A Jewish War Hero Fights for Justice Barry Farber Monday

A Jewish War Hero Fights for Justice
Barry Farber
Monday, Feb. 5, 2001
At no point in my experience as a journalist, which I guess began officially upon graduation from college in 1952, would I have dared tell my readers, "This story has a lot of necessary detail I don't feel like fooling with, but, hey, I'll give you the title of a book that has everything I'm going to leave out!"
I have no hesitation, however, at doing precisely that right now in guiding readers not to a book, but to a Web site.

I've got a story to tell. It's a war story that sounds unbelievable. It's about an American soldier in World War II who killed an unbelievable number of enemy troops in an unbelievable way, exhibiting unbelievable heroism and being denied the Medal of Honor for an unbelievable reason.

Well, maybe the reason merely SHOULD be unbelievable. He happens to be Jewish.

Too many unbelievable stories are ruined by oververification. Not this one. The more skeptics investigate, the quicker they become ex-skeptics.

And, by the way, after his near-miraculous survival the same soldier performed another feat on another battlefield that by itself would also have handed any Christian soldier the Medal of Honor.

You may call me lazy. I call myself lean. I'm not going to have this tale sink under the weight of details such as names, places, dates, ranks, military units' names and numbers, latitudes and longitudes, weapons used, and red-tape way stations on the bureaucratic road to bigotry and injustice. It's all there, bull-proof and pig-tight, including photographs and even maps, at www.rubitsky.com, which, for some happy reason, jumps onto my screen faster than any other Web site in my Internet experience.

Frown, purist; go ahead and frown. The 21st century is here. I'm going to use it. I'll give you the tale. For details go to www.rubitsky.com.

David Rubitsky is a career vet, now old and ill, who served America in the Army, the Navy, and even the Merchant Marine. On New Guinea during the war he was ordered to string communications wire to a bunker in a swamp that had been built by the Japanese and fell into American hands. His buddies who accompanied him to the bunker saw FOUR COLUMNS of Japanese troops converging on their position. They wisely decided to retreat to their main force position.

David Rubitsky refused to retreat. He asked them to leave their weapons with him. He told them he intended to try to defend the bunker by himself.

With a grab-bag assortment of machine-gun ammunition, M-1 rifle bullets and hand grenades, Rubitsky opened fire. The ensuing battle lasted 21 hours, during which the Japanese homed in on the bunker with artillery and mortars, and Rubitsky wound up hit and hurt and bleeding from places he didn't realize you could bleed from. But when the fire ceased and his American buddies advanced upon the scene they found BETWEEN 500 and 600 JAPANESE TROOPS DEAD!

Who ever heard of such a thing?
Leyte

For years Rubitsky couldn't have cared less about whether or not his exploits were duly recognized by the Army. Don't be surprised. Those were the years in which those who scored spectacular touchdowns in football refrained from pyrotechnic gymnastics and merely handed the ball to the nearest official and quickly melted with the dignity of a Libyan camel into the ranks of their teammates.

Now, in declining health, Rubitsky recognizes the importance of trying to have some sense of fairness descend upon his personal history. Why should the modesty that was the fashion of the 1940s abort all official knowledge and memory of one of the most spectacular one-man feats of modern warfare? Excuse me, TWO of the most spectacular feats of modern warfare.

And what does David Rubitsky in Wisconsin get for his quiet effort to achieve justice by having the truth recognized? No, not just anti-Semitic hate mail; he gets DEATH THREATS!

While David Rubitsky was in the jungles of New Guinea performing his unprecedented (I think I was more on target when I said "unbelievable") actions I was an early teen-ager in North Carolina collecting scrap iron and tinfoil for the war effort.

And being Jewish, like Rubitsky, I had to smile gamely when the vastly-less-sensitive-than-today's population made snide jokes about Jews in the military finding their way to safe positions in the "Quartermaster Corps" – you know; clothes, supplies, things Jews were good at – while leaving the fighting to others.

To me the most impressive thing about the Rubitsky saga is not the unbelievable toll (500 to 600!) Japanese troops he helped die for the emperor.
macarthur

Called a hoax

March 7, 2001

Editor
Letters to the Editor
WORLDNETDAILY
jfarah@worldnetdaily.com, letters@worldnetdaily.com

I would like to make just an additional comment or two about
Wisconsin's notorious World War II hoaxer.

After two years of intensive research and investigation, the
United States Army in Tab H of its official conclusion released
on December 15, 1989 stated uniquivocally that the engagement
of December 1-2, 1942 in which Rubitsky claimed to be involved
"DID NOT OCCUR AS ALLEGED."

It should not be forgotten that the Army was prevailed upon
again in 1992 and 1998 to investigate Rubitsky's Walter Mitty
fantasy. The conclusion was the same as the 1989 result:
The engagement "DID NOT OCCUR AS ALLEGED."

One final question which only David Rubitsky can answer:
Why didn't he demand that his 32nd Division comrades-in-
arms come and see the results of his alleged heroism
immediately after he said it occurred.

The only honest answer Rubitsky can make is that there were
no bodies of Japanese dead to witness because the engagement,
as the Army said on December 15, 1989 "DID NOT OCCUR AS
ALLEGED."

It should be noted that the Army never investigated Rubitsky's
claim that he was denied the Medal of Honor on another
occasion for killing another 200 Japanese soldiers while
allegedly destroying seven machine-gun nests two years
later in Leyte in the Philippine Islands.

Also, in a 1990 taped interview, Mrs. Eveleyn Smith denied
that she had signed any document attesting that her husband
supported Rubitsky's alleged Leyte exploit.

Mr. Farah certainly owes his readers an apology for spreading
Rubitsky's baseless claims of heroism when a little research
and work on his part would have shown him that Rubitsky
is simply one of the greatest liars since the late eighteenth
century German nobleman Baron von Munchhausen.

