Russian Ships Displayed at DNC`s Tribute to American Vets

The Navy Times has the following report (h/t via Drudge Report)

On the last night of the Democratic National Convention, a retired Navy four-star took the stage to pay tribute to veterans. Behind him, on a giant screen, the image of four hulking warships reinforced his patriotic message.

But there was a big mistake in the stirring backdrop: those are Russian warships.

While retired Adm. John Nathman, a former commander of Fleet Forces Command, honored vets as America’s best, the ships from the Russian Federation Navy were arrayed like sentinels on the big screen above.

These were the very Soviet-era combatants that Nathman and Cold Warriors like him had once squared off against.

“The ships are definitely Russian,” said noted naval author Norman Polmar after reviewing hi-resolution photos from the event. “There’s no question of that in my mind.”

Naval experts concluded the background was a photo composite of Russian ships that were overflown by what appear to be U.S. trainer jets. It remains unclear how or why the Democratic Party used what’s believed to be images of the Russian Black Sea Fleet at their convention.

A spokesman for the Democratic National Convention Committee was not able to immediately comment Tuesday, saying he had to track down personnel to find out what had happened.

The veteran who spotted the error and notified Navy Times said he was immediately taken aback.

“I was kind of in shock,” said Rob Barker, 38, a former electronics warfare technician who left the Navy in 2006. Having learned to visually identify foreign ships by their radars, Barker recognized the closest ship as the Kara-class cruiser Kerch.

[….]

For example, the ship in the foreground, on the far right, has a square radar antenna at the top of its masthead. That is the MR-700 Podberezovik 3-D early warning radar, commonly identified as “Flat Screen” for its appearance, a three-dimensional early warning radar mounted on the Kerch, said Eric Wertheim, editor of “Combat Fleets of the World.”

Similarly, the third ship has a MR-310 “Head Net” air search radar, shaped like two off-set bananas, at its masthead and is mostly likely the guided missile destroyer Smetlivyy. The first two ships seem to be Krivak-class frigates, but it’s hard to discern from the silhouette, experts said.

But the fact they are Russian ships is not in doubt. In addition to the ship’s radar arrays and hulls, which are dissimilar from U.S. warships, the photo features one more give-away: a large white flag with a blue ‘X’ at the ships’ sterns.

Polmar, who authored “The Naval Institute Guide to the Soviet Navy,” recognized the blue ‘X’-mark: “The X is the Cross of St. Andrew’s, which is a Russian Navy symbol,” Polmar said. (An anchored U.S. warship, by contrast, flies the American flag on its stern.)

Based on this specific group of these ship types, one naval expert concluded that this was most likely a photo of the Black Sea Fleet.

“Ships are all Black Sea Fleet,” A. D. Baker III, a retired Office of Naval Intelligence analyst, told Navy Times after looking at the image. “These four ships, at the time the photo was taken, constituted the entire major surface combatant component of the Black Sea Fleet,” Baker said, noting the photo was likely to be six years old or older. (The Kerch is now on the list to be scrapped, Baker said.)

…read more…

We are still at odds with these ships in our day:

This isn’t the first time Democrats have done ths. And this is really a cultural mistake, because, as these Democrats grow up and head off to Berkeley and other ivy league schools, they get to know our troops as projecting imperialist power to the rest of the world, and so, many do not serve or even do ROTC. So when they staff the offices of the Democratic leadership, and are asked to look for a graphic to post in an ad, they just assume Google throws them American pictures.

Here are some older examples. This first one comes from Nancy Pelosi and talks about veterans benefits and health insurance and how Democratic plans are better that their opponents. The only problem is that the soldier on the picture is a Canadian one:

Another one is from the DNC itself and was part of their front page. I will follow up the original with the original, non-photo shopped pic:

That soldier, unfortunately for whomever played with the pic, was a Canadian soldier:

It is sad that Democrats consistently mix our military men and women with those of other countries. It shows a lack of respect (explicit or implicit) for these few people who choose to make a difference in their countries future by the giving of their time to a greater purpose and will than their own. Its just another commentary on the seriousness of the Democrats as a Party worthy of this greatest nation on God’s green earth.

