AUSTRALIAN INVESTIGATION CORPORATION PTY LTD ACN 072 693 595

ABN 69 072 693 595 Specialising in: Marine Incidents Criminal and Legal Defence Investigations Crime Scene Examination Evidence Assessment Prosecution Brief Analysis Proofs of Evidence Witness Coordination Maritime Enquiries Witness Location

PO Box 490 Kalamunda WA 6926 Mobile +61(0)411 861 690

Email: aicone@iinet.net.au

WITHOUT PREJUDICE & STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL

Mr Barry Sue PO Box 490 Kalamunda WA 6076 Dear Sir

Re- Investigation Into the matter of allegations by Lynette Silver against Jackie Wong Sue (Deceased) as reflected in

the West Australian Newspaper 10 July 2010

Further to our twenty seven (27) page report complied acting upon your instructions, we herewith submit the following summary. From the information we have obtained, as reflected in our report, it is our respectful suggestion that the report in Toto not be made public. The reason for this is that close inspection of your father’s diaries and trans communicable letters of 1945 contain some intimate and private information. Additionally, it is presently undetermined as to whether or not, some of the information contained therein may or not be subject to the ‘Official Secrets Act’. We therefore recommend that any information derived of our enquiry be publicly disseminated, it should be confined to this summary. Firstly, as per your instructions, we sought to investigate the assertions made by Lynette Silver as to the veracity of your father’s comments as to his service in Blood on Borneo during 1945. As we understand those assertions by Silver, they were;

1. Jack could not have witnessed the death marches. 2. Jack could not have been involved in the attack on Trusan due to the fact at the time; he was out

of the operational area. 3. Jack could not have been present during the attack on Pitas.

2

Assessment of Issues 1. Jack could not have witnessed the death marches. We have closely studied the following documents which appear to be all that can be, now relied upon and they are; (a) Special Operations Records in Archives’ (referred hereon as SOA’s),

(b) Your father’s various diaries / documents (c) Your father’s official wartime service record

(d) Statutory declarations by Graham Greenwood of Operation Agas with Z Special Unit as well as eminent reliable witnesses to various conversations

during the 1960’s and 1970’s with former groups of Z Special personnel including Lt Don Harlem.

We have to question the reliability of the SOA documents. It is understandable that in any conflict where special forces troops are operating under cover or behind enemy lines, that ‘report writing’ at best, is an onerous duty performed under duress. As a result, they are usually brief and lack expanded detail. They are written after the event and are therefore subject to the memory of the authors who are notoriously fatigued, with malnutrition and often suffering from maladies of several kinds. The accuracy especially of actual dates often suffers (see in the above report the quoted instances where the pertinent months have been revised by crossing out and writing in corrected or altered data. We have contacted personnel tasked with the responsibility who co-ordinate, confluence and compile historical military data who affirm that any wartime report (and in particular the SOA’s relied upon here) are subject to inaccuracies; and I quote their observations “… enough holes to make a very good sieve …” To emphasise just how unreliable such reports are, we refer you to Silver’s own book Sandakan – A Conspiracy of Silence pages 315 and 316 wherein her ‘Chronological Sequence of Events’ through March to August; adequately demonstrate the confusion as to the exact status of the prisoners at Sandakan, Ranau and points between. Specifically we quote her assertion that on the; * 3rd April “Agas signals SRD that all POW’s have been moved from Sandakan” Yet she states, * lst August “10 POW’s alive at Sandakan” * 14th August “2 POW’s alive at Sandakan”

