Entries with Surname (Title)s starting with 'B'

Surname: Bartels
Christian Names: Alexander James
Country: Australia
State or Province: TAS
City or Town: Exeter
Service #: 8237880
Service: Army
Branch: RAEME
Commencement of service: 23 May 2002
Completion of service: 01 May 2008
Case Notes:

 

 

 

Alexander James Bartels was an Armourer in the Royal Australian Electrical and Mechanical Engineers, a position that is highly regarded in all three services of the Australian Defence Force.

Bartels01

 

Mr Bartels is not a valour thief, he’s not a medals cheat, he’s not even a wannabe. But he IS a fraud.

Bartels served just short of six years in RAEME as a Fitter Armament (Armourer). During which time his service was underwhelming at best. In fact, on 1st April 2008, Bartels was discharged from the Army as his Retention was not in the Service’s Interest. In other words, his attitude towards service life was so bad his superiors had no other choice but to get rid of him.

During Bartels’ mundane service he never left Australia and he definitely did not serve on operations overseas. Bartels’ life only became interesting once he was discharged from the Army.

On the 2nd of November 2015 Bartels fronted the Supreme Court of Tasmania and was convicted for Unlawful Trafficking in Firearms and related summary offences. According to information provided to ANZMI Bartels told the court he spent 10 years in the Army with the 5th Battalion Royal Australian Regiment (5RAR). During this supposed service, he claimed to have been deployed on operations to East Timor and Iraq.

As already stated, Bartels’ only served six years in the Army and not 10, he was never posted to 5RAR and was never deployed to East Timor or Iraq.

The Supreme Court of Tasmania sentenced Bartels to 10 months imprisonment (wholly suspended for two years), 198 hours of Community Service and fined $9,000. It is understood that Bartels’ sentence was wholly suspended because of his claims to the Court he was suffering from PTSD, which he apparently developed as a result of his bogus war service.

Prior to Bartels’ appearance in the Supreme Court, is also understood that he has previously been charged with similar firearm offences. In 2010 Bartels was fined $800 for firearms offences, and in 2011 Bartels was convicted on more firearms offences, for which the sentence was wholly suspended.

Since learning about Bartels’ lies to the Supreme Court of Tasmania, the Tasmanian Department of Public Prosecutions have begun an investigation into Bartels’ false claims of operational service and suffering from PTSD and, in due course, will apply to have his sentence reviewed.

This should serve as a warning to anyone who thinks they can bluff the judicial system with fabricated claims of operational service with the intent of deceiving the Courts and receiving a reduced sentence.

If you try it, you will be caught.

Welcome Alexander James Bartels to our website for all the world to see.

Surname: Bass
Christian Names: Andrew
Country: USA
State or Province: Texas
City or Town: Dallas/Fort Worth
Service #: Nil
Service: NIL
Branch: NIL
Commencement of service: NIL
Completion of service: NIL
Case Notes:

 

 

 

Major Sir Andrew Bass is an ex patriot Australian who resides in the Lone Star State of Texas, in the United States of America.

His use of the rank Major, is as fictitious as his Knighthood, although he publicly advertises both on social media. He is often seen at functions wearing Australian Military uniforms. Here is an example:


Notice how "Daggy" he looks in the uniform. It is hardly the way an ex Australian Major would want to present an Australian uniform.

Here is where Bass makes his claims in writing:

The above can be found on this web site:

army.togetherweserved.com/army/servlet/t...ype=Person&ID=113243.

TXARNG is an acronym for Texas Army National Guard, where it appears Bass served as a Private Soldier during 2003 and 2005. He clearly states that he was a Major in the Australian Army.

A thorough search of Australian National Archives failed to find any information about a person named Andrew Bass as ever serving in the Australian Defence Force.

Bass also insults the people of Texas by using the Title "Sir Andrew" inferring that he has been dubbed as a Knight of the Realm of the British Empire. This act makes Australians cringe at his audacity. When we asked Bass about his Knighthood he answered as follows;

"From: Andrew Bass
ANZMI

I hold the title of Sir Andrew because I hold the rank of Knight's Bachelor with the order of Saint John the Hospitaller, Knight of Malta (USA Division). I was invited to join the Order in 2004."


