said...

Here's another response:
*******
\I do not know of any shooting log or journal or anything else that definitively documents Mick's movements on October 30th 1983. My expertise simply does not extend to minute details such as this - indeed, it seems to me that only Mick and the airline personnel would know! I have cross-checked the info you found on timeisonourside.com with several other sources and I didn't find anything different of note.

But here are a few observations:

I find it astounding that in my 65+ books on the Stones, and all the web and magazine articles and countless interviews I have read, I have never run across this story. Seems to me that, if he was that inebriated and loud, a fellow passenger or a flight attendant might have told a story to corroborate this.

I find it even more unbelievable that Mick would not only travel commercially, but without an assistant, minder or bodyguard. The Stones, and Mick in particular, have always been a bit paranoid about their safety. And especially after their dear friend John Lennon was shot in 1980. Lennon's death really shook them up, thus I find it incomprehensible that Mick would travel as such.

If Mick supposedly had 3 women pregnant at the same time, where are these children - aside from Elizabeth Jagger? Logic dictates that we would have heard about them - after all, any woman having Mick's baby is guaranteed some BIG bucks and plenty of media attention.

I simply cannot fathom Mick entering into any discussion with a stranger on a plane, let alone arguing and stating their music was calculated to drive kids to sex, thereby making more money for the Stones.

Mick has been a tee-totaler and health nut for MANY years. Whether it extends back to the 80's, I'm not sure. Also, I checked and found out the flight time from Mexico City to Dallas is 2:30 hours - I find it difficult to believe that Mick got THAT drunk on champagne in that amount of time.


This is all based on my "knowledge" of them - I do not know them personally. It all sounds so uncharacteristic, and frankly ridiculous! But it begs the question, why would this Mormon leader go to the trouble of making something like this up? With JUST enough vague details that could make it plausible?

Troy said...

Anon 7:57

Some other plausible ways of looking at this…

“I find it even more unbelievable that Mick would not only travel commercially, but without an assistant, minder or bodyguard”.

I have witnessed celebs traveling solo in first class on several occasions. It does not seem unrealistic to assume that many of these people feel quite safe doing so, especially in first class. It is, however, entirely possible that MJ did have an assistant close by-- perhaps sitting behind or across, who didn’t perceive any kind of “intrusion”, and therefore did not make himself known.

From what I have read, 1983 was about the time that MJ was looking to work solo. As for a traveling companion, he was not on the best of terms with Richards.

“Seems to me that, if he was that inebriated and loud, a fellow passenger or a flight attendant might have told a story to corroborate this”.

Not necessarily. In all of my travels I notice most folks just minding their own business (including airline personnel). If somebody happened to be speaking loudly (pre-9/11 of course), I think I would have ignored it. In any case, it is possible that MJ dressed in such a fashion so as to minimize his presence. Many celebs do this.

“I simply cannot fathom Mick entering into any discussion with a stranger on a plane…”

I have witnessed a few drunks--mostly in third world countries-- who without exception suddenly became my “best friend” or “worst enemy”. So too, I’ve had the pleasure of conversing with “buzzed” individuals on occasion who, while not knowing me, recounted their misfortunes. They certainly didn’t shy away from their opinions of me or that of my religion.

It is quite possible that MJ boarded the plane already “buzzed”.

“…Logic dictates that we would have heard about them… [The children] after all, any woman having Mick's baby is guaranteed some BIG bucks and plenty of media attention”.

Logic does NOT dictate that we would have heard about several other children. If MJ was with Jerry Hall at the time, he very well could have paid “hush money” or for worse. According to Hall, “Mick was very unfaithful”. Not surprising, given that Mick would not acknowledge his own progeny from a very desperate Luciana Gimenez—at least until a DNA test was conducted in conjunction with a legal monetary settlement.

Speculation-- is it possible that an inebriated MJ “spilled the beans” as to “other women” on this flight?

Let’s not kid ourselves. Mick had every reason to hide his affairs, or pregnant girlfriends for that matter. Under the table deals are cut all the time.