William Gartland
gartland1@juno.com
5634 Hanna Road
Rio, WI 53960

Telephone: 920 882 3503

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The David Rubitsky story

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 26, 2001
1:00 a.m. Eastern

Sgt. David Rubitsky was asked to lay a communications wire connecting his battalion command post to a rat-infested, enemy-threatened outpost in a New Guinea swamp on Dec. 1, 1942.

The outpost was actually a former Japanese bunker won by American troops in recent fighting. Built with coconut logs and concrete reinforced with steel plate, it was four to five feet in height, 30-feet long and 10-feet wide.
retreat

When Rubitsky and an officer traveling with him arrived at the remote bunker, the three U.S. soldiers manning it said Japanese troops were moving into the area. They decided to flee and advised Rubitsky and Capt. Joseph Stehling to do the same.

Rubitsky decided to stay. And thus began his amazing story of heroism that has yet to be fully rewarded and recognized by his country even 59 years later.

Rubitsky watched the Japanese soldiers move small artillery pieces, heavy machine guns, mortars and anti-aircraft armaments into the area. He watched as more and more soldiers gathered. Anticipating a surprise attack by the Japanese on his 2nd Battalion, Rubitsky decided to lead his own surprise attack.

He opened fire. As Japanese soldiers advanced toward his bunker, Rubitsky used every weapon in his arsenal for nine grueling hours of intense fighting. He alternated between firing his .30-caliber water-cooled machine gun with 3,000 rounds of ammunition, a Browning automatic rifle with close to 600 rounds, his M-1 rifle, a pistol and tossing some of his 35 hand grenades.

Rubitsky spent a total of 21 hours in the bunker -- including nine under heavy siege. The Japanese army attacked from three different directions -- the north, south and west. His bunker had slits on all sides, making it possible for him to respond to an attack from any direction. He switched from gun to gun and threw grenades at the enemy, while the Japanese alternately charged his position and shelled it with light artillery.

When the fighting was over, Rubitsky was bleeding from the mouth, nose and elsewhere and suffering from multiple concussions from the shelling. But the Japanese were a lot worse off.

When Lt. Col. Herbert Smith came up to the bunker the next day, he estimated that Rubitsky had single-handedly killed 500 to 600 Japanese soldiers, thereby saving his own battalion from being decimated in a surprise attack.

That same month, Smith and Stehling recommended Rubitsky for the Medal of Honor.

But Rubitsky didn't get the medal. The late Maj. Gen. Smith, Brig. Gen. Stehling and three other soldiers from the 128th Infantry, the 2nd Battalion and the 32nd Division in New Guinea all concluded that the reason Rubitsky did not get the award was anti-Semitism.

Smith stated, before he died in 1989, that after referring the recommendation up the chain of command he was told by a lieutenant colonel: "We don't give Jews the Congressional Medal of Honor."

But the story doesn't end there.

Today Rubitsky is 82 years old. He spent a total of 40 years in active military service. He is currently a member of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the American Legion, the Vietnam Veterans of America and the Disabled American Veterans.

He and those who love him want to see this injustice righted.
smith's widow

Evelyn Smith, the widow of Gen. Smith, has written a notarized statement regarding her husband's support of Rubitsky: "My husband told me that Sgt. David Rubitsky deserved to win the Congressional Medal a second time in Leyte, Philippines, for knocking out seven machine gun nests, killing nearly 200 or more Japanese soldiers. …"

As for Rubitsky, himself, he says his lobbying for the medal at this stage is simply a matter of principle.

"What really matters is why I didn't get the medal," he says. "I'm doing it for the principle and the truth, not the medal and not the money. It's for every man, whether black, green, or purple. If he wears the uniform, he should get what's coming to him. He shouldn't have to fight for it."
Movie

There's talk of a movie being made about David Rubitsky. But before the full story can really be told -- on the big screen or elsewhere -- it needs a happy ending.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A hero without honor?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 29, 2001
1:00 a.m. Eastern

WASHINGTON -- They say a prophet hath no honor in his own country. It must be true of heroes, too.

A few weeks ago, I told you the story of Sgt. David Rubitsky, who single-handedly held off 21 hours of Japanese army assaults on his position in a New Guinea swamp in December 1942. When the smoke cleared, there were between 500 and 600 Japanese troops dead -- and David Rubitsky was still standing.

Lt. Col. Herbert Smith and Capt. Joseph Stehling, Rubitsky's commanding officers concluded that his heroic actions saved his own battalion from being decimated in a surprise attack. That same month, Smith and Stehling recommended Rubitsky for the Medal of Honor.

But Rubitsky didn't get the medal.

Smith ultimately became a major general and Stehling a brigadier general. They both concluded that the reason Rubitsky did not get the award was anti-Semitism.

Smith stated, before he died in 1989, that after referring the recommendation up the chain of command he was told by a lieutenant colonel: "We don't give Jews the Congressional Medal of Honor."

Today Rubitsky is 82 years old. He spent a total of 40 years in active military service. He is currently a member of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the American Legion, the Vietnam Veterans of America and the Disabled American Veterans. But, believe it or not, there is still an organized opposition to conferring the award on Rubitsky.

Since I wrote this column last month, I have been inundated with letters from people questioning Rubitsky's story, pointing out that the Pentagon conducted an investigation at the behest of Congress and refused to grant the award.

Let me tell you something. I know a little about such government investigations. I trust my own research into this matter much more than I trust the self-policing action of the Pentagon.

What's clear to me is that the people on the ground at the time -- including the commanding officers responsible for review, soldier eyewitnesses with no axes to grind and even civilians in New Guinea -- believe Rubitsky performed heroic actions 59 years ago in a remote swamp during World War II.