The Knights of Saint John the Hospitaller, Knight of Malta (USA Division) have no authority to dub any person with a Knighthood except perhaps in the confines of their "Club" when they are playing dress ups. Publicly using the title of "Sir" as a result of such a "Knighthood" is the epitome of audacious and dishonest representation.

Despite requesting information from him about his Australian Army Service as a commissioned officer on three occasions, Bass failed to respond. The reason for this is that he was never a Major in the Australian Army, and we doubt that he has had any service at all in Australia,

We direct Bass to stop insulting Australian and New Zealand Veterans by pretending to be something he is not. We are pleased to note that people from Texas were easily able to detect and report his deceit.

We are pleased to advise that Major Sir Andrew Bass has left the building, and now we welcome plain old Private Mr Andrew Bass, formerly of the TXARNG to our web site

Surname: Bateman
Christian Names: Geoff
Country: New Zealand
State or Province: South Island
City or Town: Invercargill
NZ -Which Island:
  • South Island
Service: NZ Army
Case Notes:

Geoff Bateman of Invercargill, New Zealand lied about his military history and gets his comeuppance from irate local Veterans.

 

 This case has been comprehensively explained in the following newspaper article.

 

 

Bateman is a “shifty” individual who like many we have on our web site has lied to everyone including the ones they love about their military history.  With the help of Veterans all over Australia and New Zealand, ANZMI keeps on slogging along weeding out liars, frauds and wannabes from the Veteran community

Welcome to our web site Geoff Bateman of Invercargill NZ

This is published in the public interest, particularly that of the Vietnam Veteran Community. All information presented here is fact and the truth. Reports from private citizens are supported by statements of fact and statutory declarations.

Surname: Batt
Christian Names: Arthur James
Country: Australia
State or Province: NSW
City or Town: Medowie
Service #: 17623
Service: Army
Branch: Infantry
Commencement of service: Unknown
Completion of service: Unknown
Case Notes:

 

Many services were conducted throughout Australia and New Zealand this year to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan, a significant conflict in Australia’s involvement in the Vietnam War.

 

The picture below was taken at such a service, conducted in the small Hunter Valley town of Medowie. Arthur Batt, a local Vietnam veteran is reading a poem during that service.

 

Batt 1 2

 

Batt was a member of the 1st Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment.

In early 1965, the Australian Government agreed to dispatch an infantry battalion to South Vietnam. The leading troops of the 1st Battalion, The Royal Australian Regiment (1RAR), landed on 3 June in a chartered Qantas aircraft. This was the first use of Qantas charters to move troops into (and out of) South Vietnam, and ‘skippy flights’, as they came to be known, would continue at regular intervals almost until the end of Australia’s commitment to the war. Another significant event occurred on 8 June, when the transport ship (converted aircraft carrier) HMAS Sydney, with destroyer escort HMAS Parramatta and HMAS Duchess, arrived at Vung Tau on the first of what became regular naval logistical support operations.

 

1RAR, the only infantry battalion deployed to Vietnam that was comprised wholly of regular troops, was deployed in Bien Hoa with the US 173rd Airborne Brigade. It was soon built up to a battalion group with artillery, armoured personnel carriers, army aviation and logistical support units. The battalion group saw some heavy fighting, suffering twenty-three men killed during its one-year tour of duty.

