FOR THE PURISTS INTERESTED IN THE PROCESS OF CHALLENGING THE AUSTRALIAN WAR MEMORIAL: When the Australian War Memorial refused to release the 235 documents relating to the 2nd D&E Platoon under its own FOI provisions, I appealed their decision to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal in 2014. These were the key points of my submission- and the response by the AAT..... ........As the applicant, I advise that I am a combat-accredited, totally and permanently disabled veteran of the Vietnam War with limited means, and no legal expertise. On the other hand, the Australian War Memorial (AWM) is, superficially, one of the nation’s most respectable bureaucracies. It is run by high-powered public servants and former politicians and senior ex-officers of the Australian Defence Force (ADF). This allows it to have access to individuals who have a vested interest in various military matters, and to those who have demonstrable access to influence at the highest levels. While the AWM will argue financial consideration here today as a plank of its defence, it is disingenuous. The fact that it is able to access, and rely upon, legal advice from the Commonwealth Government Solicitor’s Office and employ the Senior Executive Lawyer – Justin Davidson – to defend it, makes a mockery of such argument. But concomitantly, the very fact that the AWM feels the need to utilise such legal expertise to defend its actions in not complying with my FOI request suggests that it (and certain individuals) have much to hide, and even more to fear. Which brings us here today. Statement of Facts and Contentions As to character At the outset, it would be fair to say that the AWM (and others, sympathetic to the Anzac tradition and believing in the integrity of the AWM) have sought to demonise me over a number of years– a smear campaign obvious in many documents within the material presented. Such activity is in the DNA of this institution. While it paints itself as an honourable institution seeking to present and preserve Australian military history– the truth is, it will only present the military history that its historians and ex-officers of the ADF want the public to see. It is often said that truth is the first casualty of war. I contend that the corruption of truth does not end there. It is also reflected in the presentation of history in Memorials and Museums such as the AWM. Truth is most often sacrificed on the altar of vainglory. Take for example, General Peter Cosgrove. His rise to the position of Governor-General occurred not because he was a great warrior (because the truth is he wasn’t) but because his military history was shaped to suggest it was. I would ask the AAT here today to reflect on the fact that while the AWM takes great pains to enhance the reputations of former officers (and it is one of the contentions contained within the documents I seek) it is equally prepared to destroy the reputation of any person who offers a contrary view to that put forward by the AWM. I have been vilified to a certain extent by men and women of dubious character within and without the AWM (and apparent in these documents) but contrary to the picture painted by those individuals, I am just a retired English/ History teacher seeking to correct aspects of military history which had a profound effect on my life. So I would like to take this opportunity to correct those perceptions. The facts are that I am now aged 65, the father of five children, all of whom are professionals in various spheres of public life. I am also the grandfather to twelve. I am totally and permanently disabled as a consequence of wounds suffered in combat in Vietnam which hospitalised me for more than two years. Rather than having to be press-ganged into fighting for my country (as Normie Rowe refers to his experience) I enlisted voluntarily. I thought it was an honourable enterprise and one which I would be forever proud to have done. It hasn’t been the case. I applied for the infantry, and volunteered to go to Vietnam as a reinforcement– regarded by most as the most difficult manner a man can serve. The circumstances of my wounding, the maladministration of my service records, the incompetence of senior officers, the insensitivity and stupidity of public servants and the deliberate falsification of history done in this matter currently before this forum has taken any glory of having fought for this country. In respect of my character, rather than the image presented to politicians and bureaucrats by people like Karen Ely, General Steve Gower, and the current Director of the AWM- Dr Brendan Nelson, this is what you should note; - That I donated original colour movie footage valued at $90,000 to the AWM in the nation’s interest - That in 2000, I was one of the first Australians to be awarded the Australian Sports Medal for thirty years of service to sport- the first disabled man to play representative cricket, coaching, and administration. - That I am the author of five books- including the best-selling memoir, ‘The War Within’ (Amazon Books) and ‘Anzacs Betrayed’. - That I have received acknowledgements for working with intellectually-disabled high school students in tree-planting projects. - And that in 1997-2000 I personally constructed a Vietnam Veterans Walk in my suburb that turned an average cricket field into one of the best grounds in the District- and which attracted a South African team to play a Trial Match, as well as the NSW side playing a Trial against the Institute of Sport. These are not unsubstantial achievements, and must surely reflect favourably on my character. However, because of the contentions surrounding the 2nd D&E Platoon, my character has been shredded by shrill voices and manifest cowards within the veteran community- and the AWM. I am here today simply because I have sought to validate the service histories of myself and forty other soldiers, and having to do against a recalcitrant, corrupt organisation that favours protecting the military ‘establishment’ over historical truth. That the AWM has engaged the services of the Commonwealth Government Solicitors (CGS) to defend itself in this forum should alert the AAT to its motives. The AAT should note that to involve the CGS indicates that the AWM has much to fear from the release of the documents I seek. It knows that it has much to fear, not the least of which is the potential to damage the reputations of those responsible for the corruption of history, and their protectors within the AWM. FACTS AND CONTENTIONS On the surface, this matter is about two things: a private citizen seeking access to documents and other information concerning a platoon he served in during the Vietnam War – the 2nd D&E Platoon – and documents relating to its erasure from all records of the war and how this happened; and a recalcitrant quasi-military organisation (the Australian War Memorial) denying him that access. To the private citizen, the documents he seeks are important planks in proving that the erasure of the 2nd D&E Platoon is part of a military conspiracy to corrupt military history, done, in the first place by senior army offices to cover-up a series of atrocities that were committed on May 31st 1969 by a combined armour/infantry force under the leadership of Capt Tom Arrowsmith SG; and done, in the second place by senior army officers and public servants to maintain that cover-up. In addition, the documents are to ascertain to what extent the corruption of history was aided and abetted by public servants of the AWM, the Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) and the Army History Unit (AHU) as well as external forces (including the RSL, and individuals) with a vested interest in preventing the historical truth being told. My reason for pursuing the release of these documents is three-fold: - that they relate to my war service which is sacrosanct - that they prove the Army (and senior officers) have been involved in the corruption of historical documents, the falsification of historical military accounts, and surreptitious awarding of ‘gallantry’ medals, and - that officers within and without the Australian Defence Force (the ADF) along with the national historian and public servants have engaged in an orchestrated campaign of deceit and duplicity of veterans from the war, of government Ministers and Senators, as well as engaging in a campaign of vilification of the former infantrymen seeking to prove the 2nd D&E Platoon existed by enlisting the assistance of criminals to administer web sites in Australia and off-shore. This vilification involved a connection between the former Director of the AWM, General Steve Gower, other senior army officers and a convicted paedophile – Keith Tennent I have provided a copy of my book, 'Anzacs Betrayed' which contains a variety of information about this matter and I will refer to it during this hearing. The Case for Why the AWM should provide the documents I have sought There are a number of grounds why the AAT should find in my favour. I outline the reasons for requesting this information in the T1 docs pp. 35- 43 – with particular reference to the 6th, 7th, and 8th paragraphs on p. 36 beginning, ‘To be disregarded or dismissed as lunatics by bureaucrats for pursuing a matter that we all know to have occurred (the atrocities on May 31st 1969) regardless of whether or not is supported by military documentation, is to show total disregard for the war service we gave this country….’ Freedom of Information 1. It is a fundamental right of the individual to gain access to information that enables them to participate effectively in a representative democracy and the changes to the FOI Act of 2010 is an express recognition of the fact. The Senior Executive Lawyer of the Commonwealth Government Solicitor’s Office – Justin Davidson - stated in an interview on the ABC on the 20th October 210 that the changes to the FOI Act is in line with what he calls, ‘the desirability of accountability’. Further, Mr Davidson stated that agencies should be ‘proactively publishing information’, so I have to say that to see him actively defending the AWM’s decision not to grant me the information I seek is somewhat hypocritical. Further, the fact that the AWM has refused me access to those documents and sought to engage the CGS here today to defend its decision can only be viewed as the AWM having a lot to hide and much to fear– and reason enough to demand it comply with my request. The ABC interview with Mr Davidson is attached. 