Queen

The good news? Rubitsky is now being recognized by the government of Papua New Guinea and Queen Elizabeth in London with a medal of their own.

That award came after yet another investigation of Rubitsky's story on the ground, where it happened.

It was conducted under the auspices of Sir Nagora Y. Bogan, Papua New Guinea's ambassador to the United States, who commissioned a noted historian to interview civilians, review original documents and research other primary sources. The process took several months.

"I really believe that much of David's story just fell through the cracks," explained Bogan. "More and more, as I looked into this, I came to the conclusion that David is telling the truth."

Bogan blames the lack of recognition on a comedy of errors, in addition to prejudice.

"His story is fully consistent with the documentation we found and the primary sources we looked at," said Bogan. "I am convinced of the authenticity of his story."

In fact, Bogan was so persuaded, he invited Rubitsky and his wife to Papua New Guinea to receive the honor in an investiture ceremony. Hundreds of ordinary people turned out to meet the hero -- the man "who made the river turn red with the blood of their enemies."

Still, there's an active effort out there to undermine Rubitsky's claims -- to suggest he doesn't deserve the Medal of Honor. There is no question that at least some of those people trashing Rubitsky -- not all, mind you, but some -- spend an inordinate amount of time promoting other anti-Jewish causes. Some deny the Holocaust ever happened. Some label Israel an aggressor in the Middle East. Some see Zionist conspiracies under every bed. Others actually suggest he should be charged with war crimes for killing so many Japanese soldiers.

Meanwhile, Rubitsky -- frail and elderly -- carries on in good humor, despite being haunted by the shadows of anti-Semitism.

Realistically, Rubitsky may never see his Medal of Honor. But he will always be a man of honor -- even in his own country.

Honored from afar
Milton WW II veteran to get British medal
By JESSICA HANSEN
of the Journal Sentinel staff
Last Updated: May 21, 2001
An 84-year-old Rock County veteran will receive a British medal of honor today for single-handedly gunning down more than 500 Japanese soldiers during a battle in World War II.

This is all a hoax, a great hoax. I'm sure he is lying.

- Robert E. Nordlander,
rebuffing a claim by veteran David Rubitsky (below) that he single-handedly killed hundreds of Japanese soldiers during World War II

We reached the conclusion that there is strong evidence, not in terms of actual witnesses, but strong circumstantial evidence, supporting what David said.

- Nagora Y. Bogan,
ambassador from Papua New Guinea, whose country conducted a two-month investigation into Rubitsky's claims

However, while the Queen of England has signed a letter officially recognizing David Rubitsky for his actions, debate rages in certain American circles as to the validity of this soldier's story.

In fact, so clouded is the issue of Rubitsky's heroism that the U.S. Congress has refused to award the World War II veteran the Medal of Honor, despite two recommendations by superior officers to do so.

"I will never get that medal," said Rubitsky, a Milton resident who been trying for the honor for more than a decade. "But what does the Medal of Honor mean to me? Not one darn thing. It's long lost its luster for me."

Rubitsky's supporters believe the World War II veteran earned the United States' highest military honor for his efforts during the Dec. 1, 1942, Battle of Buna in New Guinea.

While no official record of the events at Buna exists, Rubitsky said he arrived at an outpost there with another soldier just as an officer and two soldiers were abandoning it. The man with Rubitsky left to get supplies, and Rubitsky said he was left alone.

Fearing a surprise attack, Rubitsky claims to have opened fire on Japanese troops as they trickled through a narrow peninsula and made their way slowly through the swamp. Using a variety of weapons, Rubitsky said, he waged a roughly 91/2-hour gunfight.

"They just kept coming," he recalled. "I had such a concussion to the head. I was bleeding like a stuck pig. Another half-hour longer and I would have been dead."

At a military reunion in 1986, Rubitsky learned he had been recommended twice for the Medal of Honor. He was told two former commanding officers signed affidavits saying Rubitsky killed between 500 and 600 Japanese soldiers, and saved two infantries of American soldiers from being overrun.

But some, including Robert E. Nordlander of Menasha, reject Rubitsky's account.

"This is all a hoax, a great hoax. I'm sure he is lying," said Nordlander, who has waged a letter-writing campaign opposing Rubitsky's bid for the Medal of Honor.

Once a self-described Rubitsky supporter, Nordlander said he began to change his mind about the World War II veteran's heroics after meeting with Rubitsky and investigating his claims.

Among the elements of Rubitsky's story that Nordlander disputes are the number of soldiers Rubitsky is said to have killed. Nordlander claims Japanese military records show only 150 troops were in the area during the December 1942 attack, not 500 to 600.

Rubitsky, however, says he did not estimate the number of dead Japanese, but that his superior officers did after surveying the situation the next day.

Yet, despite notarized statements from superior officers regarding his wartime accomplishments, Congress declined to give Rubitsky the Medal of Honor after reviewing the case in 1987.

Rubitsky and his supporters say a superior officer blocked the awarding of the medal because Rubitsky is Jewish, but the Army denied that was the case.

Although the American government has determined there is not enough evidence to support Rubitsky's claims, the British government has taken a quite different stance.

"When your first get hold of his story, it's too good to be true," said Nagora Y. Bogan, the Papua New Guinean ambassador to the U.S., who is coming to Milton today to honor Rubitsky. "But nobody has gone back and traced the story, except to say nothing is on file."

Rubitsky
In 1999, a historian with the University of Papua New Guinea conducted a two-month inquiry into the matter, which included interviews with villagers and a review of the battle site.

"We reached the conclusion that there is strong evidence, not in terms of actual witnesses, but strong circumstantial evidence, supporting what David said," Bogan said.

Rubitsky is being named an honorary Member of the British Empire, one of five honors that Great Britain confers on civilians and service personnel for outstanding public service. About 150 people are expected to attend tonight's ceremony where the award will be presented.

