ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
On the Road World Tour 2002 - 2003

1999, 2000, 2001 and now for the 4th year!

Thanks sUnShiNe mAN !!!!!!!!

Art from a photo by Gered Mankowitz
[Ch1: Sike-ay-delic 60's] [Ch2: Random Sike-ay-delia] [Ch3: British Invasion]



Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED) inside.
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:


ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: Why Should Mick Not Be Knighted? Return to archive
06-16-02 04:58 PM
Honky Tonk Man I think its very clear that no one thinks Mick should of been Knighted. Im included in that. However, i am intrested into the reasons why people on this board think he should'nt of been Knighted. There are lots of things to look at.

What has Mick Jagger REALLY DONE for England?

well, hes made millions of people in England and across the Globe very happy. Hes an entertainer and part of the Worlds greatest band. He is an icon of music. But i dont think this is a reason to Knight him

Also (im a little confused about this) is he still a tax exile? I really dont understand the Stones living arrangments, but how is he a tax Exile. Im ignorant when it comes to taxes, but is it because he spends less then 90 days a year in England? Isnt this why they cancelld the UK Leg of the BTB Tour, because little Mick didnt want to fork out money? Again this may make no sense. Im not very good at phrasing things. If this is the case, then again, he doessnt deserve a Knighthood

There was a time im sure, when these kind of rewards were handed to war heroes, people who served their country. People who saved lives!!, not pop musicians. I am an avid Football fan, but i think its wrong to give Bobby Robson a knighthood. For those living in America, basically hes a good football manager. That is all. Nothing else.

I fully support what people are saying as to why he should'nt be Knighted, but I DO NOT agree with people going on about drugs, girls and so on. If Winston Churchil was queer or raped women, would make him any less of a great Leader? No it wouldnt.

Then you have a completlry different kind of argument. The one which talks about Knighthoods in general. It is an old tradition for sure and how can people outside of the UK relate to it?

My own personal opinion is that Knighthoods mean NOTHING!! Its just another title these days. Whoever decides who becomes a Sir, must of ran out of decent candidates a hell of a long time ago.

Those brave Fire Fighters and rescue helpers involved in September 11th deserve a knighthood over Fucking Mick Jagger!!

Would he take a bullet for anyone he didnt know?

We all love the Stones, think Micks great. HE IS, its just a disgrace hes a become a Sir.

If this IS IT, then im one who would gladly support the downfall of the Monarcy and the election of a President. IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN in my life time, but one day.....

This isnt all about Mr Mick, but about the whole thing in General.

Right, now im off to play "Street Fighting Man"

06-16-02 08:40 PM
Scot Rocks I just think this subject for all the emotions its stirred including myself I may say, is pretty amazing. Firstly there are the arguments over the monarchy and the right and wrongs of giving people titles, then there are the arguments over Mick personally, should he become one of the people who Mick was seen to oppose and who fought against him. Then there is the argument over merit, what did Mick do that bestow him such an 'honour'. Certainly if you look at it Alex is right Mick has givein millions of people around the globe great joy and happiness and some people are saying, well hell that good enough for me, that Sir thing sounds pretty cool, what's the big deal? whats the fuss?. Well yeah that may be so, Mick has made millions of people happy but he certainly hasn't missed the benifits of doing that, however we could debate long and hard about this. However for me personally it all comes down to the bigger picture of having people who are recognised as better people than everyone else either through title or bloodline. I have never felt happy about this system and even though the recipient is a personal hero and idol of mine, It will not change my views. Mick will always be a God of R&R for me, frontman of the band that plays a daily steady part of my life which is otherwise up and down, however it will always be Mick Jagger the R&R legend, not Sir Mick of the establishment.


06-17-02 12:53 AM
Cant Catch Me Well, I've mellowed and no longer blame Mick if he wants to accept the "honor" of knighthood. Really, if he's properly sardonic about it he can accept AND preserve his bad-ass reputation. (At least most of the papers have taken pains to remind everybody of Mick's womanizing and drug arrests!)

It's the Brit government, I think, that's compromised its position. Maybe they used to confer knighthood for bravery, or for unassailable moral principles, but giving it out to pop stars and the like just degrades the title. Whoever it is that confers knighthood has debased the title by handing it out to recognize financial and popular success. Because money's what it boils down to, if you ask me. It's not the millions of people the Stones have brought happiness to with their music (Puuhleeeze!), it's the millions in Jagger's pockets.

"Hey! Said my name is called [Sir] Disturbance,
I'll shout and scream, I'll kill the king, I'll rail at all his servants ... "

On June 16, 2001 the hit counter of the WET page was inserted here, it had 174,489 hits. Now the hit counter is for both the page and the board. The hit counter of the ITW board had 1,127,645 hits when it was closed and the Coolboard didn't have hit counter but was on line only two months and a half.
Rolling Stones tour 2002 - Rolling Stones World Tour - Rolling Stones on the road