2. To validate my service history My war service is a matter of great pride, and for my family as it is for every man who has put his life on the line for his country in a time of war. I freely enlisted in the regular army firmly believing in the notion of patriotism. I applied for the infantry which is at the pointy end of soldiering, and in December 1968, I volunteered to go to Vietnam as an infantry reinforcement. I subsequently served in four units before being wounded during my seventh month in the war. The circumstances of my wounding are recorded in Ashley Ekins’ final volume of the Vietnam War, and I draw your attention to his account (See p. 60) My service in the 2nd D&E Platoon was part of that service– yet all trace of it was erased from the records of the war, and the service histories of all the men who served in it corrupted to show that we served in the 6th Battalion during that time. (See p. of Anzacs Betrayed for a copy of that corrupt document). I also point out that until 1996, the Nominal Roll did not acknowledge that I served in the 9th Battalion, despite clear evidence that I did. (See p. 61 of the T1 docs) This caused me great angst, and has finally been rectified, but that it happened at all is only part of a wider process of vilification made possible by the deliberate corruption of my personal service documents by senior officers of the ADF– and corrupt behaviour of AWM officers. The documents I seek are to determine who was responsible for the deletion of the 2nd D&E Platoon from the records, and why. 3. The corruptions of service documents For the veterans involved, the corruption of documents pertaining to their war service meant that they were confined to an administrative ‘no-mans-land’ where neither the Army nor the AWM or the DVA recognised any claims by these men that they had served in such a unit or were involved in a major ambush at Thua Tich on May 30th 1969. Subsequently, some (for whom the ambush at Thua Tich was the most traumatic event they experienced in the war) were denied pensions, because pensions are only paid on evidence that the veteran served in such a such unit at a particular time and was involved in specific activities that affected the veteran to an extent where a pension should be paid. For some men, the consequences were life-changing. Pte Peter Allen was a member of the 2nd D&E Platoon, and committed murder some months after the 2nd D&E Platoon was disbanded. But at his trial, he was unable to use the trauma he had been involved with at Thua Tich as an excuse for his crime simply because all record of the platoon, and his involvement, had been deleted. Instead of any support, Allen was left high and dry by the military bureaucracy. He spent more than 10 years in Risdon Prison. Concomitant with that, where the same veteran is unable to validate parts of his war service, it results in debilitating vitriol and slander from other veterans. This has resulted in significant emotional and psychological anguish. Being labelled a wannabee is particularly insulting to men who undertook one of the most dangerous activities men can be involved in– but then find their place in history compromised. It was a natural consequence of that vitriol that two of us have been bashed in pursuing this matter. Jim Riddle (the NCO who led the 2nd D&E Platoon) was bashed in 2006 and is now in a vegetative state, and I was bashed outside my home in January 2011. Other members of the platoon have been forced into lives of isolation, some into mental asylums. I have not fought this battle for financial considerations. I qualified for a war pension, at least, by virtue of being wounded in action at a later date with the 9th Battalion which resulted in my hospitalisation for more than two years. This is about the integrity of military history and individual service records. Proving that the 2nd D&E Platoon did exist has been an on-going battle for decades– a battle against entrenched stupidity and insensitivity by those Government bodies that promised to care for the young man when he enlisted- the ADF, the AWM, and the DVA. They have dismissed our battle to have our service in the 2nd D&E Platoon validated, because fostering the myth of the ANZAC ‘legend’ is of greater importance than the welfare of soldiers. Instead, these veterans have been abandoned by a self-serving military establishment that has thrown them to the wolves– and which has maintained a steady defence based on deceit and collusion. To a large extent, they have also relied on the ignorance and laziness of those who are able to call them to account, like Federal