Papua New Guinea is an independent nation but remains a member of the British Commonwealth. Rubitsky was asked to go to Buckingham Palace in London for the special ceremony, but a recent operation prevented him from doing so. Instead, Bogan will travel from Washington, D.C., to Milton, where he will present Rubitsky with a decree signed by the queen and a medal.

"I'm so proud," he said. "This medal I'm receiving means more to me than the Medal of Honor. I do love my country, and I'd give my life up for my country today, even at my age. But this medal means 10 times more to me than the Medal of Honor.

"I no longer seek the Medal of Honor," he added. "All I want is them (the American government) to say I deserved it and I didn't get it because of discrimination. I don't want the medal. It's the principle."

March
· With PNG’s Minister for Mineral Resources, Hon. Sam Akoitai and his delegation, Ambassador Paki attend meetings on mining and related issues at the World Bank Headquarters.

· The Ambassador delivers a speech at a reception in honor of Sgt. David S. Rubitsky, MBE (retired) in Milton, Wisconsin. The PNG Government honored Mr. Rubitsky for his heroic actions and bravery in the “Battle of Buna” during World War 2, one of the bloodiest battles in the entire war in the Pacific.

Mr. Rubitsky – who was awarded an MBE by Queen Elizabeth II and the PNG Government is the most courageous American soldier ever to have served his country in wartime New Guinea. Sgt. Rubitsky single-handedly killed in battle over 500 Japanese soldiers in the “Battle of Buna” on December 1 and 2, 1942. Read the amazing

The New Guinea jungle, 1942: waves of Japanese soldiers are assaulting a U.S. position. For 21 hours straight, Army Sergeant David Rubitsky blasts away at the attackers with a .30-cal. machine gun, a .45-cal. pistol, a rifle and grenades. The smoke clears. Single-handed, Rubitsky, 25, has killed or wounded 500 to 600 of the enemy. After examining the scene, company commander J.M. Stehling recommends Rubitsky for the Congressional Medal of Honor. Stehling's commander, Lieut. Colonel Herbert Smith, approves and relays the word to his superior, Colonel John W. Mott. "You mean a Jew for the Congressional Medal of Honor?" Mott replies. According to Smith's later affidavit, Mott "just laughed and walked away."

Rubitsky, now 72 and living in Milton, Wis., never complained. But his friends did, and so did the Anti-Defamation League and a group of Viet Nam veterans. In 1987 the Pentagon began looking into the case.

Several months ago, an Army buddy gave Rubitsky the evidence he needed: a message that Rubitsky's friend had found on the body of a Japanese officer who died later in New Guinea.

The note referred to "600 fine Japanese soldiers ((who)) died because of a solitary American soldier." Today Rubitsky says he is not as interested in the medal as in justice. He may yet get both.

New York Times

Army to review denial of a medal NEW YORK - Army investigators will decide this.month whether a veteran said to have killed more than 500 Japanese soldiers during a single encounter in World War II was denied the Medal of Honor because he is Jewish, The New York Times reported yesterday. The Army has conducted a 23-month review of the case of David Rubitsky, 72 a retired merchant seaman who lives in Milton, Wis., A spokesman told the Times that it will decide before the end of November whether to reconunend him for the medal. Rubitsky and his supporters say the veteran, armed only with a machine gun, a carbine and an automatic tii, cut down 500 to 600enemy troops trying to force their way past him i the jungles of New Guinea in December 1942. The Times said two of Rubitsky's, superiors recommended him for the Medal of Honor but a third rejected the idea because Rubitsky is Jewish.

NATIONAL DESK
Veteran Denied a Medal Sadly Vows to Fight On
By DIRK JOHNSON, SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES
LEAD: David Rubitsky, his hands trembling slightly as he read from a handwritten statement on lined notebook paper, today rebutted the Army's finding that he was simply an honorable old soldier with a foggy memory.

December 17, 1989 U.S. News
MORE ON ANTI-SEMITISM AND: JEWS, WORLD WAR II (1939-45), JAPANNATIONAL DESK
Army Cites Strong Evidence in Barring Medal
By RICHARD HALLORAN, SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES
LEAD: The Army said today that there was ''incontestable evidence'' that a Jewish World War II veteran did not perform the heroic actions that he had claimed in seeking the Medal of Honor.

December 16, 1989 U.S. News
MORE ON ANTI-SEMITISM AND: JEWSNATIONAL DESK
Medal of Honor Elude Jewish Veteran
By RICHARD HALLORAN, SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES
LEAD: An Army board of review has concluded that a Jewish veteran of World War II should not receive a Medal of Honor that was denied him in 1945 because of what his advocates say was anti-Semitism by a senior officer.

December 15, 1989 U.S. News
MORE ON ANTI-SEMITISM AND: JEWS, ARMIES, AWARDS, DECORATIONS AND HONORS, WORLD WAR II (1939-45)NATIONAL DESK
Army to Decide Soon on Medal of Honor for Jewish Veteran
By WILLIAM E. SCHMIDT, SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES
LEAD: The Secretary of the Army is to decide by mid-December whether to recommend the Medal of Honor for a Jewish veteran who is said to have killed hundreds of Japanese during a single battle in World War II but who was denied the medal then, apparently because of anti-Semitism.

December 3, 1989 U.S. News
MORE ON ANTI-SEMITISM AND: JEWS, STONE, MICHAEL P WNATIONAL DESK
Did Bigotry Block a Medal That Valor in Battle Earned?
By WILLIAM E. SCHMIDT
LEAD: Army investigators will decide this month whether to recommend the Medal of Honor for a Jewish veteran who is said to have killed more than 500 Japanese soldiers in a single furious encounter in World War II but to have been denied the nation's highest military decoration because of anti-Semitism.

