25th June 2010 Gen Peter Cosgrove OA MC the Board Australian War Memorial A.C.T. Dear Sir An American diarist of two centuries ago, wrote that: “Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.” Now, I’m not suggesting for a minute that I was a scoundrel (though perhaps, others might have thought so) but patriotism was certainly the reason why I fought in Vietnam. Despite a rough upbringing, somehow I had become imbued with the notion that there was nothing nobler a man could do in his lifetime than to fight for his country, by becoming part of that ‘band of brothers’ who were prepared to pursue that noblest of enterprises. To face an enemy soldier on his own turf and engage him in armed combat, face to face. That’s what it was all about, I thought. There could be nothing grander, surely. I was also naïve enough to believe that my country would honour such patriotism, that for the rest of my days I could wear my war service as a badge of honour. So I volunteered for the army, volunteered for the infantry, and volunteered to get to Vietnam by Christmas eve, 1968. And I was going to get exactly what I wanted when I got there ─ the full war experience. But I also marched off to war, as many of us did, with grand notions of the Anzac legend in our hearts─ from Gallipoli to Kokoda, and the ‘Rats of Torbruk’, and found that to some extent it’s all a myth. Instead, we found it to be a corrupt, inefficient, insensitive bureaucracy prepared to do whatever is necessary to maintain the ‘image’ of the military. Where after-action accounts can be falsified to protect the reputations of officers, where ordinary infantry privates became expendable if it advances the careers and the medal prospects of senior officers. I can say, categorically, that as a consequence of my own experiences, my notions of patriotism have long since evaporated. While I fought alongside wonderful, courageous men─ some of whom carried me on their shoulders at times, literally and metaphorically, the aftermath of being wounded to such an extent as I was, and the treatment I received at the hands of the military afterwards, and indeed, the treatment metered out to all veterans with respect to compensation for war wounds, and superannuation, convinces me that this country does not respect, nor even really care about those men who have fought for it. At best, grandstanding politicians pay nothing more than lip-service to it. It’s just one of the reasons why we veterans remain, to a large extent, alienated and embittered. But I have had reason to be even more bitter than most men, because I was that patriotic boy, all those years ago. And they did wrong by me. No more, though. It’s why I’d like to address you sir, a former comrade in arms, about what was done to me. After all, they don’t reach any greater heights in the military than you did. And you were part of it. So who best to address? Mr Cosgrove, like you, I served in Vietnam, and at about the same time, and even within the same units as you served- though at different times. I’d like to bring to your attention the years of personal vilification I have received at the hands of some within the military and veteran communities after my memoir, “The War Within” was published and which, as a consequence, has resulted in my alienation from the brotherhood of warriors. In particular, I refer to my struggle to validate the existence of the 2nd D&E Platoon which operated in Vietnam during 1969, and the corruptions of military history surrounding it. And, at the same time, to the corruptions of my own service history which has created such angst for me and my family. I have withstood the attacks and vitriol for many years, but my reputation, my credibility, my achievements, and my family have all suffered as a consequence of it. I don’t think you would have any appreciation of just what damage has been inflicted on me- and what the price has been. I’m sure you are well aware of these matters, since you have an association with a couple of the veteran organisations involved. It’s why I’m coming to you directly. Why you? Well, to put it simply, because you are a significant person in terms of class, status, reputation, and influence, and you may very well have had some part to play in that vilification these last few years- or at best, stood by and watched it happen. I write to you as a former Chief of the Army, but more importantly, as a man, and as well as your sense of decency and fair play, it is to your sense of manhood that I now appeal, in particular. In that light, I am trusting that you might still maintain some notion of care and concern for one like myself- an ordinary ex-Private soldier who went to war with empty-headed notions of war’s grandeur and our Anzac heritage- and found it was all manufactured bullshit. To this letter, I am attaching a Document titled: “Validation of Don Tate’s Service History” which includes official army documentation, media pieces, letters from former soldiers, and relevant photographs which do