I for one, think it naïve to conclude that MJ sired only seven known children. It is my opinion though, that he is quite a bit more skilled at hiding his liaisons than, let’s say, John Edwards.

So why would GRC go to all the trouble? A good question…

The reason is because it is ALL quite plausible and really did happen. There were lessons learned here worth conveying to the youth. I’ll say it again that GRC had no other motives. He had no interest in rock and roll, time spent researching, hidden agendas, book deals, fame, ego, nada.

For what it’s worth.

Anonymous said...

Let’s not kid ourselves.

Anonymous said...

Seems like troy has become quite the mick jagger expert, implying along the way mj's drunken state since troy has in his 'travels' encountered enought drunks to confirm his insinuation.
now the key question why would grc lecture a drunken mj about religion and mj's music, being quite the defender of not only the lds church but all the teens' susceptibility to sex inducing music?

does not add up that this encounter took place no matter how troy spins it and how many bom's he or his dad swear on.

one tiny glitch-troy tell us what the journals says about that tv special of mick's your dad watched in 1983 and about that down on the knees fhe when rolling stones music was banned forever from the cook home, but perhaps not the cook's car radio.

we are all ears!!

skeptic

Snowboard-Ninja said...

I doubt the guy made up the story, possibly fabricated it a bit. I think Mick probably was joking, he has always said "It was never about the money". If he was lying to the public to gain attention, he would have kept to his story. I think, if the event did in fact happen - Mick probably was joking around or irritated by the man.

Anonymous said...

The date of the encounter with Elder Cook is given in this thread as 10/30/1983. Here's an interview Jagger gave on 11/14/1983: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TiVqxZoIFg&feature=related

It gives a flavor of the Jagger of the time frame.

Anonymous said...

As of October 30, 1983, Jagger's picture had not been on the cover of a magazine for 21 months (January 1982 Creem). It seems odd that the airline would have had a 21 month old copy of Creem on the plane. It seems odd that anyone, including Jagger, might be carrying around a 21 month old magazine issue, even if he was pictured on the cover. The next time his mug appeared on the cover of a magazine was November 24, 1983 Rolling Stone.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001396/publicity

Anonymous said...

Here's an October 1, 1983 interview for the King Biscuit Flower Hour

http://www.wolfgangsvault.com/mick-jagger/concerts/interview-october-01-1983.html

Troy said...

From the original GRC talk:

“…And he OPENED UP the magazine and pointed to his picture, and then I knew finally who he was.”

So where does it state anywhere that Mick was pointing to himself on the front cover?

As for the You Tube video—It’s interesting that Mick refers to (the Stones) as “vulgar”.

I’ll second that view.

Anonymous said...

Someone that is boasting on 10/30/83 to a religious stranger on an airplane that the Stones' music is designed to drive the kids to sex is being, but 2 weeks later is interviewed on TV where he has a chance to self-promote and he's dismissive about the Stones' music as 'vulgar.' Makes sense to me.

Anonymous said...

That June 22 post lends support for the idea that if the encounter took place, Jagger was pulling Cook's chain. Jagger just plays the devil's advocate to get a rise out of his audience. He told Cook that the Stones' music is designed to drive the kids to sex, merely to drive Cook crazy. Similarly, Jagger told the TV reporter two weeks later he thought the Stones are vulgar, to get a rise out of the reporter or his viewers. That is, Jagger might have been in a mode of saying things, not because they are necessarily true but to get a reaction from the listener.

Anonymous said...

i am tring to find if grc left a
note in his journal of that fhe in which the cook family swore off of jagger and his ilk or time and eternity.
also that tv special cook and his wife watched the friday or so after his encounter with mick appears to be another pesky little problem which if written about in the journals would corroborate elder cook's story.
open the journal and let's find out troy!!

very skeptical!!!!

Anonymous said...

GRC told the tale several times about having sat next to and had a conversation with Mick Jagger on a plane from Mexico City to Texas, some years prior to late 1988 when the tale was first told.

