The Galileo Movement: patron saint Alan Jones, repudiated by Andrew Bolt
The Galileo Movement is a lobby group heavily promoted by radio personality Alan Jones. Recently it has been involved in some controversy.
On July 31, Age reporter Ben Cubby reported Malcolm Roberts, a member of the Galileo Movement, stating the following:
A prominent Australian sceptics’ group, the Galileo Movement, said its views would not change at all because of Professor Muller’s study. The group features broadcaster Alan Jones as its patron and lists prominent sceptics Ian Plimer and Bob Carter and blogger Andrew Bolt as advisers.
“We’ve based our views on empirical science, and there’s nothing in the Muller study to undercut that,” said the Galileo Movement’s manager, Malcolm Roberts, a former mining engineer and company director.
Mr Roberts said climate change science had been captured by “some of the major banking families in the world” who form a “tight-knit cabal”. Mr Roberts said he understood that the group’s views might sound strange, but claimed they were increasingly popular. “It does sound outlandish,” he said. “I, like you, was reluctant to believe it [but] there are significant things going on in Australia that people are waking up to”.
Which of course began to generate interest.
6 August 2012: ANDREW BOLT REPUDIATES GALILEO MOVEMENT
Andrew Bolt, News Limited columnist, and one of Australia’s prominent climate sceptics was asked what the thought of the statements by Malcolm Roberts. Apparently the two exchanged emails, which lead Bolt to write the following:
Your conspiracy theory seemed utterly stupid even before I knew which families you meant. Now checking the list of banking families you’ve given me, your theory becomes terribly, shamefully familiar.
Two of the three most prominent and current banking families you’ve mentioned are Jewish, and the third is sometimes falsely assumed to be. Yes, this smacks too much of the Jewish world conspiracy theorising I’ve always loathed.
Again, I insist: remove me from the list of people you claim are prepared to advise you. I’ve never advised you, Malcolm, and would never want to. I am offended to be linked to you.
Obviously I have been highly critical of Bolt on this blog, but on some issues we are like-minded. On the day that Bolt posted this response I attempted to comment on his blog in order to ask him what he thought of similar comments made by Evans: in particular the claims that “banking families” have been working behind the scenes for centuries to control the agenda and that the “banksters” had organised the assassination of two US presidents.
I urged Andrew to review the writings of Evans. The post was not allowed through. However given how much traffic Bolt’s blog generates and his possible dismissal of commentators such as myself he is unlikely to have seen the comment posted.
I will noted that Malcolm Roberts posted a reply on Bolt’s blog:
Andrew is referring to an article by Ben Cubby in SMH. In Ben’s interview I did not raise or discuss religion nor any religious sect. I did not imply any religious affiliation to be associated with the drivers of BS AGW. In reporting our conversation, Ben Cubby’s article did not mention religion.
I’m wondering why Andrew now introduces religion into the climate discussion.
In the interview I was asked by SMH’s Ben Cubby about the motives driving BS AGW. I discussed the usual: academics feeding off taxpayer grants, pollies seeking to make an issue for their own politcal benefit, major international bankers harvesting carbon credits, … and raised the UN and global governance.
Sa.04.08.12, 11:49am my computer received an email from The Galileo Movement’s co-founder Case Smit. Around 2:00pm I checked emails and immediately started drafting a response for Case to send to Andrew. (I wouldn’t go behind Case’s back by replying directly to Andrew.)
Sa.04.08.12, 3:14pm I sent a response to Case for forwarding to Andrew. Yes, it was a long and detailed email. It provides plenty of references for Andrew. Case is travelling across Australia so I don’t know when/whether he’s collected emails yet.
Among many points, I advised Case that:
1. quote: “I agree with Andrew in that I dislike discussing anything about groups of people based on religion, race, nationality, etc.”
As I advised Case, religion is irrelevant. Raising it diminishes the core argument and leaves one open to being discredited.
2. I provided Case with plenty of solid books and other references supporting my comments on the cabal of narrow political and financial interests pushing global governance.