Nordlander Versus Neistein

Robert Nordlander has been fighting the media for a long time. Other people, such as University of Oshkosh professor Tony Palmieri, have highlighted this in the past. Nordlander has provided me with another example. I have decided to provide it here, unvarnished. Perhaps you agree with Nordlander that certain issues need to be presented, or maybe you think Neistein is in the right when he says that people are not interested in certain topics (and a newspaper is a business, after all). I am making no decisions here. Clarifications will be provided in brackets by myself if need be.

Nordlander to P-C, December 7, 2006

[Nordlander submitted the following in hopes of the piece appearing as a letter to the editor.]

Your December 6 editorial titled “Delayed Medal of Honor decisions tarnishing valor” asserted that the delay between the time that heroic deeds of valor occur on the battlefield and their final recognition by the nation for whom they were performed is too long.

Nothing could be further from the truth. It takes time to investigate claims of valor put forth for ultimate recognition. There is the possibility of fraud being perpetrated. A classic example is the case of David S. Rubitsky, a WWII Jewish veteran from Milton, who claimed that he had been denied the Medal of Honor by his superiors because of anti-Semitism. He claimed that he had killed 600 Japanese soldiers all by himself from December 1-2, 1942 during the Battle of Buna which took place in Papua New Guinea.

The US Army spent two years 1987-1989 investigating his claim courtesy of the late Congressman Les Aspin. Again in 1992 the Army was obliged to look into this claim and still again in 1998. The repeated conclusion was that the alleged act of heroism did not occur.

Rubitsky also claimed he had been denied the Medal of Honor on another occasion in the Philippines in 1944 where he claimed he killed 200 Japanese soldiers while destroying seven machine-gun nests. The Army did not investigate that claim.

It should be noted that Rubitsky had the support of 70 members of the House of Representatives plus the support of Senator Kohl who wrote a letter to the Army saying the MOH should be awarded to Rubitsky based on his investigation.

The Army needs time to carefully look into these claims of heroism
to prevent others like Rubitsky from imposing their egos on history.

[For more details of the Rubitsky story, see my interview with Nordlander available elsewhere on The Framing Business.]

Post-Crescent Response, December 7

Robert, and I’ll try to ask this without the personal hostility I’m feeling, what does Rubitsky’s religion have to do with the point of this letter?

Matt [Neistein, opinions page editor]

Nordlander Response, December 8

He used anti-Semitism as the ploy to gain sympathy for his fraudulent claim. I have the Army file. In 1987-1989 the media was full of sympathetic stories. The detractors in his own unit were smeared as anti-Semites. Anyone who questioned Rubitsky’s claim was smeared as an anti-Semite.

Forged documents

He, Rubitsky, even forged various documents. One which General Smith of Neilsville acknowledged to me in writing. And another which Mrs. Smith, the widow of the Oshkosh General Smith told me was a forgery in which he accused her husband of anti-Semitism.

The corrupt government of Papua New Guinea nominated him for an MBE which Queen Elizabeth approved. A Papua historian claims the deed happened but won’t share his research with anyone.

The Jewish War Veterans supported him but then repudiated him after reading the Army verdict. Foxman of the ADL [Anti- Defamation League] supported him but repudiated him after the Army drew its conclusions.

Neistein to Nordlander, December 8

But what’s that got to do with the point of your letter, Robert? He could be Muslim and claim people were anti-Muslim. Or Catholic and claim the Army’s anti-Catholic. It wouldn’t change anything. Your point is that he lied about his service and was denied the medal after investigations. The other stuff is just extraneous and more than a little troubling.

To be frank, I’m not publishing this letter because you and Rubitsky have a long history that has included legal issues. I’m not going to let you use this page to continue this personal rivalry.

And for a guy who’s been defending himself for years against charges of anti-Semitism, this letter doesn’t flatter you.

There’s also strong consideration going on here to withhold your letters regarding the USS Liberty from publication, if only because they are becoming so prevalent as to be tiresome. You manage to find a way to tie any subject back to that issue, no matter how tenuous the connection, and it mires the discussion.

That discussion is the purpose of the opinion page. And if in any
group discussion, one person keeps interjecting with the same piece of dialogue over and over, it aggravates everyone else, particularly when it’s on a subject people have pretty much demonstrated they don’t care much about.

You have a passion for that issue, and I respect that. But I think it lowers the quality of your contributions to the page and I strongly suggest you consider what others think when they read those letters. You may be doing more damage to your cause than good.

Nordlander to Neistein, December 8

I take issue with a PC editorial. I give an example why time is needed by the military to validate claims of valor. I use Rubitsky as an example. The guy us a fraud. But I can’t discuss him because of “rivalry.” There is no rivalry. I and others only publicized his fraud. Apparently truth or the validity of an issue has no standing with you because you choose to use your authority to censor an honest opinion based upon your own subjective prejudices and predispositions. So much for the spirit of the First Amendment being applied to writers of letters to the editors.

I had to hire a lawyer (the Menn Law Firm) to remove slanderous Rubitsky forgeries with my name from his web site.

My letters referencing the USS LIBERTY are “tiresome?” The Post-Crescent publishes a lot of crap which I think tiresome while others might find it worthwhile and interesting. “Tiresome” is subjective and is only your opinion. I FIND THE GREEN BAY PACKERS TIRESOME but your paper is full of that crap all the time. I find it disgraceful that a former US Marine would find discussion of the injustice done to the USS LIBERTY crew “tiresome.”

I suspect you got a number of complaints again about my Reader
Reaction so you are telling me that the USS Liberty cannot be
discussed. [I presume that Nordlander is referring to his RR where he said that God does not love children because He let Hurricane Katrina happen.] Why don’t you publish a list of topics iin the PC that the readers CAN’T DISCUSS instead of giving readers the illusion that your rules bar personal attacks and limit letters to 300 words once a month.