Government Ministers. The falsification of historical accounts The corruption of the service histories of a serviceman is one thing– but deleting a whole unit of men from the records of the war has repercussions for the integrity of military history. The very essence of my request for documents from the AWM and its refusal to provide them are encapsulated in the 2nd D&E Platoon matter. And it is my contention that the deletion of all trace of the 2nd D&E Platoon was done for one reason– to cover-up a series of atrocities that were committed on May 31st 1969. The AWM has been a party to the cover-up. I will not go into all the details of the history of the matter, except to state that from 2005 until the present, the AWM has flatly refused to acknowledge that the 2nd D@E Platoon existed, and all its actions have been to maintain that lie despite the evidence presented otherwise. Despite the recalcitrance of the AWM, you will note that in May 2008, the platoon was formally recognised by the federal government after it had been served with absolute proof that the platoon existed. In a statement issued from Parliament House, the Parliamentary-Secretary for Defence said, ‘…the platoon did indeed exist and engaged in a series of important actions in Vietnam…’ (See p 59 of the T1 docs) My request for documents from the AWM is to ascertain who was responsible for the deletion of all trace of the platoon, and why and surely the AAT would appreciate the motives for such a request. I contend that the reason for the corruption of records is well known to the Directors and historian of the AWM– it was done to cover up a series of atrocities committed by a combined force under the leadership of Capt Tom Arrowsmith of which the 2nd D&E Platoon was a part. It is the position of the AWM that not only didn’t the 2nd D&E Platoon exist, but that no atrocities occurred. In recent years, despite first-hand accounts by the men involved, it has only gone as far as reluctantly acknowledging that there are differing accounts of what transpired, but ensuring that more weight is given to the officers involved than the lower ranks. For that reason, I now place on the record, the following information and first-hand accounts pertaining to he acts of atrocity carried out by the force which included the 2nd D&E Platoon: Some of those first-hand accounts, as follows: 1. Photographs: Two photographers were embedded in the 2nd D&E Platoon- Army Sgt Bellis, and civilian photographer, Dennis Gibbons. This was a very unusual event- and in fact, I never saw an embedded photographer at any other time. They recorded every aspect of the successful ambush at Thua Tich on May 30th 1969, and the follow-up ambush the next day- as well as the aftermath- including a series of photographs showing the enemy dead, bodies being dragged, and the reaction of villagers to the sight of headless bodies being dragged. Those photographs are available for viewing at the AWM. Many of those photographs have since been removed from the AWM records, and investigative journalist, Frank Walker (Ghost Platoon) has confirmed that many were destroyed by one of the photographers when these matters became public knowledge. 2. First-hand accounts by soldiers: As well as my account in 'The War Within' and 'Anzacs Betrayed', a number of other, former members of the combined amour/infantry force (including senior ADF officers) have supplied validating statements: - From my memoir, The War Within (published in 2008 by Murdoch Books): ‘Afterwards, when Pearson and his hangers-on had gone, they got us infantry boys to drag most of the bodies into a bomb crater. There was going to be a ‘sapper’s burial’, as they called it. We all cheered that. Especially the cavalry boys—they didn’t want to load the carcasses into their APCs. Fair enough, too, we thought. Who’d want to ride in there after they’d been carting around bodies as mutilated as some of them were. ‘Spooky’ tended to do that. But blowing bodies up? That was a newy to me. It didn’t feel right, somehow. And Riddle was pissed off about it as well. He didn’t think it was ‘appropriate’. I couldn’t see how it fitted in with our program of winning ‘hearts and minds’ either. Then a couple of soldiers started tying two of the bodies to the back of one of the carriers. Apparently, it was propaganda time—the local village chief was out to make a point. He wanted the bodies back in Xuyen Moc to set an example to anyone contemplating assisting the Viet Cong. We had to oblige. We were just shit-kickers, and it was way over my head the way things went down. I was glad I didn’t get to see the ‘sapper’s burial’ go down. We were on the move by then, and only heard the explosion behind us, and saw the pall of black smoke rising into the sky. The VC struck back early that same afternoon, ambushing the convoy as we made our way south to Xuyen Moc. They hit us with RPGs but they’d been too close, and the rockets bounced harmlessly off the sides of the carriers. That was all the VC had, so they got themselves shot