Yer, but look I've got to wonder about madam "aren't".
Chumming up to pedophiles as she did, is no work for journalism. It's the job of psychologists and psychiatrists.
I saw the interview in question and was horrified with her chummy approach.
There's got to be limits, and I think she passed it there.

As for the order of Australia, my thinking is she should stay attached to it. And in the future, consider more carefully social norms, by keeping in the square, which is one that doesn't appear to condone pedophilia and murder. Both are inexcusable.

Dan

'Yer, but look I've got to wonder about madam "aren't".
Chumming up to pedophiles as she did, is no work for journalism. It's the job of psychologists and psychiatrists.
I saw the interview in question and was horrified with her chummy approach.
There's got to be limits, and I think she passed it there.'

then maybe she would make a good democrat Dan.

Mind you they never took the award away from Jane Caro who the abc use to promote some pretty vile views. Still as usual one rule for regressives and others held to a much higher standard.

My intention when putting this up wasn't to focus on the sad events relating to Hannah and Rowan Baxter, nor was it specifically about whatever Bettina did or didn't say.

It was more about how awards aren't just given on a basis of merit which cannot be taken away, but given on a proviso regarding the future actions of the recipient.

I think it's all shallow and phoney to reinforce a socially engineered narrative.
Like the whole world has simply become a stageshow to manipulate idiots, who aren't able think for themselves.

Hey Paul1405,

"Now she has tried to mitigate, and by inference, justify the actions of Rowan Baxter in murdering his three children and their mother"

Sorry to single your comment out, but I think I should respond.
Right now you're implying Bettina is justifying the actions of Rowan Baxter in murdering his three children and their mother.
This may not necessarily be the case, though I haven't actually listened to what she said.

I want you to try to separate 2 things:
Try and separate Rowan Baxters actions as being a completely separate issue which cannot be defended;
From the other issue, which is whether or not Hannah's actions played any part in potentially backing him into a corner, where he may have felt overwhelmed by it all, and which may have lead to him taking the actions that he did.

I cannot defend Rowan Baxters actions killing his family.
Nobody in their right mind could defend those actions, so to imply they are isn't really fair or reasonable.
- The only way a person could potentially defend those actions would be to argue that both Hannah and the kids deserved it, and no-one could argue that on a basis of merit, it's not possible to argue the kids deserved to be doused in petrol and set alight.

Questioning whether the actions of Hannah (or even the law) were factors which may have even partially lead to or had an impact on the end result is not unreasonable.

AC,

The juvenile petulance that has seen the usual Marxists mob howling for the removal of a legitimate award is just another attempt to trash free speech. Nothing whatever to do with domestic violence. There are too many people sticking their noses into things that are none of their business. Whatever Bettina Arndt said is irrelevant to the fact that she received an award for services she has provided, just like everyone else on the list. I don't believe in awards, but that's another story.

I feel sick about the horrible deaths of three innocent children, done to death in a most horrible way, just be because two adults were incapable of living their lives properly. I feel nothing for the adults, and I was sickened by the fact that the male's family could have a chat about it on national TV so soon after the event, giving Tracey Grimshaw another opportunity to tear up.

I prefer Bettina Arndt's honesty and common sense.

Sorry. The female's family.

AC, a person does not have to necessarily condone something to inadvertently create justification for that something. I'm sure BA does not condone the actions of Baxter, but she did inadvertently create a justification that some can latch onto.

The copper, maybe he was "star struck" with the media attention, better to have said; "At this early stage of the investigation we are pursuing certain lines of enquiry, and a report will be prepared for the Coroner in due cause."

Back in the good old days you could jag a Knighthood for just donating 10,000 quid to the LIBERAL PARTY. Now day's you have to be high profile, in the media to score an Order of Australia. In the case of BA, a lot of what she says I agree with, I have said many times on the forum, some men get a raw deal from the Family Court, particularly where children are involved.

Other than the mundane, day to day job of BA what has she actually done above and beyond the call of duty to deserve this award. Bill the plumber should get an O of A for 50 years of service to drains and pipes. BTW I knew a woman, now passed on, who for 50 years spent countless hours helping out with homeless people in Sydney, always at the stove in the kitchen, so to speak, not a leader, but a doer, never one for attention, she never receiver an O of A, not high profile enough, not in the media enough, not good enough.

The GG refers this all to a committee, look whose on the committee, not Bill the plumber, or the battler down the street. Like minded people.