MJ has not told of the encounter publicly. In fact, his publicist has privately denied that the encounter took place.

Ergo, the hunt to verify or dispel the story. Without the date from GRC, to attempt verification one would have to hunt down where Jagger was every day in a multi-year period. For example, if it could be demonstrated that MJ was not on a flight from Mexico City to Texas anytime during January and February 1985, that does not mean he might not have been in October 1984. There would be an endless game of hunting down the absence of MJ on such a flight during a period of time, only for the 'goalposts to be moved' and another time frame proposed.

GRC's Troy entered the picture and after about 4 months from first promising, delivered handsomely on his promise on February 21, 2010 in a post here of 11:09 AM. Kudos to Troy.

The efforts at verification were aided considerably by Troy's efforts to ascertain and disclose the exact date that GRC's journals give for the date of the encounter as October 30, 1983.

Having the date from Troy has narrowed down the verification effort considerably. Rather than have to hunt down where Jagger was every day in a multi-year period, verification was aided considerably by Troy's efforts to ascertain and disclose the exact date that GRC's journals give for the date of the encounter as October 30, 1983.

It has now been 4 months+ since Troy revealed the date as October 30, 1983. At best there have been nibbles around the edges of where Jagger was, what his persona was giving off in a relatively tight time frame, etc.

It appears that in March 2010, some considerable effort was made by some anonymous posters reporting their efforts here. But in more than 4 months, nothing has been revealed.

It appears that no one has even been able to identify a definitive source to seek out. MJ has not, apparently, kept a journal himself of which the public is aware.

It appears that efforts to verify the story may be stagnating. It might help if someone reading this and who lives in or near Salt Lake City could contact the Church headquarters--I believe Troy said the Historical Department--and ask to GRC's journals for October and November 1983, and then post the journal entry of 10/30/1983 ver batim and any related mentions in the days and weeks after.

The exact language could then be passed along to MJ's publicist and a comment requested.

Does anyone live in Salt Lake City and have the ability to do this chore?

Anonymous said...

GRC told the tale several times about having sat next to and had a conversation with Mick Jagger on a plane from Mexico City to Texas, some years prior to late 1988 when the tale was first told.

MJ has not told of the encounter publicly. In fact, his publicist has privately denied that the encounter took place.

Ergo, the hunt to verify or dispel the story. Without the date from GRC, to attempt verification one would have to hunt down where Jagger was every day in a multi-year period. For example, if it could be demonstrated that MJ was not on a flight from Mexico City to Texas anytime during January and February 1985, that does not mean he might not have been in October 1984. There would be an endless game of hunting down the absence of MJ on such a flight during a period of time, only for the 'goalposts to be moved' and another time frame proposed.

GRC's Troy entered the picture and after about 4 months from first promising, delivered handsomely on his promise on February 21, 2010 in a post here of 11:09 AM. Kudos to Troy.

The efforts at verification were aided considerably by Troy's efforts to ascertain and disclose the exact date that GRC's journals give for the date of the encounter as October 30, 1983.

Having the date from Troy has narrowed down the verification effort considerably. Rather than have to hunt down where Jagger was every day in a multi-year period, verification was aided considerably by Troy's efforts to ascertain and disclose the exact date that GRC's journals give for the date of the encounter as October 30, 1983.

It has now been 4 months+ since Troy revealed the date as October 30, 1983. At best there have been nibbles around the edges of where Jagger was, what his persona was giving off in a relatively tight time frame, etc.

It appears that in March 2010, some considerable effort was made by some anonymous posters reporting their efforts here. But in more than 4 months, nothing has been revealed.

It appears that no one has even been able to identify a definitive source to seek out. MJ has not, apparently, kept a journal himself of which the public is aware.

It appears that efforts to verify the story may be stagnating. It might help if someone reading this and who lives in or near Salt Lake City could contact the Church headquarters--I believe Troy said the Historical Department--and ask to GRC's journals for October and November 1983, and then post the journal entry of 10/30/1983 ver batim and any related mentions in the days and weeks after.