exactly as it says- validates every aspect of my war service- and puts to the sword those claims from armchair experts that my service history is manufactured in any way. But first, I think a comparison of our relevant army histories makes for interesting reading, simply because although you reached the pinnacle of the Australian military tree, and I remained forever at its roots, it goes some way to explaining why you and I have such divergent opinions about the army, and our military heritage. Of course, we came from entirely different backgrounds: you entered the army from a privileged family, and became an officer, destined for greatness; I came from a significantly disadvantaged family, socially and financially, and became a Private soldier- always destined to remain so by virtue of the fact that I spent the last half of my military career in a Military Hospital after being wounded in Vietnam. We were both reinforcements to Vietnam. I arrived a little earlier than you did. We both served in the 9th Battalion. You served in it for just 39 days, then, despite a recognised act of heroism (and despite the battalion being under-manned) found yourself re-posted to a more sedentary unit; I had served with two other units before arriving at the 9th Battalion, and served with it about 35 days, until being wounded in action and repatriated home. During our time in that same battalion, you were involved in a very minor contact with just two enemy soldiers at a creek, and for that, and some other relatively minor matter, were awarded a Military Cross- though I must say, there seems to be some serious maladministration even with the dates of those actions (and the truth of what occurred); on the other hand, I was one of three men ordered to run into a Viet Cong killing field under heavy enemy fire to support the leading section of my platoon when it was ambushed in a bunker complex- an action which saw one man killed, and ten of us wounded. I didn’t even rate a mention in the Battalion’s account of that ambush, or get my name recorded in the battalion’s history- let alone any gallantry medal for doing what I did- and it was, by every measure, a far more gallant act than either of yours. We both served in a D&E Platoon, considered by Major George Pratt, company commander of HQ Company at that time, to be a unit designed for men “unfit for normal infantry duties in battalions”. In your case, despite your recognised heroism with the 9th Battalion, you spent almost a year in the D&E Platoon; in my case, I was part of a specially-created “2nd D&E Platoon”, raised for a specific purpose by Task Force Headquarters- to tackle a large enemy force known to be congregating in the Xuyen Moc area. My unit was disbanded after six weeks, with a significant number of kills up our sleeve, and no losses of our own. And whereas your official D&E Platoon was always formally recognised, the 2nd D&E Platoon was ‘edited-out’ of the histories of the war for almost four decades because of certain contentions that occurred in the field on May 29th, 1969. That was, until May 2008, at which point the existence and activities of the 2nd D&E Platoon was formally validated and acknowledged by the Australian government, and placed back into the history books. You were never wounded in action, whereas I was severely wounded in action- on July 19th, 1969. You spent no time in a military hospital; I spent more than two years in them. You enjoyed a sparkling career in the army, finally being promoted to the premier military position- Chief of the Army; I remained a Private soldier, found myself permanently disabled by my war wounds, and medically discharged from the army as no longer being of use to it. You had a full working career, and retired with public acclaim and significant superannuation; I had a working life of just 13 years, and received $20,000 in super when I retired as a teacher, following an attack by an assailant with a steel bar. We both wrote memoirs. You didn’t have to work to sell yours, because of your standing in the military and the community; I did have to work at selling and promoting mine, because of my standing in it. Yours was a veneer of the life that was lived- pro-Cosgrove, and pro-military; mine was a self-deprecating, warts and all account of an entire life, and with respect to the Vietnam component, revealed military maladministration, false after-action accounts, medal-grabbing by officers, and corruptions of history. Veterans loved yours because you said what they wanted to read and didn’t interfere with their notion of espirit de corps; mine revealed a different side of the Anzac tradition, entirely. Since our army days, we have met socially on a number of occasions, as have our wives. Of course, we are in a different social class to you, and were made aware of that. On one occasion, you agreed to open a “commemorative walk” I had built in the Shellharbour area, (mostly with my own hands) but you were denied by the Council’s General Manager, Brian Weir- an