Neistein’s Final Word, December 11

Robert, I have no problem with you disagreeing with our editorials. As you can see by letters we print, people do it all the time. What I have a problem with is you seeing an editorial on a topic that allows you to take a swipe at a personal enemy and using it to do so.

Rubitsky has been denied his medal, as you claim. The issue is done with. The opinion page is not here for you to twist the knife on a dead issue.

There is no rivalry? He sued you and you went to the police regarding his harassment of you. You just said you had to hire a lawyer to deal with him. I don’t know how you would define “rivalry,” but when police are necessary to break up a confrontation between two men, I think it’s fair to dub them rivals.

The truth and validity of this issue has already been exposed. If you wrote me a letter explaining how the earth was round and all those people who said it was flat were wrong, I wouldn’t print that either. The issue is over with. Just because Rubitsky still lobbies for it doesn’t make it a worthwhile topic.

As for the Liberty, it is getting tiresome, and I say that as an opinion editor, not a Marine. My job is to keep the community conversation on the page lively and progressive. One person who brings up the same subject every single time he speaks - whether the actual subject at hand is as mundane as day care policies or suburban street repair - only bogs that conversation down, especially when no one responds. That doesn’t make you part of the conversation, Robert; it makes you the guy pleading for attention.

And I haven’t gotten a complaint yet about your RRF response. If anything, it grated on me as soon as I saw the e-mail, and the frustration on my end regarding this has been growing. And every time we have any discussion along these lines, you accuse me of censorship. I hate to point this out, but my title is “op-ed editor.” That means I edit the page. That means I make the decisions about what goes on and what doesn’t. I know you think this is blatantly unfair. Unfortunately, that’s too bad. Every opinion page in the country has an editor who makes the same decisions.

My decision in this case is to very politely and professionally request that your crusade for the Liberty not overwhelm your contributions to the page. By my count, you’ve brought it up at least three times since August with no real developments or new information on the issue. I don’t want to ban you from the page, but I’m also not going to let you abuse it.

This is coolbert: Medal of Honor I.

"The river ran red with blood!!!"

WARNING: WHAT YOU ARE ABOUT TO READ IS EXTREMELY CONTROVERSIAL. I AM NOT SAYING IT DID HAPPEN, I AM NOT SAYING IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. I LEAVE IT TO THE READER TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES WHAT THE TRUTH IS.

Read at Joseph Farah's web site WorldNetDaily the most incredible story of war time heroism. A story that is the greatest single feat of arms in the history of warfare.

The story of David Rubitsky.

David Rubitsky. A U.S. Army sergeant in World War Two, who singlehandedly, in one battle without assistance of any type, killed 600 Japanese soldiers!!!

David Rubitsky, a man who was deserving of the Medal of Honor [MOH], but who was denied the award because, "We don't give Jews the Congressional Medal of Honor." [this from a senior commander of his unit, the 32nd Division, Wisconsin Army National Guard [WIARNG] [Red Arrow]].

[The 32nd Division [Red Arrow], did see extensive combat in the Pacific theatre during WW2. Spent more time on the front lines and in combat than ANY OTHER ARMY UNIT IN WW2!!!]

David Rubitsky, a man who served his country in the most heroic manner, and was denied the highest award for valor because of his JEWISH FAITH!!! [so much like Artie Klein, is it not!!!???]

"He opened fire. As Japanese soldiers advanced toward his bunker, Rubitsky used every weapon in his arsenal for nine grueling hours of intense fighting. He alternated between firing his .30-caliber water-cooled machine gun with 3,000 rounds of ammunition, a Browning automatic rifle with close to 600 rounds, his M-1 rifle, a pistol and tossing some of his 35 hand grenades."

"Rubitsky spent a total of 21 hours in the bunker -- including nine under heavy siege. The Japanese army attacked from three different directions -- the north, south and west. His bunker had slits on all sides, making it possible for him to respond to an attack from any direction. He switched from gun to gun and threw grenades at the enemy, while the Japanese alternately charged his position and shelled it with light artillery."

Again, a feat of arms without parallel in the history of warfare period!!!

And denied the MOH because of his faith!!

This story first surfaced in the national media around 1987 or so. Appeared in major newspapers all across the country. I can even remember seeing the account of Rubitsky's heroics myself and being impressed and amazed at what I had read.

David was even interviewed on National Public Radio [NPR] and recounted the event with startling detail.

David's story has been repeated on numerous web sites [including Joseph Farah's ]] and weblogs throughout the years. David has become somewhat of a cause celebre.

"cause cé·lè·bre ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kôz s-lb, kz s-lbr)
n. pl. causes cé·lè·bres (kôz s-lb, kz s-lbr)
An issue arousing widespread controversy or heated public debate.
A celebrated legal case."

Many in high places in our government have lobbied on the behalf of David to see this historic injustice righted. Lobbying with the intent to see David awarded the MOH. An award which he so deservedly merits!!

TROUBLE WITH ALL THIS!!

THREE TIMES THE U.S. ARMY HAS INVESTIGATED THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS OF DAVID AND FOUND THEM TO BE TOTALLY LACKING. WITHOUT MERIT OF ANY KIND. THE BATTLE AND KILLING OF 600 JAPANESE ON THE BATTLEFIELD SEEMS TO HAVE NOT OCCURRED!!

"After two years of intensive research and investigation, the
United States Army in Tab H of its official conclusion released
on December 15, 1989 stated unequivocally that the engagement
of December 1-2, 1942 in which Rubitsky claimed to be involved
'DID NOT OCCUR AS ALLEGED.'"

