XXXXX, Xxxxxxx Xxxxx

This imposter was featured in a book by Alister Taylor of Auckland, New Zealand, in the $185 per copy "Australian Roll of Honour". A highly-questionable vanity publication promising a "Reference to anyone who has achieved anything in Australia over the past 40 years". 

New South Wales Fair Trading Minister John Watkins went to press, saying his department had received 10 formal complaints about the company: "I strongly advise New South Wales consumers to avoid this venture." Taylor says claims that people had to pay up to $500 to have their biographies printed were not true.

No interviews or research were conducted for this publication, the subjects provided their own history and claims. This is the very publication this imposter has used in an attempt to verify his claims. Remember, these are self-authored 'biographies'.

You should also note the collusion of the imposter's family in propagating these and other stories. Family members of this imposter have gone so far as to set up varied web sites purporting to be the 'official' CPMH web site, stealing copyrighted content from this site (using myriad fake aliases and email addresses) including guest book entrants from this site featured on their "wall of shame" in vexatious attempts to cause harrassment of CPMH team members and supporters. The photo here featured the imposter dressed in an Army captain's uniform. It was later claimed by a family member of the imposter that it was taken during his term as a bandmaster of the Xxxxxxxxxx City band. When that was proven to be fallacious, he then claimed it was during a WW1 re-enactment school visit. 

This imposter, a genuine veteran has attempted to claim decorations to whichj he has no entitlement. He has proved deceptive and used guile to trade himself off as a person worthy of the citations he erroneously claims.

RAAF Sergeant Xxxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxx was born December 7, 194X. His Vietnam service was with 2 Squadron (Canberra Bombers) from August 13, 1970 to June 3, 1971. He was awarded Mention in Despatches (December 6, 1971) and authorised to wear the US Air Force Outstanding Unit Award  (with V device) and the South Vietnamese Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation awarded to his unit, 2 Squadron RAAF.

His personal medals are The Australian Active Service Medal, Australian Vietnam Medal with MID  and The Vietnamese Campaign Medal. Against protocol, he used the MID as a post-nominal.

Xxxxx resides west of Sydney, New South Wales, and attended the Vietnam memorial service conducted 18 August 1996 at the lower mountain township of Springwood.

At a Springwood hotel, he was confronted by another Vietnam veteran (Army)  for wearing the US Presidential Unit Citation. The army veteran saw the citation emblem attached to the right side of Xxxxx' Vietnam Veterans' Motorcycle Club jacket (Colours) and said to Xxxxx, "See you're still wearing the wrong citation!".

Xxxxx replied saying, "I was with The Team ("The Team" in Australian military terms is the Australian Army Training Team, AATTV) on helicopter operations over the border and I can't say anymore" as justification for the wearing of this highly regarded award, the US Presidential Unit Citation  (US/PUC)

However other witnesses have stated that when Xxxxx was asked about the emblem, he has said; "I was on clandestine operations with SAS (Australian Special Forces) across the border and the award was made to the unit by The President but we're not allowed to talk about it"  and "I was at Long Tan."

The facts:

• No RAAF personnel served with the AATTV. (The RAAF Caribou Flight did support the AATTV). The AATTV was awarded the US Meritorious Unit Commendation (US/MUC) with a cut-off date of August 31, 1969. His service was August 1970 to June 1971.
• Australian SAS units (Special Air Service Regiment) conducted no operations outside Vietnam's borders and the SAS were not awarded the US/PUC (Army).
• Long Tan and August 18 is part of Australian Military History because on that date in 1966 D Company, 6th Battalion The Royal Australian Regiment (6RAR) numbering 108 souls was involved in an epic 3 hour battle with an estimated 2,500 strong Viet Cong (VC) Regiment, re-enforced by a North Vietnamese Army (NVA) battalion. The Australians lost 18 killed with 24 wounded and for 2 days after the battle buried 245 VC. For its courage and tenacity during the battle President (LBJ) Johnson awarded D Company 6RAR the US/PUC (Army) in 1968.
  
  Was Xxxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxx at the battle of Long Tan?  No, he was not! He wasn't in Vietnam during 1966 as his service was restricted to 1970 and 1971.

Xxxxx' claims are false, and he has no entitlement to the award.

CPMH has been forwarded several orginal e-mail messages from Xxxxx to ors, in one, he confesses that he has lied about his exploits in uniform.

See Xxxxx' threats and abuse and reaction to those who merely question his authority to wear awards to which he is not entitled, link removed due to apology received.

Check Xxxxx' genuine entitlements link removed due to apology received.

On 14 June 2002 an apology in the form of a hand written letter was received at CPMH by the above mentioned person for wearing the award of the US Presidential Citation to which this veteran had no entitlement. This apology was received via the Australian Federal Police. The above veteran has now been informed via that source that due to his being a genuine veteran his name will be removed from the site, however, the story, without name and picture will remain on the site as a reminder of the fact that he did in fact claim and wear an award to which he was not entitled and that by doing so was committing an offence against the Defence Act. To date he has not been charged with this offence.

The apology letter, minus signature is published here and the member has been informed that if in the future he attempts to wear the said award again his name and photograph will be reinstated on the site and a formal request will be placed with the Federal Police to have him charged in accordance with the Defence Act. The above action has only been considered as this veteran who, for reasons known only to himself, decided that he needed more than his entitlement of medals and awards.

Now seeing the error of his ways, his name and photograph have been removed and his informal apology to the veteran community at large is here for all to see. Had this person not been a veteran, the opportunity to amend his ways would not have been offered.

He has been reminded that if the offence is committed again in the future and reported to us, he will resume normal status on the site for which there will be no compromise.