insensitive bureaucrat who saw no war service. You took no stand in that minor fracas, despite the personal slap in the face, but I did appreciate your acceptance of the offer to open it. So we go back aways, Mr Cosgrove, you and I. Walked some similar paths. Which is why your recalcitrance to enter any debate on various issues concerning me and matters I have raised these last few years, has caused me so much angst. Your refusal to assist the lowliest of former comrades-in-arms has been noted by many within the veteran community, including those we both served alongside. And so to the point of this letter. Let me be absolutely clear about this- what irks me most, is that you have been well aware of the fact that the maladministration of my service records created significant problems for me during my life, and despite your gallantry medal and your position of influence within the military and veteran communities, never felt inclined to reach down and offer me a helping hand to correct it. You allowed weaklings within the veteran community to ostracise me for striking out against the military ‘establishment’, including sycophants leading battalion Associations (Alan Price of the 4RAR Association being one of the worst) and never felt inclined to assist me in validating either my service with 9RAR, or with the 2nd D&E Platoon. You sat and watched as an assortment of villainous criminals, cowards, and known paedophiles attacked me mercilessly using off-shore web sites where Australia’s weak politicians and useless police forces can’t touch them. How could this be so, Mr Cosgrove? Where were you when a genuine man was needed to stand up and be counted? What price genuine courage? Forgive me for this presumption, but one might’ve thought that a man with your background in the military, with your connections, with your knowledge of military protocol and leadership, might have done something- especially given our common histories. Yet, and here’s the rub, when another veteran (with a sordid past) wrote to you on one occasion requesting that you allow “mitigating circumstances” for an act of paedophilia he committed to be allowed into his service history, you didn’t hesitate to act on his behalf, and allowed it. (I have copies of the Statement made to the Police by the mother of the young victim, the request made to you, and your reply to him). Of course, it was your right as Chief of the Army to make a determination to this criminal’s advantage, and I don’t question that right, or your decision to do so. But I must ask this question of you- what was in it for you? Was it so that that particular individual thus became a slave to the ‘military establishment’ of which you are the pre-eminent face- condemned to a life of protecting the highest officer ranks from attacks by critics like me? Is he part of that defensive front-line employed by that ‘establishment’ to vilify those who dare question its integrity- shoot the messenger? Why would you assist a convicted paedophile in a service-related matter- but not assist a fellow, disabled infantryman trying to validate his service? Then (and this matter has been a long time in the wings) there is the very delicate matter of Private Peter Allen. Do you recall the name? You should- after all, you gave evidence at his trial for murder, back in Vietnam in November, 1969. And, on reflection, and considering all the variables, your involvement in that matter is intriguing, and revealing. You were aware, I have no doubt, that prior to his act of murder, Pte Allen had been a member of the 2nd D&E Platoon- that very same infantry platoon I served with- erased from the history books immediately after the contentions of May 29th 1969. What seemed to escape you was that at Pte Allen’s trial, he was unable to use as any defence the fact that he had been traumatised by his involvement in that platoon- because it didn’t historically exist! Imagine that. And there you were, Mr Cosgrove, kept back in country for that important trial, so that you could give evidence. And what did that evidence amount to? That he had given you a nasty look at one point. That’s all. A nasty look. Nothing more than that. Could there have been a more significant reason for your appearance at that trial? Then there are the actions of Bob Buick to consider- the ‘hero’ of Long Tan, and a darling of the military establishment. It was Bob Buick who led the vociferous attacks against me in the early stages, using his knowledge of army administration to poo-poo any notion that a platoon of men had been created illegally. It was Buick who announced boldly that he “had support at the highest levels of the government and the military” and was able to operate villainous web sites to vilify me, and which the government and the Federal Police were powerless to shut down. Or refused to do. What did you think of the attacks against me by Bob Buick, Mr Cosgrove? I mean, here was a man who freely admitted to killing an unarmed, wounded enemy soldier after the battle