Local News

Remains of Korean War Soldier Returned Home

LOS ANGELES (KTLA) — Sixty-two years later, the remains of a local soldier reported missing in action during the Korean War are being returned to his family.

remains-bigArmy Pfc. Roosevelt Clark, of Arvin, Calif., will be buried on March 1, in Bakersfield.

His remains arrived at LAX early Wednesday morning.

Clark was just 18 years old when he was reported missing in action on Nov. 28, 1950, while fighting with the 35th Infantry Regiment in North Korea.

Between 1991 and 1994, North Korea gave the United States 208 boxes of human remains, believed to contain the remains of 200-400 U.S. servicemen.

Documents turned over with the remains indicated that some were recovered from the area where Clark was believed missing in 1950.

Scientists identified Clark’s remains using dental comparisons, as well as DNA, which matched Clark’s aunt and uncle.

“It means so much to us,” Clark’s cousin, Rennie Hunter, told KTLA on Wednesday. “We are just overjoyed that he’s coming home and that we have some closure.”

Clark attended Bakersfield High School, where he played on the football team. He dropped out in April 1950, during his junior year, to join the Army.

VIEW & ADD COMMENTS

42 Comments to “Remains of Korean War Soldier Returned Home”

    Anonymous said:
    February 27, 2013 at 10:23 AM

    Welcome home

      Anonymous said:
      February 27, 2013 at 1:40 PM

      This hero is welcomed home on the day we have a new secretary of defense. A secretary of defense that refused to answer questions about his income and employers in the last few years.

      I wonder if this vet gave his life so that a man like hagel could work for a president that apologizes for his country as Obama has.

      The country's leadership and policies have gone in the opposite direction since this proud service member gave his life to defend this country.

        Anonymous said:
        February 27, 2013 at 2:06 PM

        A secretary of defense that refused to answer questions about his income and employers in the last few years"

        That is a lie roger. A blatant lie. He was very clear http://consortiumnews.com/2012/12/28/hagel-and-th

          Anonymous said:
          February 27, 2013 at 2:11 PM

          And they were very clear he hadn't. The vote was suspended and rescheduled because of it.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 5:18 PM

            No they weren't very clear roger. You are a lying. Hagel provided his records a long time ago. They even ruled against cruz. He was just reaching.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 8:02 PM

            Yes, they were. At least ones that had the nerve to ask questions.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 8:40 PM

            Hagel made himself very clear. Those fools were just reaching.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 8:42 PM

            He made himself clear at times by saying history would be the judge.
            He couldn't explain why they were wrong, just that he couldn't be precise now.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 9:13 PM

            Referring to the surge. Not referring to where he received money.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 9:35 PM

            Regarding the money he refused to provide information.

            Anonymous said:
            February 28, 2013 at 1:06 PM

            You're such a stupid troll roger.

            You mentioned the history will be the judge line that Hagel made at his hearing. That was in reference to the surge. You're not dealing with an idiot. I know what the hell I'm talking about.

            Anonymous said:
            February 28, 2013 at 3:17 PM

            Who cares what it was in reference to, he couldn't defend his own record.

        Anonymous said:
        February 28, 2013 at 8:12 AM

        Way off topic and a troll comment.

          Anonymous said:
          February 28, 2013 at 9:03 AM

          Yes, you just posted one.

    Anonymous said:
    February 27, 2013 at 10:40 AM

    What a shame he returned on Hagel's first day at defense.

      Anonymous said:
      February 27, 2013 at 12:46 PM

      Why? Because hagel is a real american patriot? Two time purple heart recipient, viet nam vet, businessman and senator?

        Anonymous said:
        February 27, 2013 at 1:37 PM

        Why? Some would think that during his confirmation process he demonstrated poor skills at tracking details and a reluctance to reveal his business and loyalties since retiring from the senate.

          Anonymous said:
          February 27, 2013 at 2:04 PM

          But he didn't. He was very clear on all of this business dealings. These mccarthyites were just desperate. He already revealed all of his and his wifes business dealings.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 2:11 PM

            In your opinion. Senators weren't so convinced.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 5:17 PM

            No it's not my opinion, it's what they found. Hagel was forthcoming and they just filibustered. He gave all his records.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 8:03 PM

            The senators that wanted answers never got them.

            The head of the committee cut of talk and forced a vote.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 8:39 PM

            Yes they did, levin even had to stop and say "enough"

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 8:42 PM

            Before they got answers on who he received funds from since retiring from the senate. That would be -no, they didn't get the answers they wanted.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 9:13 PM

            Look it up yourself. Stop being so lazy. They got all the answers.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 9:33 PM

            I have, and Hagel couldn't provide some, refused to provide others and Obama was even asked by republicans to withdraw him as nominee.

            Anonymous said:
            February 28, 2013 at 1:07 PM

            He provided all the information that was needed. More than any nominee. They were just filibustering.

            Anonymous said:
            February 28, 2013 at 3:15 PM

            No, he didn't. and Levin cut it off so he didn't have to.

      Anonymous said:
      February 27, 2013 at 1:11 PM

      when one battle-scarred vet rises to question the cavalier manner in which American soldiers are routinely sent into ill-advised wars, we ought to shut up and listen. And we ought not to be implying that they’re traitors, or that they’re on the payroll of North Korea, Iran, and the Devil himself. "
      http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2013/02/26/wha

        Anonymous said:
        February 27, 2013 at 1:38 PM

        Service doesn't excuse a lifetime of mistakes following it.

          Anonymous said:
          February 27, 2013 at 2:05 PM

          What mistakes?

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 2:12 PM

            Any mistakes.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 5:17 PM

            Yeah, ok troll. Whatever you say.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 8:03 PM

            You're the one admittedly paid for this.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 8:40 PM

            No I didn't. No matter how many times you say it.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 8:42 PM

            Of course you did.

            6 minutes ago @ Breitbart.com – Protests to greet Ahma… · 1 reply · 0 points
            I'm like jesus, I'm gonna chase you money changers out of the temple and out of town and of course out of this forum. Me and ohsoquiet and a few other REAL AMERICANS who are being PAID to be here like you Israeli PR men. I'm here to chase you filth out.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 9:12 PM

            Not on your life Bozo.

            Anonymous said:
            February 27, 2013 at 9:34 PM

            Yes, someone posting on your profile made that comment.
            Perhaps there are more than one using it to chase people away?

            Anonymous said:
            February 28, 2013 at 1:08 PM

            not on your life buzzard

            Anonymous said:
            February 28, 2013 at 3:16 PM

            It certainly wasn't you style or wording. You don't even match style and working from this morning.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Advertisement

Advertisement