For their involvement, they were awarded the US Army Meritorious Unit Commendation, the citation reads:

 

By the direction of the Secretary of the Army, the Meritorious Unit Commendation is awarded to the 1st BATTALION, ROYAL AUSTRALIAN REGIMENT GROUP for exceptionally meritorious achievement in the performance of outstanding service:

The 1st Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment, distinguished itself in the conduct of military operation in the Republic of Vietnam from 5 May 1965 to 16 May 1966 while attached to the173rd Airborne Brigade(Separate) of the United States Army.  As the first ground combat unit in-country, the 173rd Airborne Brigade and its assigned and attached units conducted extensive combat manoeuvres in the Bien Hoa area and in the Viet Cong strongholds of War Zone D and the Iron Triangle during the period 5 May 1965 to 4 May 1967.  In every confrontation with the stubborn insurgents, the 173rd Airborne Brigade displayed marked aggressiveness which enabled them to neutralize enemy strongholds and capture thousands of logistical items.  In addition to remarkable skill and tenacity in combat, the sky soldiers of the brigade carried on an extensive civic action program characterised by sincere compassion for the   suppressed local populace.  During each of the brigade's combat operations, the sky soldiers immeasurably aided the allied counterinsurgency effort by winning the hearts and minds of the Vietnamese people.  The remarkable proficiency and devotion to duty displayed by the members of the 173rd Airborne Brigade are in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflect distinct credit upon themselves, the Armed Forces of the United States, and the Armed Forces of Australian and New Zealand.

The Unit Citation, as shown below, can be worn with pride by those members of 1RAR.

Batt 2

1RAR was relieved by the First Australian Task Force (1ATF) during May-June 1966. It returned to Australia in June.

 

Batt 3

 

After the Medowie memorial service, Batt was photographed and appeared in an online media publication, “News of The Area”. For those of you who have read this article, it refers to Batt having been involved in the Battle of Long Tan, this has been identified as an error on behalf of the reporter, the fact being Batt left Vietnam before this event. This is supported by the below extract from the Vietnam Veterans Nominal Roll, which is available in the public domain.

 

Batt Retraction

 

 

Batt 4

 

In the previous photograph, Batt is wearing the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal (RVCM).

The RVCM was issued by the Government of the Republic of Vietnam for service in the prescribed area of operations in Vietnam during the period commencing on 31 July 1962 and ending on 28 March 1973 for Australian personnel.

 

Batt 5

The Australian Government authorised this medal to be awarded to Australian servicemen and women and, like any award, there is a qualifying criteria.

The Australian government maintained the basic qualifying criteria specified by the Republic of Vietnam for allied troops. To be eligible for the medal a person must have completed a minimum period of 181 days, either continuous or aggregated, unless:

-        killed on active service (KIA);

-        wounded in action i.e. classified as a Battle Casualty and evacuated as a result of those wounds; or

-        captured and later released or escaped.

Medical evacuation from the area of operations for any reasons other than wounds received in action does not constitute an exemption from meeting the minimum qualifying period.

Accordingly, for Batt, the evidence is in, namely:

-        He returned to Australia, along with his Unit, from Vietnam on 01 Jul 1966;

-        He served a total of 173 days in Vietnam; and

-        He was not a casualty of that conflict.

In summary, Batt is not entitled to wear the RVCM. Surely, like all others who have served in the defence forces, Batt understands there are rules and regulations, they are there for a reason and they are ‘black and white’.

To conduct yourself with such disrespect to fellow Veterans, aggravated by the fact you did it on such an occasion, namely the 50th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan, is quite disgraceful and has earned you a place on ANZMI with your fellow fraudsters and honour thieves.

 

Surname: Bauerle
Christian Names: John
Country: Australia
State or Province: NSW
City or Town: Glenroy - North Albury
Service #: .3782491
Service: Army
Branch: RAAC
Commencement of service: 17 May 1958
Completion of service: Unknown
Case Notes:

 

 

 

John Bauerle is the President of the Albury - Wodonga Branch of the National Serviceman's Association. (NSA). He has been the President of that organisation for 17 years. He commenced compulsory 3 months National Service training at Puckapunyal Recruit Training Camp in Victoria in May 1958. He was attached to an Armoured Unit there for his remaining service.

In the photograph sent to us below, Bauerle is wearing three medal ribands for his three months service at Puckapunyal.

 


 

The first riband from the left is,

An unofficial tin medal riband that denotes National Service. Purchased.

The Second riband from the left is,

The Conscripts Service Medal riband. This is also an unofficial self purchased tin medal riband.

