Paul, oh no you don't.
I'm not falling for your unprincipled attempt at contriving a win and talking me into a corner.
If you don't like my answer which is the one before this, you need to take stock of your attitude on how you discuss/debate.
To elaborate on my response to the above, I made no mention of Pell in this thread or topic, so why would you even attempt to bring up a comment from another long lost thread, which has it's own criteria story line and content, which in no way relate to this one.
To knock you further out of the ring, and show everyone how twisted and desperate your mind is to win a point at any cost, and any mentality, you go and dig up a comment I made on another thread approx ONE YEAR ago!
Max your desperate.
If it makes you happy, if only to satisfy your sick sense of superiority, I admit to the Pell statement happily, BUT, as long as you admit that it had nothing to do with the thread/topic we were on.
ONE YEAR AGO!
Really?
So there you are you can go back to sucking your thumb happily in your play-pen.

From the News: Paul be fully informed! Link posted below.

"Former Australian of the Year and family violence survivor Rosie Batty, whose young son was murdered by her mentally ill ex-husband, earlier this week questioned the legitimacy of the appointment.

“I cannot help but be appalled that someone who minimised violence towards women who is part of the inevitable push-back and backlash that we all experience as we pioneer a way forward, would be awarded,” Ms Batty told news.com.au.

Upon receiving her honour, Ms Arndt told news.com.au she had been writing about men’s issues for 30 years.

She said she started off as a feminist and campaigning for women’s rights, but became “increasingly alarmed” by the movement.

“I felt in many areas, women had achieved equality,” she said. “We had a lot to celebrate. But there are many who wanted to extend women’s rights well beyond any notion of equality.

“It’s now all about male bashing, trying to advantage women over men in so many areas. I had enough of that."

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/2020/01/

ALTRAV, you said;

"I made no mention of Pell in this thread or topic"

Did I say you did, what I said was; "Your support for a pair of convicted paedophiles in Pell and Harris, blaming the victims"

You then came back with; "If you can find where I mentioned, let alone defended Pell, I will make an open apology to the forum."

I DID JUST THAT.

You tried to convolute and limit it to this thread, by later adding "in this thread or topic."

Like other Old MEN on this forum you try and paint DIRTY OLD MEN in society as the victims. As I asked previously, have you ever done time?

Well there you go Josephus, another person questioning the award to Arndt. Nothing in your above post links Batty to Hennessy, and as I said in my opening post; "The GG has received a number of complaints about the award to Arndt" one such other complaint could have been Batty. You produce no evidence that Batty conspired with Hennessy, as you contend.

Josephus, I am continually sickened by the number of people who always take a wrong stance based on politics.
I sometimes wonder if they would vote the opposite way if politics and virtue signalling were not a threat.
There is definitely politics and I believe even some personality clash between these two, and so we end up with all the slags coming out of the woodwork challenging her.
What has she done to deserve the honour?
A damn sight more than some of those bitching about her getting and keeping it.
She has been honest, which is more than I can say for some of those on here, whereby she admitted backing the females, only to find, as I have said before, that they have gone too far over the line and now need to be pushed back.
Why do you think I am so critical and abusive towards these abusive and mentally twisted maggots.
They are no more women than a rabid dog, which is apt as the word 'bitch' immediately springs to mind, which is what the GG and others opposing her receiving the honours are.
No those complaining are of no genuine substance or credibility and should not only be ignored but attacked vigorously for daring to make such egregious and unjustified comments and attacks on such a worthy recipient.
I'll bet if she was pushing women's causes she would have been instantly lauded and given all manner of praise from the same cows denigrating her now.

Paul broaden your reading

http://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/batty-thrilled-with-government-call-to-remove-arndt-s-gong-calls-for-men-to-join-push-202

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/victoria/batty-thrilled-with-government-call-to-remove-arndt-s-gong-calls-for-men-to-join-push-20200130-p53w35.html

Josephus, I ask is it not reasonable to consider that there at least two sides to any story, but without personally witnessing the story, we have no choice but to try to make sense of the facts.
We know historically that at some point either one or both parties are going to embellish or deviate from the truth.
This is a problem, but it does not mean we automatically assume that the accused is completely guilty, unless they are found to be an aggressive sex predator, otherwise he is a NORMAL male.
Now the reason I err on the side of the male is because since women were encouraged or promoted that they were as good as any man or equal to any man, they changed or maybe they stopped being mild mannered and restrained or even disciplined, and threw caution to the wind in a crazed ambition to test their newfound freedom, and that of course had sex as front and centre as the main goal in their new lives.
They were given permission to act like males and they were not told exactly what and what not to do or how to conduct themselves.
It has ALWAYS been the males prerogative and birthright, to be the predator.
But now it seems that since the maggots threw caution to the wind, they have assumed the role of predator, but much more aggressively than any males ever did.
Because if a male was too aggressive he was labelled a rapist.
But not so for a female.
They can be ANY age, tart themselves up, go out for the night specifically to get "LAID".
This is not the actions of a virtuous woman but the actions of a SLUT!
So where once it was within the purview and the domain of a man to "hunt" and seduce a woman, the roles have changed.
And so it is that I have no respect for females of today, and also why I defend the men who have been found guilty of some wrong doing towards a female.
Blame the feminists and "Me TOO".