The exact language could then be passed along to MJ's publicist and a comment requested.

Does anyone live in Salt Lake City and have the ability to do this chore?

Anonymous said...

Pt 1: GRC told the tale several times about having sat next to and had a conversation with Mick Jagger on a plane from Mexico City to Texas, some years prior to late 1988 when the tale was first told.

MJ has not told of the encounter publicly. In fact, his publicist has privately denied that the encounter took place.

Ergo, the hunt to verify or dispel the story. Without the date from GRC, to attempt verification one would have to hunt down where Jagger was every day in a multi-year period. For example, if it could be demonstrated that MJ was not on a flight from Mexico City to Texas anytime during January and February 1985, that does not mean he might not have been in October 1984. There would be an endless game of hunting down the absence of MJ on such a flight during a period of time, only for the 'goalposts to be moved' and another time frame proposed.

GRC's Troy entered the picture and after about 4 months from first promising, delivered handsomely on his promise on February 21, 2010 in a post here of 11:09 AM. Kudos to Troy.

The efforts at verification were aided considerably by Troy's efforts to ascertain and disclose the exact date that GRC's journals give for the date of the encounter as October 30, 1983.

Having the date from Troy has narrowed down the verification effort considerably. Rather than have to hunt down where Jagger was every day in a multi-year period, verification was aided considerably by Troy's efforts to ascertain and disclose the exact date that GRC's journals give for the date of the encounter as October 30, 1983.

It has now been 4 months+ since Troy revealed the date as October 30, 1983. At best there have been nibbles around the edges of where Jagger was, what his persona was giving off in a relatively tight time frame, etc.

It appears that in March 2010, some considerable effort was made by some anonymous posters reporting their efforts here. But in more than 4 months, nothing has been revealed.

It appears that no one has even been able to identify a definitive source to seek out. MJ has not, apparently, kept a journal himself of which the public is aware.

It appears that efforts to verify the story may be stagnating. It might help if someone reading this and who lives in or near Salt Lake City could contact the Church headquarters--I believe Troy said the Historical Department--and ask to GRC's journals for October and November 1983, and then post the journal entry of 10/30/1983 ver batim and any related mentions in the days and weeks after.

The exact language could then be passed along to MJ's publicist and a comment requested.

Does anyone live in Salt Lake City and have the ability to do this chore?

Anonymous said...

Pt 1: GRC told the tale several times about having sat next to and had a conversation with Mick Jagger on a plane from Mexico City to Texas, some years prior to late 1988 when the tale was first told.

MJ has not told of the encounter publicly. In fact, his publicist has privately denied that the encounter took place.

Ergo, the hunt to verify or dispel the story. Without the date from GRC, to attempt verification one would have to hunt down where Jagger was every day in a multi-year period. For example, if it could be demonstrated that MJ was not on a flight from Mexico City to Texas anytime during January and February 1985, that does not mean he might not have been in October 1984. There would be an endless game of hunting down the absence of MJ on such a flight during a period of time, only for the 'goalposts to be moved' and another time frame proposed.

GRC's Troy entered the picture and after about 4 months from first promising, delivered handsomely on his promise on February 21, 2010 in a post here of 11:09 AM. Kudos to Troy.

The efforts at verification were aided considerably by Troy's efforts to ascertain and disclose the exact date that GRC's journals give for the date of the encounter as October 30, 1983.

Anonymous said...

Part 2-Having the date from Troy has narrowed down the verification effort considerably. Rather than have to hunt down where Jagger was every day in a multi-year period, verification was aided considerably by Troy's efforts to ascertain and disclose the exact date that GRC's journals give for the date of the encounter as October 30, 1983.

It has now been 4 months+ since Troy revealed the date as October 30, 1983. At best there have been nibbles around the edges of where Jagger was, what his persona was giving off in a relatively tight time frame, etc.