3

* 15th August “Murozumi beheads last Sandakan POW” These are her words in her book. We refer you also to an SOA dated 20 May that states “All POW gone from Sandakan”. We venture to suggest it would be imprudent of Silver as a self proclaimed investigative historian, being availed of these discrepancies that these reports at best were indicative only of actual events and at worse, totally unreliable. Yet, in her scathing, cowardly attack on the late Jack Sue, she totally relies upon their veracity as if they were unequivocally the gospel truth. It goes without saying that even if Jack Sue somewhere stated that he and Gort Chester saw the last 4 POW, how would he know they were the last 4? In any case, in his book Blood on Borneo, he makes it on a number of occasions very plain that some 50 plus years after the event, he apologises for any inaccuracies. Notwithstanding, it is indicated that prisoners as early as late January began departing from Sandakan and carry on through until mid June (according to Silver) which may or not be true as we do not really know. There is no empirical evidence other than the words of some survivors that marches were organised, as indicated by Silver restricted to those indicated as being numbers 1 to 5 or more. It begs the question that at any time from Jack’s insertion on 3 March to his extraction on 17 August 1945, it is not inconceivable that he and Gort Chester in their various patrols of the area came into contact with marching POW. Given the sensitivity of the whole POW issue at that time, it is equally not inconceivable that any report submitted by Chester may have been conveniently “lost” in communication (Blamey’s cancellation of Operation Kingfisher speaks volumes). We therefore respectfully submit that Silver is remiss in her reliance on the SOA’s to castigate Jack Sue as to his veracity in the matter of the POW’s. Notwithstanding, we refer you to a signed hand written document by the late Don Harlem. This document dated 31 March 1984, was in relation to a proposed book that he and Jack were both preparing to write during the 1980’s and in this, Don Harlem clearly states in his own hand and we quote;

“... Jack and I are writing the story of the infamous Borneo Death Marches. We are the only two original operatives who covered this whole 160 mile Death March route westwards from SANDAKAN to RANAU during hostilities...”

4

2. Jack could not have been involved in the attack on Trusan due to the fact at the time; he was out of the operational area. In rebuttal of this assertion by Mrs Silver, we have to, with due respect accede to her assertion that he could not have been there. If she is referring to the mission as 30 May 1945 (if indeed that is the correct date for the reasons aforementioned), then he was clearly involved in Operation Stallion at that time. Notwithstanding, we refer you to the Agas Report of 20 May wherein it is described that an attack on Trusan was carried out by natives on that day. This appears to be a 3rd party report, therefore, given any previous comments such a report may well lack fully descriptive details of this raid. It is no secret, as evidenced from diaries and reports that Chester, his officers, his NCOs and his OR’s had little faith in the quality of the majority of his native troops. It is therefore inconceivable to us that Chester would authorise such a raid if it were not under the command of an officer and at least one NCO. It was standard SRD operating procedure for all parties to be under the command of an officer and at least one NCO and this can be verified in the files we sighted during our research. From the SOA’s it is indicated that Lt Harlem had been tasked to lead guerrillas that he had trained into the area of Sungei Sungei and Sugut River as this area is in the vicinity of Trusan; a mere 12 miles or so of Sungei Sungei. It is not inconceivable that the reported raid on 20 May was led by Lt Don Harlem and that his NCO was Sgt Jack Sue. This tends to be verified in that the report indicates the location of safe containing money and other documents as described in Blood on Borneo. We refer you to an actual outbound field signal, written in 1945 and sent from Trusan and in what strongly appears to be Jack Sue’s handwriting. This signal clearly states, quote;

“... OUT... QSP... NRM... FROM DON AM IN TRUSAN SEND PRIORITY MOTOTAI NOT TO BOMB FOR TEN DAYS. REQUEST IMMEDIATE STRIKE KENOLIGAN AND TABOUAN URGENT STOP TRUSAN DESERTED ON ENTRY FIFTY JAPS RETURNING APPROX TEN DAYS TO CLEAR ODD STORES HAVE OPENED SAFE DOCUMENTS JAMBONGAN MORE NEWS FOLLOWING ...”

Whilst the 3rd party report indicates no major conflict with the Japanese, it is not inconceivable that a sole suicidal soldier possibly aware of the approach (whilst other Japanese had fled) sought an opportunity to die for his emperor; an issue of relative inconsequence in the grander scheme of things. So it follows that Jack Sue’s account of taking out a single soldier to save Harlem’s life and finding the safe could not honourably be called a lie. We also refer you again to the supporting affidavits in the company of Don Harlem and others as to that veracity.