up pretty bad. Pte Len Ellcombe took two of them out himself at close range while another held his hand to stop him sliding off the APC. We scurried round in circles, dashing in and out of the scrub. One wounded man was left wounded for me to cope with, while a couple of others were knocked over by the troopers. We were exultant. We had gotten through two major contacts with the enemy on consecutive days, and we’d escaped without a scratch. If Riddle had been an officer, he would’ve got a gong for sure. But he wasn’t. He was just a Private like the rest of us. He just got more bodies to bury. There was another incident too, that day, on the road to Xuyen Moc when the juices were flowing, well and truly. Civilians copped it. But I’ll let it lie. Some dogs shouldn’t be disturbed.’ Eventually, the remaining bodies were dumped in the center of Xuyen Moc. Two of them were headless. They’d been banging around at the back of the APC till they fell off. I don’t know where the heads ended up. - from Cpl James (Jim) Riddle- the de facto platoon commander of the 2nd D&E Platoon after Major Barry Parkin was replaced as platoon commander in a series of emails: ‘I recall the girl who was killed at the ambush, and there was another on the way back, after the ambush, when the tracks were in a panic and heading at speed while firing at people in the fields, on the way to Xuyen Moc the following morning. That was when we dragged the bodies behind us. Yes, the lads came and asked me what I thought about that, and I told them I was pissed off, but it was the thing soldiers do who are in their first combat and who are 'out of their lids’. I'd seen it before, and felt bad, but war is not for humans, so for a while, we were not human. ..’ And, ‘... Shortly after that the lead tracks ran into a space with villagers doing dry paddy work, and that’s where you saw the woman and kid killed by the tracks. It wasn't a deliberate killing. It was pure and simple panic by ‘trackies’ who had just been ambushed and were shit scared. We tried to stop them shooting, but we were all standing up in the back of the tracks and couldn't get at the gunners in time. These gunners were the untried ones...’ - From Ghost Platoon, Frank Walker (who spent a year investigating the matters) records how Riddle, ‘ ...has vivid memories of bullets ripping into a youth leading a water buffalo on the far side of the first paddy. He remembers seeing a woman carrying a baby knocked flat as bullets slammed into her, and the infant flying through the air...’ - Richard Bigwood- (taken from his Statutory Declaration to the AFP): ‘...The person I recall being Capt Arrowsmith ordered Private Slattery and me to tie 2 of the bodies to the back door of an APC. The door was in the down position and we used our toggle ropes to fasten them by the ankles to the bar inside the rear door, when the door was raised the bodies hung down on the outside of the vehicle. All the other bodies were dragged to an old bomb crater and were given an “ENGINEERS BURIAL” they were blown up...’. - Edward Colmer (a former AFP officer): in an email to me, dated 14 September 2007: ‘With Ashley Ekins most determined analysis of this matter flawed and totally fabricated, has now prompted to me to now consider proceeding with actually committing myself to compiling a "Brief of Evidence" that I will forward to the Federal Police. If Ashley Ekins continues to insist that we were never part of D & E Platoon, then I am prepared to touch on the atrocities, that he personally insists didn't happen...' and again, in an email to me dated 10th May 2009: ‘....I ate pork and noodles [a death wish!] because the villages hated us for brassing them up en route to Xuyen Moc, from the Thua Tich engagements...’. - Trooper Allan Stanton- the driver of Capt Tom Arrowsmith’s APC writing his own account in Before I Forget (Sidharta Press): ‘...it was decided to take five bodies, tie them together and hang them by their ankles from the back of the carrier for the trip back to Xuyen Moc. Before leaving the ambush site we had one further task to perform- dispose of the other six bodies. We dragged them to an old bomb crater....Along with the bodies were placed explosives, hand grenades, a number of Claymore mines, a few gallons of petrol and a long fuse cord. The fuse was lit and about five minutes later the explosion of our crude burial could be hears....There was now one more task to perform before our return to the Dat- take the bodies of the five VC still hanging from the backs of Two-Alpha-Zero into the village square. I knew they were still there by the shocked loks on the faces of the locals as we drove through the village...’ - Robert Enright- a former member of the 2nd D&E Platoon: - First, he had already raised the matter of the atrocities in a newspaper account in the Northern Territory News in 1976, and in an email to me, dated April 25th 2011, stated: ‘...I covered Manski as he unceremoniously dragged the unfortunate girl back towards the road arch of ancient where she was tied to an APC along with three others...and seven more to be blown up as crows meat..’ and again, in a subsequent email to me: ‘....the shooting at the rice paddy workers who were aghast at the sight of their own (being dragged)....and as we turned into the main square of Xuyen Moc I could see the command vehicle which had turned left and the OC. (Arrowsmith) leaned back to cut the rope to release the done and dusted corpses....’ - Des Blazely- a former member of the 2nd D&E Platoon in a letter to me (which I forwarded to the AFP): ‘..the bodies were given an Engineer’s burial in the vicinity of the Thua Tich gates.....we received remnants from human bodies fall from the sky (after the explosion)...’ - Terry Slattery- a former member of the platoon: 'I was not in actual ambush but next day did the sweep, watched the choppers with the Big Brass roll in, photos were taken then after they left I was ordered to help drag bodies (3 were tied to the back of APC (one was a woman) and the other 8 to a bomb crater for an engineers burial, which I had never heard of before). I remember when I grabbed a leg and the skin peeled off in my hands and the smell was with me for a long while. We were in the last mob of APC to leave and were ambushed on the way. Reported 5 kills.Got back to village where I asked what happened to bodies and was told the village people would wash and bury them.I can remember Normie Rowe having a sing along and us having hot beer with ice in it. Next day a report came in that a APC hit and killed a woman and child, don't know if that was confirmed. Next I remember we were split up and I was sent to 9RAR B company along with a few others. I would have fallen at the first hurdle with all the backlash you have received, but I hope you make it to the winning post...Slats.... PS I have told my story to my psychiatrist for over 30 yrs and have had several stays at Repat, the Demons still haunt me .. IT Did Happen. For many years I did not know that this was a cover up.' - An independent verification from ‘Septemus Prime': On 27 Jul 2010, I received this letter from an anonymous source which contained names and matters only a former officer of senior rank would have been aware of. He has never revealed his true name, despite repeated requests. He wrote: 'The occurrences which were documented by Don Tate in his book 'The War Within' did indeed occur. I happened to be working at AHQ in Canberra shortly after the event and I can tell you the incident caused quite a stir, especially within the ranks of the Australian Army Public Relations Service. I recall a mad scramble headed by Lt/Col Lance Logan, the CO; and Major Ross McKenzie (2IC). I was informed of the incident by Captain Eric Barnett, well after the fact. The incident was common knowledge by all members of the AAPRS. A complete statement of denial was written at that time at the highest level at AHQ to thwart inquiries from journalists and news organizations should the incident become widespread public knowledge. Lt/Col Logan oversaw this. The Australian Army deliberately destroyed documentation, falsified documentation and intimidated witnesses to cover up certain unsavory acts and atrocities committed by Australian soldiers in the field in South Vietnam. 16mm cinefilm and 35mm photographs did exist showing an APC towing dead suspected Viet Cong through a muddy field. I saw the film myself before it miraculously 'disappeared' from AAPRS custody. It was not something anyone could ever forget after viewing. The AAPRS was charged with the processing and release of all 'official' media activity concerning the Army's role in Vietnam. Those images deemed un-PR-like, were censored and listed NFR (not for release). Images showing death and destruction were always marked NFR. Images of Diggers receiving awards, doing good deeds for the local population, attending to the medical and nutritional needs of villagers were always good PR and released for publication. The AAPRS was highly active in controlling information, anything portraying Australia's involvement in Vietnam in a 'positive' light was deemed 'good' PR. The people of Australia owe Don Tate a huge apology. Those most vocal in shouting him down should be suspected as either stupid, insane, or perhaps part of the cover up, which has continued far too long.’ So, have no doubt about this- not only did the 2nd D&E Platoon exist, but it was involved in a series of atrocities. In addition, the AAT should note that immediately after the atrocities, Capt Tom Arrowsmith was demoted, and the 2nd D&E Platoon disbanded. The other point of contention concerns the distribution of gallantry medals. The AAT should note that despite the contentions, the Task Force Commander (Brigadier C. Pearson) received a Distinguished Service Order, Capt Tom Arrowsmith was awarded a Star of Gallantry in the End-of-War List, while a Military Cross was awarded to the officer commanding the generic D&E Platoon – Lt Ray Woolan – (despite the fact that his platoon was not present at the ambush). The London Gazette of November 1969 records the awarding of the medal to Pearson and Woolan. (See attached). However, I would now like to concentrate on the corruptions of historical documents that resulted in the falsification of military history. The AWM acknowledges that deceiving the populace is part and parcel of their role as gatekeepers of military history. An essay written on behalf of the AWM by Simon Forrester make the point that even photographs are censored and manipulated to reflect a different truth to the one from the battlefield: ‘….Photographs of patrols and operations generally depict Australian troops in heroic, deliberately posed shots of helicopter 'insertions' and 'extractions', or stoically pressing on through mud or forest. Images of Australian wounded appear, but the injured are always conscious and being given medical attention. Even images of events as drastic as a major plasma transfusion in the field are reassuring in their suggestion that modern medical science is available to all, no matter where they may be. The photographs of 'dust offs' (medical evacuations by helicopter) suggest that full hospital facilities are only a radio message away. There is only one series of photographs that documents the death of an Australian soldier. These few colour photographs depict a chaplain giving the Last Rites to the dying man, already partially wrapped in the hoochie used as a substitute body bag in the field, and several later stages as his body is removed to a helicopter pick-up point, winched aboard and flown away. These images were never released during the war. The enemy are always depicted as defeated. They are shown hands tied, blindfolded, awaiting interrogation. Although now unarmed and looking meek, they are always closely guarded, suggesting they are dangerous and treacherous. Although enemy dead are photographed on many occasions graphic images were never made public at the time of the war. Army Public Relations photographer Sergeant Chris Bellis' image taken on the morning after a night ambush against Viet Cong at Thua Tich in June 1969 is an example. The contorted body of a Viet Cong wearing a light shirt and shorts, his head haloed by barbed wire, dominates the entire foreground. In the middle distance, with a second Vietnamese body, are seven Australian soldiers milling about. In the original albums presented to the Australian War Memorial by Defence Public Relations 'NOT FOR RELEASE' is written heavily over the small print of this negative. There are many similar examples to be found throughout the albums…..’ ‘Sanitisation’ and ‘editing’ are two weapons used by Defence to remove any material with the potential to embarrass the military or the government after a war– par for the course. But disappearing official enquiries into allegations of war crimes is altogether another thing. When the ‘legend’ of ANZAC can be bent to accommodate an historian’s opinion rather than the words of men who were at the coalface, we have a national disgrace. Conclusion The simple fact behind all this intrigue is that the military leaders of the day covered-up a series of atrocities committed on May 30th 1969 by deleting all trace of the 2nd D&E Platoon from the histories of the war. It is a cover-up that continues to this day. The AWM and the military have always denied that atrocities occurred. There has been great wrong done here. Response by the AAT: CONSIDERATION 40. Under section 24 the agency must undertake a request consultation process if satisfied that a practical refusal reason exists in relation to the request. This process is set out in section 24AB. In this case I am satisfied that this consultation process was undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the FOI Act. The Respondent’s letter dated 10 September 2013 contained the matters required by subsection (2). The letter also usefully identified ways the Applicant’s requests might be revised in an attempt to remove the practical refusal reason. 41. The Applicant places great weight on the reasons for which he requires access. 42. However, under section 24AA when deciding whether a practical refusal reason exists, regard must not be directed to any reasons which the Applicant gives for requesting access or to the agency’s belief as to what are the Applicant’s reasons for requesting access. 43. I have also taken into account Part 3 of the current version of the Guidelines issued by the Australian Information Commissioner under section 93A of the FOI Act, particularly paragraphs 3.96 to 3.107. 44. In order to determine whether there would be a substantial and unreasonable diversion of resources from other operations, it is necessary to first determine the scope of the request, and this will enable an assessment to be made as to the extent of any diversion of resources which will be caused. In this case the scope is extremely wide and non- specific. 