It appears that in March 2010, some considerable effort was made by some anonymous posters reporting their efforts here. But in more than 4 months, nothing has been revealed.

It appears that no one has even been able to identify a definitive source to seek out. MJ has not, apparently, kept a journal himself of which the public is aware.

It appears that efforts to verify the story may be stagnating. It might help if someone reading this and who lives in or near Salt Lake City could contact the Church headquarters--I believe Troy said the Historical Department--and ask to GRC's journals for October and November 1983, and then post the journal entry of 10/30/1983 ver batim and any related mentions in the days and weeks after.

The exact language could then be passed along to MJ's publicist and a comment requested.

Does anyone live in Salt Lake City and have the ability to do this chore?

It has now been 4 months+ since Troy revealed the date as October 30, 1983. At best there have been nibbles around the edges of where Jagger was, what his persona was giving off in a relatively tight time frame, etc.

It appears that in March 2010, some considerable effort was made by some anonymous posters reporting their efforts here. But in more than 4 months, nothing has been revealed.

It appears that no one has even been able to identify a definitive source to seek out. MJ has not, apparently, kept a journal himself of which the public is aware.

It appears that efforts to verify the story may be stagnating. It might help if someone reading this and who lives in or near Salt Lake City could contact the Church headquarters--I believe Troy said the Historical Department--and ask to GRC's journals for October and November 1983, and then post the journal entry of 10/30/1983 ver batim and any related mentions in the days and weeks after.

The exact language could then be passed along to MJ's publicist and a comment requested.

Does anyone live in Salt Lake City and have the ability to do this chore?

Troy said...

Ditto--

It has been 4+ months with no real effort made towards verifying the information I made public on this blog. The one exception being the anonymous poster on Feb. 25, 2010 who I believe made a good faith effort to connect the dots, but we have heard little else since then.

When you contrast the number of postings from the first four months to the last four, it’s quite telling. What it reveals is that for the most part there is little interest in getting at the truth by putting forth the required due diligence to substantiate my claim of Oct. 30 1983.

To be fair, I have given those who questioned me as much time as they gave me…and what have they produced? Knee-jerk reactions like the posters on Feb. 21, or complete fabrications on June 21. One of you said this story does not add up no matter how I try to “spin it”. If that’s the case, do your homework and prove me wrong with primary source facts, not fantasies.

Only 8 months ago your vocabulary was brimming with confidence. Give us a date! You said, we will do the rest! Uh huh…

So, I redundantly implore you: how hard is it to visit the COB Historical and ask to see a book?

If on the other hand, you have a vital hand to show, then show it.

Anonymous said...

troy- are you satisied in your mind and heart that all you have to do is give a date? is that all that is in your dad's journal? to corroborate the date, what about journal entries on the amily home evening and the tv special?
why play hard to get; i you have more give more.

and why the hell did it take you 4 months to get the date? do some reverse engineering did you?

guess what the truth will come out no matter howhard you play to keep the lid on.

a

Troy said...

The literate person who has read my past statements wouldn’t be asking why it took four months. By the same token, they might even take the time to spell check their own comments…

You want corroboration without first proofing what’s in the diary for Oct. 30? That’s backwards and lazy my friend.

“guess what the truth will come out no matter howhard you play to keep the lid on”.

I welcome the truth from various fronts. Yep, I’ll stand before God someday at peace with this. As will you. So if you want your “truth”, go check the diary and verify it. Read on and you will find the FHE write up too.

Engineering? Playing games? Not happening here.

I have no more to give, so don’t waste my time with baseless accusations.

Conspiracy-minded fool.

Anonymous said...