5

Having considered this, it gave us some concern as to why Mrs Silver given her experience with the parsimonious ness of information contained within these reports, did not allow Jack Sue the benefit of the doubt as to this incident. We would have thought that in the years between 2001 and Jack Sue’s death, presuming she had read Blood on Borneo , had she had any doubts she could have clarified it with Jack Sue as to whether he referred to the 20th or 30th May raids as he does not indicate any date in his book. We say that to call him a liar is despicable and we wondered why she had done so after his death. We are confident that Jack was still in the field as he was not extracted until the 21st May; given the inaccuracies of dates. He was definitely in the field in the area at the time and one of his diaries reflects he was cleaning weapons which ‘is standard operating procedure’ after a raid. 3. Jack could not have been present during the attack on Pitas.

In support of our previous assertions as to the unreliable accuracy of the ‘Special Operations Records in Archives’ (referred hereon as SOA’s), we refer you to the letter of 28 August 2010 from one Craig Brown of SOA; an acclaimed investigative historian. We quote;

“… The Official History of the Operations and Administration of Special Operations Australia [(SOA), also known as the Inter-Allied Services Department (ISO) and Services Reconnaissance Department (SRD)) Volume 2 - Operations - copy no 1 [for Director, Military Intelligence (DMI), Headquarters (HQ), Australian Military Forces (AMF), Melbourne dated March 1946 - NAA citation: NAA: A3269, O8/A

... Is, like many of the other SRD official history volumes and many of the operational reports themselves, filled with inaccuracies. Inaccuracies I have encountered include dates, service numbers, place names, operative names. At first glance the records seem accurate enough, but it takes a keen eye and an analytical mind to spot the inconsistencies. There are several reasons for this; 1. The official history documents were compiled between October 1945 and

March 1946, in some cases several years after the events depicted. This allowed inaccuracies and suppositions on the part of SRD Historical

6

Section NCOs to creep in, especially where few operational or intelligence reports existed.

2. Operational reports were often written by the Party Leaders In the field,

when these men were under extreme stress or suffering from tropical diseases. Dates, place names and personnel names especially have proved to be Incorrect in some of these cases. Basic facts were not checked before the information was included in the Official History documents, particularly Volume 2 - Operations.

3. "Interrogation" (debrief) of Operatives returned from the field was in

many cases conducted immediately on return from operations. These operatives were often suffering from malnutrition and tropical diseases. A glance over most service records for AIF Operatives shows that most spent at least a week in hospital on their return from the field. Debrief of personnel in this condition is not, in my opinion, conducive to accurate reports. So as you can see, from the above, I do not consider the Official History of SOA Volumes to be accurate sources. They were written by personnel who were not on the operations described and were not fact checked to ensure accuracy. I also do not consider Party Leader reports to be 100% accurate either. In my own research, I use these documents as a guide only.

Debrief of Operatives returned from the field is usually the most accurate of the report types listed above, but as with Party Leader reports, I will only use these as a guide.

4. Much important information only came to light AFTER the Official

History of SOA Volumes had already been written. …” (unquote)

We now refer you to a letter which appears to be dated sometime in May 1945 from a Chinese operative to Jack Sue in the field sent by native bearer informing him that the Japanese at Pitas were reduced to 8 in number, had two (2) machine guns and six (6) rifles. The letter urges Jack Sue to act swiftly before the Japanese are reinforced, as they are moving to and fro. We now refer you to an order originated by Jack Sue urgently requesting a torpedo stores drop in the area of Mempakad, some mere six (6) miles from Pitas. Given his obvious close association with the author of the letter, referring to your father as “Uncle” and his own father as Jack’s brother, it is conceivable that a raid was made on

7

Pitas at Jack’s insistence citing the vulnerability of the small Japanese party and prevailing upon Chester to implement the raid. It is equally conceivable that the raid was made some time in May. We also have sighted one of Jack Sue’s photographs showing the radio shack at Pitas dated May/June 1945 confirming the probability that the raid on Pitas took place sometime in May. We now refer to the evidence of one Graham Greenwood, a former “Z” Operative who served with Jack Sue at the time in question. Specifically, we refer you to two extracts from a book, written by Mr Greenwood, named “No Turning Back.” The extracts referred to are: “Forty Miles on foot” Chapter 10, page 107:

“… Don, Jackie, Maruf & Kanun had already gone ahead into the area, planning a raid on the rubber plantation at Pitas, held by Japanese garrison. So this left Gort, Nick, Skeet and me to do the tramp …”

Page 110 Para 2

“… the next day we heard a party from here had made a night raid on the Pitas Homestead, and the Japanese soldiers there had been killed, leaving the way clear for us to go up the river and take the place over as our new headquarters …”

It is very significant to note that this book was commenced in 1982, well before Blood On Borneo, and was finally published in 2005. Any assertions as to these being the ramblings of some insignificant “Old Man” must be considered against the fact that Mr Greenwood was only in his mid fifties in 1982, and is still of very sound mind in his late eighties! Mr Greenwood has been interviewed (his attached affidavit refers) and he is very clear that Jack Sue was on that raid on Pitas, although he is uncertain of the actual date. Once again, given an expert historian’s view of SOA inaccuracies, Jack should have been given the good grace of doubt as to his veracity and certainly, not labelled a liar. Possible Motive: As previously mentioned, we were surprised at the vehemence of Silver’s callous attack on a dead man’s reputation: There seemed no rational explanation. As a result, we focused our enquiries on Silver’s antecedents in respect to her predilection with the Borneo operations and the Death March tours.

8

It was discovered that from the years 1978, Jack Sue was conducting diving and special interest tours in Borneo especially focusing on historical wartime experiences. These tours were financially viable and very popular particularly with Australians from all states as well as international clientele. These tours ceased in about 1995 when Jack Sue virtually chose to retire. Our enquiries revealed that about the time of her book Sandakan – A Conspiracy of Silence, Silver commenced conducting tours in Borneo through a local agent Tham Yau Kong. As far as we can determine, these tours continue to this time on a regular basis. Further enquiries have confirmed from information supplied to us by you that in about August of 2009 contact was made between yourself and Tham Yau Kong wherein as confirmed by the latter that a proposal by him to you was made to instigate tours in Borneo called “In the Footsteps of Jack Sue and the Z Men” where Barry Sue was to be the personal escort of these tours. We consider it being significant that this same person was also the authorised agent in situ who ran the tours in Borneo for Silver. Tham Yau Kong confirms that negotiations between your good self and him over a period of months with an eventual proposed commencement date of May 27 being followed by July 1 and August 12 2010. We understand from Tham Yau Kong that for various reasons, mainly due to your father’s untimely death in November 2009, it would not be possible to realise the first confirmed tour of “In the Footsteps of Jack Sue and the Z Men” until 12 August 2010; the original arrangements being made prior to his death. Confirmation of this is verified by both yourself and Tham Yau Kong. We have confirmed that a website established by Tham Yau Kong was online advertising “In the Footsteps of Jack Sue and the Z Men” in March 2010. We have perused a number of email communications between, initially a journalist with the West Australian Newspaper, namely one Rod Moran and yourself requesting to peruse your father’s wartime diary, in the singular. This led into further requests for the diary and other papers by Silver who initially gave no specific reason for the request. Your replies did not preclude an exchange of information but requested the supply of documents to you from Silver which you were prepared to peruse and compare to ascertain as to if there were any obvious discrepancies. Silver was not prepared to supply documents and requested a meeting stating that she had; “… a limited window of opportunity …” At the time you were unable to commit time for such a meeting due to other project obligations and made Silver aware of that as you had no agenda to pursue unlike it would appear, Lynette Silver.

