Remains identified of Nebraska twins killed at Pearl Harbor |

Remains identified of Nebraska twins killed at Pearl Harbor

Associated Press
In 2015, the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency personnel began exhuming the remains and using new DNA technology to identify those lost. Here, a Navy honor guard carries a casket containing the remains of remains of Navy Machinist’s Mate 1st Class George Hanson, which were identified last December, off a jetliner to a waiting hearse at Denver International Airport late Wednesday, June 26, 2019, in Denver. Hanson died during the 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

LINCOLN, Neb. — Authorities say the remains of twin brothers killed in the Pearl Harbor attack have been identified and will be returned to Nebraska.

The Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency said Thursday in a news release that the remains of Machinist’s Mate 2nd Class Leo Blitz and Fireman 1st Class Rudolph Blitz were identified last month.

Both were 20 and were assigned to the battleship USS Oklahoma when the ship and others were attacked by Japanese planes on Dec. 7, 1941. The attack on the ship resulted in the deaths of 429 crewmen, including the Blitzes.

Their remains were among the unidentified remains buried in 46 plots at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific in Honolulu. In 2015, agency personnel began exhuming the remains and using new DNA technology to identify those lost.

The agency says the twins’ remains will be interred in Lincoln on Aug. 10.

Categories: News | World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.