"Abe Foxman [head of Anti-Defamation League] even congratulated
Lt. Col. Terrance Adkins, head of the ArmyAwards Branch at that
time, for the thoroughness with which it pursued its investigation
of Rubitsky's claims of valor and charges of anti-Semitism against
the Army."

"Moreover, all of Rubitsky's 92 congressional supporters -in-
cluding Wisconsin's Senator Herbert Kohl-all accepted the Army
conclusion that the engagement 'DID NOT OCCUR AS ALLEGED.'"

"It should not be forgotten that the Army was prevailed upon
again in 1992 and 1998 to investigate Rubitsky's Walter Mitty
fantasy. The conclusion was the same as the 1989 result:
The engagement 'DID NOT OCCUR AS ALLEGED.'"

Consider David's own most compelling evidence:

Japs commit Hari Kari over Rubitsky

"The most compelling evidence supporting Mr. Rubitsky was a handwritten message on the back of a photograph removed just after the battle from the body of a Japanese officer. The officer, Colonel Yamamoto, had committed suicide to atone for the loss of 600 fine Japanese soldiers killed by a lone American soldier. In an interview with National Public Radio Mr. Rubitsky graphically recounted the fighting which went on all night. Mr. Rubitsky admitted to being insane from shooting and bayoneting them."

What does the Army say about this??

"As regards the photograph, both Japanese and American experts declared it a forgery."

And as for the persons that originally recommended David for the MOH??

"The commanding officer who allegedly said "Jews don't get the Medal of Honor" had been relieved of his command the day after the mythical battle and had nothing to do with either forwarding or forgetting the original affidavits. The key witness for the claim of Mr. Rubitsky, the officer reputed to have seen the bodies of the slain Japanese, was placed back at battalion headquarters writing reports."

Well, someone is telling a real whopper here. This is NOT a matter of nuance/shades of grey/he said/they said/etc. This either occurred or it did NOT occur. Perhaps the U.S. Army still has a vendetta against David!!?? What is what here??!!

The Museum of Hoaxes web site has even sent a letter to Joseph Farah demanding a retraction of the 2001 article.

I have some problems with David's account right off the bat:

* Ammunition expenditure.

3000 rounds fired in a nineteen hour period. That many rounds would weigh about 210 pounds to begin with [I am assuming that 100 rounds of thirty caliber ammo weights 7 pounds]. If five men carried that load to the area where the battle took place, that would be an additional 40 pounds per man carried in addition to their normal battle kit.

Linesmen [this is described as an officer and the linesman, David!!] performing their mission would NOT have normally carried such a load . A linesman would carry his standard battle kit, a Garand rifle, and a normal load of ammo, but not an additional forty pounds of ammunition.

[ammunition was prepositioned by someone else??!! It is not clear what is what!!?? This fighting position is described as an outpost. A listening post [LP] or an observation post [OP]? You would not have found a machinegun, BAR, and an enormous quantity of ammo in such a position. The normal SOP would have been FOR THE TROOPS TO REPORT WHAT WAS GOING ON AND THEN SPLIT, ABANDONING THE POSITION, WHICH IS WHAT THEY DID, MINUS DAVID!]

[for the officer and the other three enlisted men to have left David by himself is strange too. It may be that the SOP for those troops already in the outpost was to report and leave when threatened. If the officer told David to leave and he did not, that would have constituted disobedience to orders. Normally all the enlisted would have deferred to the officer on the scene as to what course of action to follow!!]

* Casualties.

[Perhaps the statistics do not hold water when you are battling Japanese!!!??? My assumption about the wounded to dead ratio of 350/100 is not correct in the case of Japs!!!???]

[Perhaps also those thirty five hand grenades thrown all were on target too, and killed a lot of Japs besides!!?? Jap casualties were NOT only from weapons fire!!??]

[well, if the dead numbered 600, and my assumption of 2100 wounded is generally correct, that is 2700 troops. And that does not even count those NOT KIA/WIA!! What would have then been the size of the attacking Jap force!!?? At least regimental strength, or even brigade strength!!??]

* Saipan.

During the Great Banzai Charge of Saipan [1944], 5000 Japanese attackers were ABLE to overrun two BATTALIONS of Army infantry, that infantry with artillery support. That is a defending force [American] of in excess of a thousand men. That a thousand men were not able to stop a Japanese force of only somewhat greater number than what David would have had to face SINGLEHANDEDLY is an indication that something is not right here!!??

Well, you see where all this goes, don't you!!!

The U.S. Army is NOT the only party investigating the claims of David. It seems the government of Papua New Guinea has also done a month long check of the facts and concluded, based I guess upon the eyewitness [??] accounts of the local natives, that the battle described by David DID OCCUR!! David HAS BEEN awarded a Member of the British Empire [MBE] for his exploits!!??
Scond battle
"The river ran red with blood!!!"

But there is MORE!! It also seems that David ALSO claims that he should have been awarded a SECOND MOH for his exploits during a second battle, this one fought two years after the first, this second engagement taking place in the Philippines [1944]. According to David, on this second occasion, he again, singlehandedly [??] killed 200 Japanese while wiping out seven machinegun nests!!!

[David was a telephone linesman, NOT an infantryman!!??]

Another feat of daring in addition to the first episode of heroics that boggles the mind!!!

600 here, 200 here!! You get it, right!!??

Surely someone must have seen the second battle!!?? Yes!!?? I would have thought so!!?? Again, maybe this also was not witnessed??!!

Whatever, David qualifies as one helluva killing machine!!

Or does he???!!

Again, you the reader decide!!

coolbert.
Posted by: Albert / 10:44 AM

Tall Tales

Only a nation of infants who have been spoon-fed the pablum of relentless Jewish propaganda would question the reality of Judaism's race-hate doctrines. Jewish hasbara (propaganda) is first and foremost based on brazen lying, the more outrageous the better. Though they have accused Hitler of the Big Lie technique they are themselves the chief practicioners of it. In addressing the Jewish leadership, Christ said they were, "Of your Father, a murderer and a liar from the beginning." (John 8:44).