The third from the left is the -;

A Citizens Military Forces/Australian Reserve Forces Medal riband. This is also an unofficial self purchased tin medal riband.

Bauerle has been a President of an Ex Service Organisation for 17 years. He has set a bad example for all the National Service members in his Albury- Wodonga Branch and also the entire Australia National Servicemen's Association.

Since this photograph was taken, he has probably applied for his correct entitlement to the Australian Defence Force Medal and the genuine Anniversary of National Service Medal.

However, by his wearing of unofficial tin purchased ribands, he implied to all those in his organisation that it is acceptable to wear what you like.

Leading by example in regards to medals protocols should be one of his prime responsibilities. He is a medals cheat who lacks respect for the men and women who have genuinely been awarded military medals for their honourable service.

Particularly those who have served in operational areas on active service.

If you were sent to Vietnam for a 12 month deployment, you came home with two ribands. A serviceman/woman would be required to serve six months or more in country or Vietnam waters to be awarded the two medal/ribands. Bauerle had three months at Puckapunyal, Victoria, and in the photograph wears three medal ribands.

If you have the compulsion to wear tin purchased medal ribands, they should be worn on the right.

Bauerle should stand down from his current position for his disrespect and lack of leadership.

The National Servicemen's Association, Head Office, Sydney, recently introduced the position of a Protocols Officer within their organisation to prevent medal cheats and imposters denigrating their Association.

This followed numerous complaints received regarding former National Servicemen glorifying their medals entitlement over many years by adding non awarded medals and ribands to their rack. It was becoming a problem.

From the reports we are receiving at Anzmi, and soon to be published, it appears that it is still a problem, and the Protocol Officer has a long way to go to instill some integrity into the National Servicemen's Association in regards to medals protocols.

We are not at odds with any ex service organisation that contributes to the welfare of its members. We support the great work they do. This includes the Returned and Services League of Australia,(RSL) NSA. VVFA, VVAA, APPVA, Salvation Army, Naval Associations or any other body.

However, we do have problems with individuals within those bodies who bring their organisations into disrepute by not adhering to the Governor General's medals protocols.

Whilst medal cheats and imposters are out there, we will expose them.

There is no else!

Surname: Bayley
Christian Names: Graeme Maurice
Country: Australia
State or Province: Victoria
City or Town: Melbourne
Service: Army
Case Notes:

 

Graeme Maurice Bayley

Thanks to the press and a 4 RAR veteran, another Ex-Service Organisation "Executive" has been exposed.  It was not enough that this man served as a genuine veteran, he felt a need to wear more than his legal entitlement regarding war service medals and to lie about how long he spent in Vietnam.   May he reap the recognition he deserves.


 

Melbourne Shrine of Remembrance - August the 18th 2001, guest speaker - Graeme BAYLEY voiced to all in attendance: " It is time for Vietnam veterans to move on, the past is the past.  There is no point dwelling on it" 
A very easy thing for him to say because he didn't endure what the majority of Vietnam Veterans had to endure and by this we mean a long time away from family and loved ones in a strange country embroiled in a nasty war.

BAYLEY was a senior member of the Vietnam Veterans Association of Australia (VVAA) and the several hundred Vietnam Veterans in attendance heard his advice echo around the pillars of the most sacred edifice in Victoria - after all - he was an invited guest speaker, and why would anyone doubt his credentials?

In March 2006 ANZMI was contacted by several irate members representing the 4th Battalion Royal Australian Regiment,  these veterans had been handed newspaper clippings of BAYLEY's appearance as guest speaker five years earlier, and the target of their anger was BAYLEY wearing  a medal he had no entitlement to - and still wears - the "Vietnamese Campaign Medal" awarded to veterans who served more than six months "in-country" - 



 

"on the front line within 5 months"
The period between his enlistment and arrival in Vietnam was 8 months which disproves this statement. His claimed 5 month  time frame was a virtual impossibility for anyone of his rank and Corps. 
BAYLEY enlisted (was conscripted) on 1 May 1968 and arrived at 1ARU, Nui Dat, Vietnam, 6 January 1969.   He spent 40 days at this Reinforcement Unit, a notably long period of time.  20 to 22 days was the norm for Infantrymen who displayed any ability since capable reinforcements were always required by the Battalions as soon as possible.