45. When considering the nature and extent of resources necessary to deal with an FOI request it is appropriate for an assessment to be made on what is estimated to be the amount and extent of work involved in compliance with the request for information but it is not necessary when considering the exercise of power to refuse the request under section 24 to consider in detail the contents of all documents comprised in a wide ranging and generalised request such as the present one. The process is one which requires a consideration of the resources likely to be necessary in order to comply. 46. From the first request made pursuant to the FOI Act, it can be seen that there is no limitation as to time. It is framed on the basis that it requires all documents referring to the “2nd D&E Platoon matter”. There is then a reference to correspondence between certain persons being included as part of that imprecise and unlimited request. The request also seeks correspondence regarding the Applicant over a period of more than nine years concerning five named persons. It can be appreciated from an examination of the scope and nature of the request and the requirements of the FOI Act that there is a requirement to employ very significant resources to comply and this is, in my view, established by the affidavit of Ms Patterson and also the letter of refusal. 47. When the request for these documents were made on an informal basis 90 documents relating to the request were furnished and a number of these were furnished in a redacted form after removing personal information. This is not a case where the Respondent has made no efforts to provide documents in response to the Applicant’s requests. The Respondent has acted reasonably in relation to the Applicant’s requests and has cooperated with him to a significant extent by providing documents in response to informal requests. This is not a case where an agency has simply refused to engage in any meaningful manner with an applicant in relation to his request for information. 48. As pointed out by the Respondent in its refusal of the FOI request, the use of resources could be substantially reduced in the event that the Applicant undertakes the task of being more specific as to the documents requested, or clarifying specifically the information that he seeks. The Applicant will be assisted in the task of modifying his request so as to be more specific and detailed by using the substantial number of documents he has already received. As a consequence of the request being altered to be more specific and precise, no doubt, some of the resources would be unnecessary and the force of the practical reasons for refusal would be lessened. 49. Having regard to the evidence before me from Ms Patterson and the material furnished by both the Respondent and the Applicant, I am satisfied that work involved in processing the request for documents in this case would substantially and unreasonably divert the resources of the agency from its other operations. In particular, on the evidence I consider that the operations concerning the current projects relating to the Centenary commemorations and the ANZAC project are important priority operations which will require the dedication of substantial resources and that resources will be diverted from these important projects if the Applicant’s requests in their present terms are to be pursued. 50. In reaching this conclusion I have taken into account the time, cost and amount of work and the expert personnel needed to find, identify and collate the documents sought in the agency or in other departments, and to analyse and examine the documents together with consultations with other persons or entities in relation to the request. Extensive redacting of the documents will probably be required and this redaction will involve fine and complex decisions as to the need for redaction and the extent of such redaction. 51. I consider that in this matter the Respondent has acted in a responsible and reasonable manner in making available a substantial number of records and in attempting to narrow the scope and lessen the burden of searching for the information to be made available and that is has made out its case for refusal on the grounds of the existence of “practical reasons” for refusal. CONCLUSION 
 52. I accept the detailed evidence of Ms Patterson and after taking into account the material present before me including the T documents and all the material produced by the Applicant and his detailed submissions, I consider that the decision under review should be affirmed. 
I certify that the preceding 52 (fifty - two) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for the decision herein of The Hon. Brian Tamberlin, QC, Deputy President 
....................[sgd]............................................... Dated 27 February 2015 PS I attach the announcement by Major Harry Smith at the launch of his book in which he alleges senior army officers falsified historical accounts of a battle in order to secure gallantry medals 50 years ago. When one of their own admits that corruption is part and parcel of Australian military history, one should doubt everything trotted out.