"conspiracy minded fool"-troy to anon several days ago

whether true or not strong words by the provoker and provokee are condemned by Jesus in matthew 5:22.
be that as it may here is what elder gene r cook says in his talk about his alleged encounter with MJ
"In our FHE that night(october 30, 1983 which is a sunday)"we made a commitment as a family that we never ever would allow any of that kind of music in our home-not ever"
i guess after a long sunday flight following stake conference(usually over by noon),and a 2plus hour encounter with mj plus an additonal flight from texas to slc, it was time for a special FHE to go over the sinfulness of rolling stones music with his family.
then later in the week after committing he and his family to "never ever allowing" mj kinda music in his home, he and mrs cook turned on the tv to watch an mj special. why watch mj if you have committed otherwise?

conspiracy minded fool
troy-how about scanning/posting a grc journal page or two just to help those who still do not believe?

conspiracy minded fool

Troy said...

Still no word from the “give me the truth at all costs” crowd…

And as yet, nobody willing to verify the primary source held at 50 E. N. Temple.

Pathetic.

So which is it? Too lazy to step away from the PC, or too frightened of church security?

Or maybe this is nothing more than a few old friends (Ute fans?) with an axe to grind.

Merry Christmas all.

Anonymous said...

mick is around ??? or "somebody" "kill him" ?!

Anonymous said...

troy

new year request!!

can you give me an estimate on when,year ??, your dad initially developed and used this story as he traveled to firesides, devotionals etc as a GA?

thanx- if it is too difficult to research, that is ok as well.
also what is located at 50n temple st that you alluded to in a previous post? i am not in utah.

seeker

Anonymous said...

Seeker,

If you look over all of the past posts I think you will find the answers to all of your questions.

peace

Anonymous said...

that's a lot of posts;so perhaps someone could tell me what church org/activity is at 50 n temple- i may have an opportunity to be there in april conf. time and go there if it is open for searching thru emeritus ga, like elder grc's journals.
just asking!

seeker

Troy said...

The Church History Library is located north of the Church Office Building and East of the Conference Center.

Ask for the GRC journal there.

Go Knock yourself out seeker. Since nobody else seems capable of asking for it, you might be the first!

Anonymous said...

thanx-i appreciate the info!

seeker

Anonymous said...

troy- i will be in slc in 2 weeks or so.
at the library- are any type of credentials required to see the journals? and are the journals the originals or transcribed materials from the originals?

thanx

seeker

Troy said...

The original copy is at the historical department. A transcribed version resides with the author.

I don't know what credential, if any, is needed for research. I have not had a reason to go there. Perhaps you should call first.

Anonymous said...

I more stumbled across this and then it got me curious. I was curious if this was true or he made this up since it was one of the stories told to me as a kid. In looking, the only definitive way to tell would be if Mick commented. But in look, I can not find any record of Mick taking commercial airlines. I have found many references to both his Rolling stones private plane and charters by a company called Blue Line. Both pictures and news/posts of such. So for sure he used private methods of transportation so I would go with this didn't happen until something further comes to light.

Anonymous said...

troy, elder cook's son, has said he has extracted the date of the cook-jagger encounter from elder cook's journals which are on file in the church somewhere. so read a few posts from last fall till spring for troy's response. unfortuntely there has been no second witness to review the journals and verify. the date given is a sunday on which elder cook was returning to slc from a mexican stake conference. there are still major questions, the primary one is if the encounter took place how much did elder cook embellish the account ala paul dunn to make it such a profound teaching tool.
the jury is still out-your mileage may vary!!

Troy said...

Anon June 22: you continue to promote the lie that there was embellishment in Elder Cook’s story… yet you can’t seem to bring forward any other evidence from other talks given by Elder Cook that shows a pattern of embellishment. This was not the case with Elder Dunn’s talks. The Jagger story stands on it’s own merits, no help needed.

Yes, it is unfortunate that no one posting here hasn’t made an effort to see the record despite all of the rhetoric to that effect. As I have pointed out, the journal is held at the Church History Department, not just “somewhere”.

So amigo, if you cannot at a minimum ask to see the record in order to support your claim, perhaps it is time for you to fall on your sword.

Anonymous said...