"serving 9 months with the 4th Royal Australian Regiment"
He was posted to the 4th Battalion on 18 February 1969 and began his return to Australia on 19 May 1969. The length of this posting was 3 months and totally denies his fanciful claim.   Had he served on Operations Federal, Overlander and Stafford with the Battalion, he could have spent a total of 58 days in the bush but we don't have any definitive information on his actual duties within the unit. Not all Infantrymen posted to Battalions went outside the wire on warlike operations.

"He found fitting back into life at home was easier for him than others"
BAYLEY departed for Australia with 4RAR aboard HMAS SYDNEY on 19 May 69....why?
His total Vietnam service was 4 1/2 months, a lot shorter than the majority of Infantry tours which were 1 year.  The reason for this is unknown but what is known is that some Infantry posted to Battalions took the option of an early return with their unit while many more were posted out to other units to complete a normal tour.
There is no indication that BAYLEY suffered from any disability which may have prompted this early return, it would appear that he took up the option.

ANZMI contacted BAYLEY and requested he clarify the situation - as he is a genuine veteran he was given ample opportunity to prove or disprove his illegal wearing of the medal - he neglected to reply to our correspondence and now will remain on the CASES page as evidence that the Veteran Community will not suffer this type of offender.
Should he offer an apology to the relevant people and units, it will be treated as all others have been.

If not for the alertness of a 4 RAR veteran this charade would have continued unreported.  BAYLEY would be fully cognizant that he commits an offence against the "Defence Act" each time he "medals up" - here is an opportunity for the VVAA/RSL to recommend charges be laid....or will they close ranks around him?

Graeme BAYLEY - you have been exposed by your own battalion mates as a poseur and a fraud - may you reap what you have sown.

Allegedly there is a lot more to this man and his dealings with Veterans that cannot be published by us. We look forward to some interesting guest book entries about Mr Bayley.

Updated 27 Aug 06
 

GRAEME BAYLEY wrote...."Would you please consider removing me from the cases file" Our answer is yes, we will, but only if a majority of Veterans agree that we should.

BAYLEY sent the following email as a reply to correspondence from us.  In it, he offers information on how he came to be in possession of  the Vietnamese Campaign Medal and offers an apology.

He was asked to reply before 6 July 06 but his first email reply of 30 June was not addressed correctly and obviously wasn't received by us. Further emails, one with the same apology and an admission as to "the error of his ways", were sent to the correct address after his story was published on 15 August 06. We contacted him to make sure we had copies of every email he sent to either correct or incorrect email addresses.

We find it very difficult to believe that a person who has been involved with ex-service organisations as long as he has would be unaware of the requirements and protocols surrounding this award. 

"Given to me by a regular Army mate" The Australian Government didn't give him one but his mate did so he feels he can legally wear it. What a bloody ridiculous statement.

He was "the Secretary of the Melbourne Sub Branch of the VVAA for about 8 years" and apparently not once in that time did he become aware of the requirements for the award nor the protocols.

"Because I took no notice of protocol, or learning what was right or wrong with medals I now apologize............"

Pull the other one Mr BAYLEY.

He also said that he has no idea where the statement about him being on the "frontline" 5 months after his call up date came from. It was published in the newspaper, he would have read it and anyone else who read it would reasonably believe it came from him, if it was an incorrect quote he'll have to take it up with the editor and have a retraction published.

Nowhere in his emails does he fully address this statement from the news article "serving 9 months with the 4th Royal Australian Regiment"
He asked us why he would lie about his time spent in Vietnam when there is a possibility of being found out because the Vietnam Veterans nominal roll is freely available.

The answer to this is, in our experience we've found that lies about war service became very difficult to explain after the first nominal roll was published in 1996, wannabes were caught in a trap of their own making and had to carry on with their charades. They're sometimes executives within ex-service organisations, as BAYLEY was or still is, and more often than not they resort to threats of litigation against anyone who questions them.