9

It was without warning shortly thereafter that the cowardly castigation of Jack’s veracity appeared on the front page of the West Australian Newspaper on 10 July 2010. We are privy to an email communication from Silver to the Borneo agent Tham Yau Kong the following day Sunday 11 July 2010 and we quote; “… Original Message ----- From: lynette silver To: yau kong tham3 Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 12:42 PM Subject: FW: Jack Sue Here is the main newspaper story - they certainly made a big thing of it! There is also and editorial. All Ok here. Had one' hate' email. Also had another, but when he got my reply, he apologised profusely and urged me to keep up the good work. Have had three long emails from people congratulating me on the research - two were soldiers, and one is an historian. L. websites: www.lynettesilver.com www.sandakan-deathmarch.com additional email: lynettesilver@live.com lynettesilver@tpg.com.au Later that day Tham’s website was visited and the “In the Footsteps of Jack Sue and the Z Men” advertisement had been removed without any notice to you. Further enquiries have been determined from Tham Yau Kong that Silver had preordained the article in the West Australian Newspaper with a view to discredit Jack Sue’s reputation in order to extinguish any competition to her own tours. It then made sense to us as to why she might see fit to take such action because it occurs to us that there is a limited market for such tours in Borneo; and the two (2) tours would potentially be in conflict and therefore, commercially less viable. Furthermore, we refer to the Epilogue of Silver’s latest publication “Deadly Secrets” wherein Jack Wong Sue by inference, is vilified and the newspaper article (inspired by but not written by Silver) lends credibility to her assertions in her book.

10

Conclusion: We cannot specifically prove that Lynette Silver set out to castigate the reputation of Jack Wong Sue for her own material gain, nor can we beyond reasonable doubt prove that her motives for apparently inducing the West Australian Newspaper reporter Rod Moran to assist her in what cannot be discounted as a commercially based attempt at blowing her own trumpet to the degradation of Jack Wong Sue’s heroic wartime reputation. Her platform and that of Rod Moran was that this cowardly attack on a ‘war hero’ was promulgated in the public interest of ‘historical accuracy’. The burning question for us is the use of the words ‘historical”& “accuracy’. Firstly, it was never purported by Jack Sue, that Blood On Borneo was in any way intended to be an authentic historical work: quite the contrary in fact; he makes several apologies, in advance, as to any historical inaccuracies, and colourful inclusions, yet Silver has treated the work as such and castigated on those grounds, unfairly, we suggest. We question the manner in which this ‘alleged investigative historian’ has quantified and qualified ‘accuracy’ given the respected opinion of a reputable military historian (Craig Brown) as to the fallibility of the Special Operations Records in Archives’ upon which Silver appears to have relied. We leave it to you as a family, to form your own opinions as to the motives, the veracity and intentions of this woman whom, to our understanding has never heard, felt, seen; experienced a shot fired in anger. A person who has the temerity to invite her reading public to believe she has an empathy with a special forces soldier, without her ‘any understanding’ of the trials, tribulations, the horror, the fear, the depredations, the trauma, the post stress disorder, the debilitation of multiple tropical disease, the weariness of war, malnutrition and dehydration. Living in constant trepidation of being betrayed or captured by a merciless tortuous enemy; an enemy who was reputed to put little or no value on the lives of others, or even themselves to the degree that such covert operators would question their survivability under such harsh and strenuous circumstances. We respectfully submit that it cannot be discounted on a balance of probabilities that Lynette Silver callously contrived in concert with journalist Rod Moran to castigate the memory of a much loved war hero who put his age up, volunteered to venture behind enemy lines, did his duty, suffered the consequences for his country with the humility representing the quality and courage of his Z Special Unit peers. We refer you to the inscription Silver made to your father in her book Sandakan - A Conspiracy of Silence in her hand;

11

“… Lynette Ramsey Silver 27.8.98

To my friend Jack Sue who always knew the truth … Lynette …”

Obviously it would appear not a time when he appeared to be, possibly a commercial threat. We note the overwhelming support for your father; the general Australian public in comments following the West Australian Newspaper articles. We also note that not one other media outlet took issue with this abominable story. Although we cannot be definitive, it would appear prima facie that Lynette Silver has gained her reputation as a military historian by singling out heroic people and denigrating them; often times unjustly and on scanty and unreliable information. For some 30 years or more, Borneo operations were classified and any talk about the Borneo Death marches was strictly prohibited. The eventual writings from some self proclaimed historians, such as Silver, have left a bitter pill in the mouths of many Z men who strongly disagreed with her findings, taken from inaccurate records and written by impersonal authors who were never there. It would certainly explain why Harlem wanted to set the records straight (as can be seen from some of his writings) in the proposed book that he and Jack Sue were planning to write? We refer you to part of Jack Sue’s Citation as issued from ‘Honours and Awards’ and shown below.