3. I offered to arrange for Andrew to talk with people who’ve done their research on global governance.
(They will discussion the erosion of Australia’s sovereignty and competitiveness with him too if he wants.)
4. Miscellaneous points such as prominent courageous American TV journalist Glenn Beck identifying UN Agenda 21, the banking families, UN, Maurice Strong, … Glenn has laid out his research publicly.
Is Andrew aware that one of the world’s most powerful entities, the USA Federal Reserve Bank, is not a government agency? It’s a private entity controlled by the major international banking families, mainly European. Documented.
The Fed’s owners and controllers are much more powerful than the Fed.
Is Andrew aware of how money is created? David Evans and Jo Nova are. They discuss it publicly and have written fabulous material about it.
I did not raise the word ‘conspiracy’ with Ben Cubby. I don’t know why Andrew did.
Even though their deliberations are secretive, the cabal is working quite openly. Documented. Not a conspiracy.
I agree with Andrew and have publicly and privately objected to people discussing religion in the manner to which Andrew refers. I’ve counselled them against it. Some of my friends and those who I respect, admire and value enormously for their achievements are Jewish. Some are Christians. Some Buddhist, Some Muslim, Some Hindu. Some atheists. Some agnostic. Some not interested.
I’ve never spoken to or met Andrew. I’ve enjoyed email correspondence with him. I’ve given him tips for which he has expressed appreciation.
Andrew has my street address, my email address and my phone numbers. I’m wondering why he didn’t discuss it with me?
I’d be happy to discuss any of these topics with him privately or publicly on air. Preferably after he’s done the research.
It’s ironic that climate alarmists criticise The Galileo Movement for listing Andrew as an adviser (on media). They say TGM’s listing of Andrew Bolt discredits TGM. (We disagree.) Now Andrew seems worried about being discredited by association with TGM. Gotta laugh.
Maybe Andrew is Aging. Or maybe he’s upset with another part of Fairfax, Mike Carlton who did raise religion in association with climate:
Until learning of Mike Carlton a few minutes ago I was at a loss as to Andrew’s reason for raising religion. It seems Andrew didn’t. Mike Carlton did the day before.
I wonder if Mikey’s the same Mike Carlton who ran from me when I inadvertently sent him facts in response to emails received in a conversation with some alarmist ‘scientists’ funded by government. Mike doesn’t seem to like facts. He runs from them. Either directly as he did by email on 08.03.2010 or by cleverly implied smear on August 4th, 2012.
Notice the pattern in Fairfax Press? And they wonder why circulation plummets and losses grow?
Other posters on Bolt’s blog are alert to the issue and the troubling aspects of Robert’s theories:
Andrew I am glad that you have taken this position. Not because I believed that you endorsed Malcolm Robert’s comments but because like you I was appalled by them. Good on for you taking this stance. – Rudi
James In Footscray replied to Malcolm Roberts
Mon 06 Aug 12 (06:41am) – Malcolm Roberts is obviously upset, but I’m not sure this does his case much good. It’s angry and rambling. The tenuous cabal/conspiracy distinction, the youtube link, the ‘some of my friends …’ comments – they’re not good signs.
John replied to Malcolm Roberts Mon 06 Aug 12 (10:37am)
- So you are not retracting your comment that climate science is controlled “some of the major banking families in the world” who form “a tight-knit cabal”.
Andrew as an Australian it really is a great comfort to me and my fellow Jews the stance you have taken against such blatant bigotry. Why Jews are constantly maligned as part of some secret movement amuses me as if implying no Jew is ever poor while on every nation’s doorstep looms the controlling arm of Saudi Wahabbism via the Muslim Brotherhood’s threat to world peace.If Jews are such a terrible threat to the world considering their input to the world’s progress is disportionate to their small numbers may I suggest the real enemy are not the Jews but the Jew haters themselves. G-D Bless. - Daniel Katz in Sydney Sometimes of Tel Aviv
Mon 06 Aug 12 (10:42am) – Love how Malcolm Roberts is linking to Glenn Beck to prove the ‘global Jewish banking cabal’ theory- argument lost! Mark Smith of Sydney (Reply)
Mon 06 Aug 12 (11:15am)