Anyone reading or listening to grc's talk of his encounter with jagger will recognize embellishments- for instance cook is totally in control of the conversation with one of the rock stars adored by millions, exhorting mick here, pontificating there,and bearing his testimony that would be,if true ,more powerful than st. paul with Festus. And of course cook can do that because we only have, and he knows it HIS SIDE OF THE STORY-no corroboration from mick who according to cook was drunk( what an unkind thing for cook to relate to thousands of college students) on champagne.
the only loser is cook who will see that non-episode rerun in front of Jesus as cook accounts for who he was and what he did as a christian as we all must.

btw-that pesky little detail of having fhe when he returned to slc on sunday night still bothers me- maybe it should you as well.
my sword is in its sheath.

Troy said...

I realize it must be very hard on you living hundreds of miles from SLC in order to corroborate what I stated in my last post. Could be part of the reason you continue to straw grasp a la ad hominem?

It’s remarkable how you chastise for relating the “unkind” truth about Jagger’s condition at the time, but you have no problem calling another a “loser”. Hmmm.

And you base your comment “anyone reading or listening to (his) talks will recognize embellishments” on what? You did your own LDS straw POLL?? Funny how over the years the Cook family hasn’t had anyone comment personally to us in a negative fashion about it. Only here on this blog where a disgruntled minority takes shelter have I ever read to the contrary.

Get a grasp on church history... There have been several high profile admonishments and testimony bearings, more than can be mentioned here.

As for the FHE, I was there. In fact, it was probably me that found that special on TV and told pops to come downstairs and “take a look at the guy you just spoke with”. So cast your stones at me all you like for pointing out the rather unflattering Jagger docudrama. No regrets on my part. Sure made for a good object lesson though.

And since you bring up judgment day, yes I’m looking forward to it. No longer will you have the luxury of hiding under a rock-- and God willing, I can be the first to testify before Christ regarding your apostate commentaries.

Anonymous said...

actually troy, truth be told, it was you who went in search of the true date for the encounter and you came back with a date, thank you very much! unfortunately it seems the grc journals cast little more light/truth on the matter inasmuch as you went into a big huff saying i got the date, you want more go fetch!
i contend that if more info corroborating the encounter was in the journals , you would have cited para/page number to clear your dad. did not happen! SOooooo, what is one to make of a fhe on sunday , a tv special with the mick and his evil music and a covenant by a family with the Lord to never listen to that music ever. what this adds up to is a huge drama story worthy of fireside evangelism toward the lds youth exhorting them to be faithful and give up on mick and his evil music.
nothing more, nothing less than a device for making points in a speech/talk to the youth and it is quite powerful because good(grc) is pitted against evil(mj) and good wins out!

btw there is a pesky detail in a previous post by you about your not being/living with the family at the time so you really couldn't recall blah,blah blah! chk it out!

consequently you could not have discovered the tv special and called your dad and mom down to see it.

just saying!

and "apostate" is a mighty powerful accusation but as a gentile it does not apply to me- just a sinner saved by grace.

Troy said...

Long story short, made a phone call to put to rest this silly fetish you have with FHE. As stated previous, I was not living at home in 1983. I was at a boarding school that year. By September of 1983 I began coming home on weekends to visit. GRC was home the evening of the 30th, late. That night, I got to hear snippets of the MJ encounter.

The next day, a FHE (it really doesn’t matter what day it was held) was given. I was not present. By that Friday, I was back home again. While at home for the weekend, the brothers watching TV came across the MJ expose. As kids naturally are, we asked GC to come look at the TV, partly to see if we could get a reaction from him. Was this really Mr. Jagger? It’s not like we went out of our way to view it. It’s my guess we found it in the course of flipping channels. Big deal.

After this, another family discussion ensued.

Yes there were commitments and admonishments made, but what kid is perfect? You readily admit you’re a “sinner”, as we all are… so perhaps you should cut others—including impressionable kids—some slack. And that is, as they say…the truth.

Now since you have a crystal ball, go ahead a lecture me about how I have somehow “spun a yarn”.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 230   Newer› Newest»