of Long Tan, but received a medal of gallantry instead of being charged with murder. Wasn’t it Barrister James Fergus Thomson, a former legal officer in Vietnam in 1966, who wrote (Letters to The Australian, August 2000) that if he’d been aware of Buick’s claims of killing those soldiers back in the war, he would’ve personally prosecuted him for murder? Of course the question is- why hasn’t he been charged, still? I mean, he has admitted to murder. Not only that, but the same Bob Buick managed to score a Long Service and Good Conduct Medal which he had no right to receive, but which he wore for some 20 years before being outed as a medal-wearing fraud. No action was taken against him, yet now, Buick has a free hand to attack any critic of the military with gusto. Coincidence? I think not. More importantly, not once, Mr Cosgrove, to the best of my knowledge, did you ever stay his hand or urge restraint. And finally, I draw your attention to the actions of the Director of the Australian War Memorial, another former general, and a pillar of the military establishment- Steve Gower. You would be aware that he sent out an email to the veteran community discrediting the valuation of the colour movie footage I had donated to that august institution designed to honour our military history. You would be aware that he chose not to discuss the issue with me personally, but, instead, chose various ‘postmen’ within the veteran community to disseminate that misinformation- including that very same, sordid individual you have an association with. Two generals- and both having a connection to a convicted paedophile. Makes interesting reading doesn’t it? I’ll ask the question so many other veterans ask- why would men of your standing even countenance such a despicable creature, let alone communicate with him? Did you ever think to ask Mr Gower why he acted as he did, especially given that I had two official valuations in my possession as to the value of those films? Or is it a fact that Mr Gower shares your concern for maintaining the ‘integrity’ of the generals of the ‘military establishment’ and attempted to discredit me further? After all, the last thing our former generals want is some loose cannon proving that our military history is largely written by historians in collusion and consensus, where historical fact is sacrificed on the altar of self-aggrandisement? I took the matter to the Minister for Veteran Affairs, Allan Griffin, as you are aware, but he is a weakling, a puppet with no courage of convictions, no strength of character to tackle the major players in the establishment. But then, nor did you, Mr Cosgrove. These are just some matters that I need to raise with you. So I ask you now, publicly, as a former comrade, officer, and as a man, why didn’t you ever raise a voice in my defence? Wasn’t it enough that I spent more than two years in hospitals after being wounded? Wasn’t it enough that I would be permanently physically disabled as a consequence of that ambush? Wasn’t it enough that I would be left out of the 9th Battalion’s record of its tour because of incompetent clerical administration? Wasn’t it enough that my actions of the 19th July would be ignored in the history of that battalion, written as it was, by former officers from that battalion who weren’t at the coal-face of that ambush? Wasn’t it enough that the army corrupted official histories to cover up atrocities in the field by editing the 2nd D&E Platoon from the history books- and to hell with the service histories of the 39 ordinary infantry privates caught up in it? Wasn’t it enough that I would be forever alienated from the veteran community because I dared to reveal those corruptions? Wasn’t it enough that I had to contend with all that, and to top it off, be denied a full working career, like you were able to enjoy, and had to raise a family of five in relative poverty? Where were you all this time, Mr Cosgrove? Where was your heart? And where was the courage that earned you a Military Cross? You alone had the capacity to put the jackals to the sword. But where were you? Yours Sincerely Don Tate General Peter Cosgrove did not respond. Two years later, I met him at an Anzac Day function and asked him why he didn't. 'Because I didn't like the tone of your letter,' he said. 'You didn't like the tone of my letter?, I replied. 'How the hell did you ever score a gallantry medal?' he just smiled. It's just as interesting to note that Charles Waterstreet, a Sydney barrister and a former cadet under Cosgrove, had this to say about General Peter Cosgrove in a Sydney Morning Herald article, 'Australia Fair' in 2010: 'Do not be fooled by General Peter Cosgrove's genial, hail-fellow, well-met appearance. His Australia Day address this week was full of back-slapping, high fives, tree-hugging and Up There Cazaly-ing. Generalissimo Cosgrove – and he had even worse nicknames by which he was unaffectionately known at Waverley College in the 1960s – has a very dark secret that continues to haunt me.