With regard to his ,now admitted, very short tour, he did tell us that he asked a 4RAR Company Clerk where he would be posted to next as the Battalion was leaving Vietnam, he was informed that it was Battalion policy to take married veterans home at the completion of the tour and therefore he had no choice in the matter.

We looked into this supposed 4RAR policy and can find nothing to support his claim. This explanation is more than highly unlikely and we stand by our version of events which is that he opted out of the war while others fought on.

This is from another email and should be taken into account when considering this person's apology.

"I am a genuine man who is proud of my service, albeit short, in Vietnam with 4RAR.I am now aware of the error of my ways in wearing the Vietnam medal, however it was not worn with any intention to deceive, but to be a constant reminder of an event that took place between me and a very close colleague in a contact with the enemy"

The issues here are:

1...For many years, possibly 19 years, BAYLEY wore the Vietnamese Campaign Medal while never having served the required 6 months in Vietnam to be recognised by the Australian Government for the award. An offence punishable by law.

2...By wearing this medal and by allegedly making false statements to the press, he enhanced his war service in the eyes of others by claiming to have been fully trained and "on the frontline within 5 months" and also by extending his 3 months in a fighting unit to 9 months.

His apology is made to any member of the veteran community who is genuinely upset by his behaviour.

Any Veteran of any conflict who wishes to personally accept or reject his apology should email us at information@anzmi.net

Please provide your correct name and where served as only replies from genuine Veterans will be taken into account, if you had your name removed from any nominal roll, your reply will be ignored, sorry. Your city or town should be noted as well, thank you.

Replies from ex-service organisations will count as one reply. Personal details will not be published, your anonymity is assured.

If you can still read this on or after 1 October 06, you'll know the result of our poll.

______________________________________________________________________

Dated 30 June 2006 but incorrectly addressed, re-sent by BAYLEY and finally received at ANZMI ON 22 August 2006.

Dear Sir

In response to your letter received today I put the following to you for consideration.

I heard about this complaint about a month ago and was waiting for the people involved to to approach me about it, as I would have expected fellow VV's to do, however, as usual they have opted to take the cowards way out.

I know the original problem was started by a group of people involved with the Goulburn Valley Veterans Service Office.

I would be very surprised if the complaint originated from the 4RAR Association as I am not a financial member, and cannot remember ever being one and also I hace attended Charlie Company reunions since 1987 and my medals have never been an issue.

I would like to give you some of my history before I go into the wearing of the medal in question.

I have never been an executive member of the GVVVA, however I was it's welfare officer and pension officer for some time.

I was in fact the Secretary of the Melbourne Sub Branch of the VVAA for about 8 years before moving to Shepparton. Again, medals were never an issue there.

I am extremely disappointed in this matter as I have prided myself on the work I have done in the area of welfare and pensions for veterans. I have worked tirelessly for their benefit and have had a lot of success in both the pension and welfare areas both here and in Melbourne and it hurts me to think that fellow vets don't have the courage to face me, but prefer to take this course of action. It hurts even more that they have chosen to hide behind the 4RAR Association's banner.

I had, until a month ago never given much thought to my medals and the dates stated in your letter are correct and therefore I am not entitled to wear the Vietnam one. 

I can remember this medal being given to me by a regular army mate who was in my section. He also gave me a miniature of the same medal. I put these medals, plus the original one in a draw and did not see them again until the Sydney welcome home in 1987.

With the passing of time and concentrating on other work in the veteran community, the wearing of medals did not rate highly with me.Obviously, I was wrong.

Because I took no notice of protocol, or learning what was right or wrong with medals I now apologize unreservedly to any member of the veteran community who is genuinely upset by my behavior.

In closing, I congratulate you on the work you do and assure you that I never intended to deceive anybody.

I trust this explanation is satisfactory.

Yours sincerely

Graeme Bayley

This is published in the public interest, particularly that of the Vietnam Veteran Community. All information presented here is fact and the truth. Reports from private citizens are supported by statements of fact and statutory declarations

 

Powered by SobiPro