12

We also note that immediately following these articles, Silver was on radio interviews throughout Australia promoting her new book Deadly Secrets where she is recorded as mentioning the ‘recent case in Western Australia’ as part of her book promotion. Was this part of her real agenda or just pure co-incidence? Additionally, we perceive that alleged historian’s, may have some difficulty admitting that the sole source relied upon, by them, for their own reputations is inherently flawed. We must, therefore, mention here that “commerciality” extends beyond, and does not necessarily include financial profit.

13

Even though this has been a totally independent enquiry, we have to say there appears to be absolutely no justification for calling Jack Wong Sue OAM DCM JP; a loved and respected Australian icon … a liar! We say, rest in peace Jack Wong Sue and all of his fellow Z Men.

One of Australia's greatest war heroes, WA's Jack Wong Sue, fabricated key parts of his guerilla battles with the Japanesein Borneo, according to Australia's leading investigative military historian.

The alarm was raised by historian and Order of Australia recipient Lynette Silver when she was approached for expertadvice on a planned documentary.

Ms Silver, whose investigations last year led to former Ex-Prisoners of War Association of Australia president Rex Cranebeing charged with fraud after it emerged he was never a PoW, claims there are factual errors in Mr Sue's best-sellingmemoir, Blood on Borneo, and inconsistencies with reports held by Federal Government archives.

Always a hero | Frauds exposed

Mr Sue was an operative in the ultra-secret Special Operations Australia, which was sent behind enemy lines in 1945. Hereceived a Distinguished Conduct Medal for a daring, and undisputed, reconnaissance mission on a Borneo railwaystation. He died in November 2009, aged 84.

Ms Silver says Mr Sue lied in key aspects of his memoirs, including his claim that he was a witness to one of the notoriousSandakan death marches, which saw allied PoWs marched from the Sandakan prison camp, in the north of Borneo, to thevillage of Renau, in the interior.

She says that Mr Sue was not in Borneo when the first march began on January 28, was on a reconnaissance missionwhen the second march left on May 29 and was in hospital when the third march left on June 15.

Historian casts doubt on war hero'srecordROD MORAN, The West AustralianJuly 10, 2010, 2:45 am

au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/…/3/ 1/4

Appendix - West Australian 10JUL10 retrieved 10AUG10

Ms Silver says archived SOA records contradict the veteran's claims that he was involved in killing a group of Japanesedefenders at Trusan in May and saving the life of his commanding officer.

SOA archives show there were no Japanese at the village.

Mr Sue's account of a raid on a Japanese garrison at Pitas on June 13 is also disputed by Ms Silver. "At the end of myinvestigation I was shattered," Ms Silver said. "Not only had Jack Sue not taken part in some of the missions, as he claimed,he had also invented the story about seeing the PoWs.

"I trusted (him) implicitly regarding the story. It left me feeling betrayed and angry. I valued his friendship and had absolutefaith in his integrity.

"His actions … bring the entire veteran community, especially those who served in Special Operations Australia, intodisrepute.

"I realise that my findings will come as a disappointment to many of his admirers, of which I was one. However, now that Iknow his account is flawed, I cannot ignore it. In the interests of historical accuracy, I felt it my duty to set the record straight."

10/08/2010 Historian casts doubt on war hero's re…

au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/…/3/ 2/4

Appendix - West Australian 10JUL10 retrieved 10AUG10

State president of the RSL, Bill Gaynor, said Blood on Borneo was based on Mr Sue's memories of his time fighting theJapanese and was not a historical text. "I guess in this day and age, when military historians start delving into actual wardiaries, and things like that, things may come out that put it into question," he said.

"I guess the bottom line is that if you were there you are qualified to talk about it. If you weren't there, you are only going bywhat the written word is. Knowing Jack's integrity, he wouldn't make any claims that weren't there. Then again, everything isopen to scrutiny."

Mr Sue's family declined to comment.