When gas chamber doubter Bradley Smith placed a series of nationwide advertisements in college newspapers for his views, Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz rushed to respond, denouncing Smith nationally in print as a "known...anti-Black racist." This was a complete lie made up out of thin air. Said Smith, "So far as anti-Black racism goes, in all the stuff I've written over the last 20 years I've never written a word on that issue. It can't even be argued. It's a complete invention...They make any accusation that comes to mind, confident that media won't try to find out the truth of the matter." (Smith's Report, Dec. 1991, pp. 2-3).
Bayonets the Japs
A few years ago National Public Radio (NPR), a taxpayer financed enterprise, championed the cause of 72 year old David S. Rubitsky, who claimed that only "anti-semitism" was keeping him from receiving the Congressional Medal of Honor for having single-handedly killed more than 600 Japanese soldiers in a battle. According to Rubitsky, he fought off waves of Japanese soldiers in all-night fight and saved his battalion. He said Japanese bodies were "piled like cordwood." He told reporters: "Some were still alive. Some I just hit in the shoulder and couldn't move. Some in the legs. So I would just shoot them and bayonet them, shoot them and bayonet them. I was a completely insane man."

As soon as NPR and the NY Times discovered that there was a Jew who was not getting the highest military award, that magic explanation for all Jewish troubles, "anti-semitism," was summoned. The Times and NPR reflexively played the hound to the U.S. Army's hare. As it turned out, Rubitsky's account was conclusively proved false. Rubitsky's evidence, a Japanese inscription on a photograph, was judged by both military experts and historians in the U.S. and Japan to be "100 percent...a forgery."

However, since this was a Jew the media were dealing with, the NY Times conceded that, "In a reflection of the delicacy of the matter...Army officials and members of Congress were careful not to portray Mr. Rubitsky as a deliberate liar...simply an honorable old soldier with a foggy memory." (NY Times, Dec. 16, pp. 1 and 14; Dec. 17, 1989; also cf. Researcher newsletter, vol. 3, no. 5, p. 1). Indeed it must have been a very foggy night out there in the Pacific.

One wonders if the perpetrator of this little yarn had been an aging, hillbilly, good ol' boy from north Alabama, what pyrotechnic paroxysms of pointed media indignation would have been directed at his church, his culture and his community?

The same "foggy memories" applied in the Israeli trial of Cleveland auto-worker John Demjanjuk, where several Jewish "eyewitnesses" swore, without a trace of doubt or shadow of uncertainty, that Demjanjuk was the infamous "Ivan the Terrible," gasser-general of Treblinka. Demjanjuk was convicted and sentenced to hang on the strength of these "honorable old" Jewish "eyewitnesses." Only later did researchers working for his family prove that Ivan the Terrible was long dead and Demjanjuk was not him.

We'll pray as we're seizing the day.

CONGRESS' DOUBLE STANDARD

As we approach the 34th anniversary of the Israeli massacre of 34 Americans serving on the USS Liberty, a massacre which the late George Ball, under-secretary of state under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, referred to as the "blatant murder" of American citizens, we have yet to get any congressional inquiry into the cause of this tragedy. The events of June 8, 1967 have proven, if anything does, the stranglehold which Israeli influence, courtesy of AIPAC and other Zionist organizations, have on the Congress of the United States.

congress

Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY) was able to get some 70 congressional colleagues to sign a letter addressed to the secretary of the Army demanding that Rubitsky be awarded the Medal of Honor. The Army found on Dec. 15, 1989 that Rubitsky's claims were spurious.

The disgraceful intervention of Sen. Herb Kohl on behalf of...

December 7, 1994

Editor
Letters
FOND DU LAC REPORTER
33 WEST SECOND STREET
FOND DU LAC, WI 54935

On November 10 John Patrick Hunter, Associate Editor of The
Capital Times in Madison, WI, reported that David Rubitsky, the Milton,
WI veteran, who claimed that he had been denied the Medal of Honor
because of the anti-Semitic, i.e., Judeophobic prejudices of a superior
officer, may have a movie made about himself.

kirk douglas

On November 28, 1989 Colonel William D. Hawkins, USA, Ret.,
the top intelligence officer for the Wisconsin-Michigan 32nd "Red Arrow"
Division during the Battle of Buna, wrote the following words to the
Secretary of the Army:

"I feel certain that in this small but high-mortality campaign, I would
have been aware of any such heroic action and this appears to be a
completely fictitious Walter Mitty-type fantasy which does not belong
in the annals of that select group of Medal of Honor heroes."

Knowledgeable Americans would agree with Colonel Hawkins. It is
an insult to Medal of Honor winners living and dead to have the Rubitsky
fantasy immortalized in cinema while their heroic deeds remained buried,
for the most part, in the official histories and archives.

I happen to come from a city (Menasha, WI) with a population of
some 15,000 people that has two Medal of Honor Winners, the late Elmer
Burr, who saved his superior officer and others by falling on a Japanese
grenade during the Battle of Buna and Kenneth Stumpf, who performed an
extraordinary act of bravery during the war in Vietnam. Stumpf recently
retired from the Army.

It would certainly be an insult to the memory of Elmer Burr
to have Rubitsky immortalized by Messrs. Douglas and Krainin. I leave
Kenneth Stumpf to speak for himself.

Robert E. Nordlander
n...@mail.atw.earthreach.com

333 Lopas Street

	It's what David Rubitsky said when his incredulous military superiors asked him why he did such a damn-fool thing as stay behind all alone in a jungle bunker under attack by four columns of Japanese infantry. "I got tired," said Rubitsky, "of hearing Jews don't fight."