Follow thewest.com.au on Twitter

21 - 25 of 25 First Page < Previous Next > Last Page

21 - 25 of 25 First Page < Previous Next > Last Page

25 Comments

Post your comment

Colin 04:14pm Saturday 10th July 2010 WST Report Abuse

Well he is a hero whatever the truth, somethings might have been stretched who knows for sure. Its not likethe book Bravo two zero where 80% was found to be fiction.

Reply

Sandy Groper 04:36pm Saturday 10th July 2010 WST Report Abuse

Sometimes the personal records of WW2 Australians falsely showed they were hospitalised somewherewhen they were in fact on highly secret missions. I know from my personal experience in Vietnam there wereincidents involving myself where there is no official record.

Reply

Ron 07:46pm Saturday 10th July 2010 WST Report Abuse

Jack was there, and the historians weren't. He's still a hero who endured much privation and danger for otherAUSTRALIANS benefit. If his book is somewhat inaccurate, it could be due entirely to faulty memory, andconfusion with age. In many actions, even witnesses reports offered up...

Reply

Ron 07:50pm Saturday 10th July 2010 WST Report Abuse

... conflicting reports on what actually happened. The man still deserves everything he was accorded,including his medals and hero status. Even C.W. Bean was guilty of error in recording war espisodes. IsLynette Silver on a mission to now denigrate a man who can no longer defend himself?

Reply

Rita Ducklin 10:56am Sunday 11th July 2010 WST Report Abuse

Regardless he was still a hero .

Reply

1 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

Post a commentLeave your comments for other visitors to read. Please limit to 300 characters. It may take a few minutes for yourcomment to appear. Please be patient and do not repost. No HTML, please.

10/08/2010 Historian casts doubt on war hero's re…

au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/…/3/ 3/4

Appendix - West Australian 10JUL10 retrieved 10AUG10

Jack Wong Sue is a wartime hero. But he may not be a hero for all the reasons you think he is.

There is no denying that Mr Sue was an operative of the secretive Special Operations Australia, which infiltrated Japaneselines to gain valuable intelligence during World War II.

But hard documentary evidence now refutes some of his claims.

These serious revelations have cast doubt over what has become an iconic story to many West Australians.

It is worth noting that Blood on Borneo, Mr Sue's 2001 memoir, was written after he had a massive stroke. Paralysed downhis right side, he painstakingly typed the 400-page manuscript with a single finger of his left hand over three years.

It was an act of heroism in itself. What effect the stroke had on his memory of events more than 60 years before can only bea matter of speculation.

Another explanation may involve what has been dubbed "survivor guilt", an aspect of post-traumatic stress syndrome. It is amental condition whereby a person genuinely feels they have done wrong by surviving where others perished.

Mr Sue emerged from the jungles of Borneo having seen - and necessarily done - terrible things. He was just 19..

Perhaps at the end of his life survivor syndrome set in as he recalled mates lost, the times he killed and the hopeless plightof the Sandakan prisoners.

Doubts concerning aspects of his memoir arose when historian Lynette Silver was approached for expert advice on aproposed documentary concerning a series of SOA missions, code-named Agas, conducted in Borneo in mid-1945.

The storyline was based on Mr Sue's memoir. When Ms Silver read the proposed documentary narrative she was puzzled bythe many factual errors. This led her to compare Mr Sue's claims in Blood on Borneo with SOA after-action reports of theincidents described.

Ms Silver takes issue with Mr Sue's account of the SOA raid on the village of Trusan in May, 1945. He devotes a chapter to itin his book and describes the killing of a number of Japanese defenders.

He also says he saved the life of his commanding officer, Lt Don Harlem, when a Japanese lying "doggo" aimed his pistolat him: "Down Don! I screamed … Don dropped like a stone as I let go a burst of automatic fire with my silenced Austenmachine gun, almost cutting the enemy in two."

Lt Harlem's version was very different: "… I was to proceed to Trusan, (to) wipe out garrison of approx 7 Japs there and thusopen the Sugut River … I arrived at Trusan … and recced the area. 1 Jap seen during the day and as I could not movebefore dark I decided to recce again on the 20th. This I did but 13 Japs seen there embarked and sailed to Keningau …On21 all was set for the attack but it appears all the Japs evacuated the day before and only stores remained. These and thehouses were burnt on the 22nd as it was reported that the Japs wished to return … to salvage them and house timber forboat building."

Another archival SOA document reads: "On 20 May a native party organised from Jambongan raided Trusan, where,although no Japanese were found, their headquarters and safe were seized and many documents sent back forexamination."

Mr Sue's account of a raid on a Japanese garrison at Pitas on June 13 is disputed by Ms Silver. In Blood on Borneo, he tells

Despite revelations Sue will always be aheroROD MORAN, The West AustralianJuly 10, 2010, 2:43 am

Yahoo!7 My Yahoo!7 Mail More

10/08/2010 Despite revelations Sue will always be…

…yahoo.com/…/despite-revelations-s… 1/2

Appendix - West Australian 10JUL10 retrieved 10AUG10

how he was with a party of guerrillas that attacked a house of sleeping Japanese soldiers.

A person in the employ of the Japanese agreed to outline in chalk, on the ceiling of the basement, the position of thesoldiers' beds. At dawn they attacked, armed with silenced Austen machineguns, firing through the floor, killing all but one ofthe enemy.

The SOA report does not support Mr Sue's account. It reads: "Pitas action on 13 June, 45. Sgt Watts with three sections of(local) guerrillas set out … to attack and take Pitas. On the night of 13 Jun contact was made with Sgt Useoff SRD agentworking with the Japanese … Watts and a native named Mustol entered the quarters while 4 guerrillas remained below tofire on any attempting to escape … Four Japanese were killed in their quarters and two escaped. A search was made in thesurrounding undergrowth and the adjacent lavatory where one Japanese was found and killed by Watts …"

Mr Sue is not mentioned in the report. On the date of the raid he was in hospital on Morotai.

While it is difficult to explain these anomalies in his recollections - and Ms Silver's criticisms notwithstanding - Mr Sue wasnonetheless a genuine wartime hero.

On May 31, 1945, he and a Malay guerilla, Mandor Ali, were sent to reconnoitre the Bongawan area, the site of an importantrailway station.

It was a very dangerous mission, code-named Stallion IV. There were several thousand Japanese troops in the district. MrSue and Mr Ali were able to get the station-master, Ah Lee, to accompany them to where their leader, a pre-war friend, waswaiting.

The SOA party was seeking information about Japanese troop movements - crucial information given the Australian 9thDivision was preparing to invade Borneo.

The SOA report on this mission reads, in part: "This was the result of a very good effort by Sgt Wong Sue and Mandor Ali,who had to go into the station actually when Japanese were working there, and persuade Ah Lee to return with them to meetthe party leader."

In recommendations at the end of the report, it was observed: "Party Leader states that the work carried out by Sgt WongSue and Mandor Ali in persuading the Station Master to leave his post was of special note. This dangerous mission wascarried out in a thickly concentrated Japanese area."

Mr Sue was awarded the Distinguished Conduct Medal for his actions. The later citation for the award goes intoconsiderable detail about his activities while behind Japanese lines, noting that he displayed "leadership, gallantry andcold-blooded courage of the highest order". It continues: "While in the interior, Sgt Wong (Sue) did magnificent work ingathering intelligence, organising native guerrillas and harassing the enemy, capturing considerable equipment and killingnumbers of the enemy."

While at Bongawan, Mr Sue spent eight days cross-checking the intelligence gathered from Ah Lee and "at great personalrisk watched hundreds of Japanese move down the railway line. The information thus received and passed on was of thehighest importance to the 9th Australian Division."

Ms Silver says Mr Sue's wartime record was admirable - so why embellish it?

Follow thewest.com.au on Twitter

'The West Australian' is a trademark of West Australian New spapers Limited 2010. All rights reserved. Advertise with Us PrivacyPolicy Terms of Service Help

10/08/2010 Despite revelations Sue will always be…

…yahoo.com/…/despite-revelations-s… 2/2

Appendix - West Australian 10JUL10 retrieved 10AUG10