Pelosi `Swears` Spirit of Susan B. Anthony Spoke to Her in White House (Occultism)

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) told a recent gathering of the Women’s Political Committee that the spirits of suffragists Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Alice Paul spoke to her at the White House. Pelosi said she heard them say: “At last we have a seat at the table”.

Nancy Pelosi Busted ~ by 27% (Pelosi says women receive less pay than men. Let`s check Pelosi’s staff pay)

NewsBusters has this:

But, as NPR’s Tamara Keith reports, this is an election year when many votes are as much about getting the opposition on the record as passing legislation.”

Keith led her report with the anti-GOP smear: “By now, you’ve heard about the Republican war on women. Democrats don’t want voters, particularly coveted female voters, to forget about it. First, there was the issue of contraception; then, came the Violence Against Women Act. You might say the Paycheck Fairness Act is a sequel.” She continued with two clips from Senator Harry Reid attacking Republicans, and specifically singling out presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

Later in the segment, the NPR journalist acknowledged that “the fact that he [Romney] and his fellow Republicans had to, once again, explain their position on women’s issues appears to be exactly what Democrats want. In the Senate, they keep bringing up bills related to women – bills they know Republicans don’t support….With the war on women narrative apparently likely to continue, House Republicans are trying to get off of defense. They recently launched the women’s policy committee.”

What Keith failed to mention that is that a May 24, 2012 article by Andrew Stiles of the Washington Free Beacon documented that “a substantial gender pay gap exists” in the offices of three female senators who support the Paycheck Fairness Act. Senator Patty Murray of Washington is “one of the worst offenders,” according to Stiles: “Female members of Murray’s staff made about $21,000 less per year than male staffers in 2011, a difference of 33.8 percent. That is well above the 23 percent gap that Democrats claim exists between male and female workers nationwide.” Overall, according to the writer, “women working for Senate Democrats in 2011 pulled in an average salary of $60,877. Men made about $6,500 more.”

Back in April 2012, the correspondent filed a one-sided report on Mitt Romney and cited the “liberal news site Think Progress” as one of her main sources. Keith turned to a former aide to Democrats John Kerry and Deval Patrick without giving his political or ideological affiliation.

…read more…

Military Chaplains Soon Forced Into Performing Same-Sex Marriages? (Two veterans from over a year ago think so)

BigGovernment has this:

The stage is being set so that military Chaplains can and most likely will be ordered to perform same sex marriage in contradiction to their religious beliefs.

WASHINGTON, May 22, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Democrat House leaders including Nancy Pelosi have opposed a measure to ensure military chaplains are not forced to perform same-sex “marriages,” arguing that it is based on a “manufactured crisis” and therefore unnecessary – a response strongly criticized by chaplain advocates.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on Thursday echoed sentiments issued by the Obama White House regarding the conscience language, part of a defense spending bill, saying that “there’s nothing that says that chaplains act against their faith.”

The result will be that chaplains of certain faiths abandon the military as they are forced to choose between violating their faiths or being driven out for not performing such marriage ceremonies.

What is required is the respect of certain long-established and broadly supported religious beliefs. We currently lack a White House and Democrat leadership capable of providing this respect. When Leftists empowered by big government meet religion, religion loses and is ultimately diminished in size and influence.

…read more…

In a recent response to a friend post on FaceBook, I mentioned the types of areas that same-sex marriage hurts religious belief and places where faith and care and concern for the poor as well as children:

…Unfortunately, like many others, this is what Thomas Sowell calls “stage one” thinking. Emotions based policy making without asking what affect a decision will have on society. The oldest (and most successful) adoption agency in Massachusetts (80-years in the field of placing children with families, Illinois and California are sure to follow) and DC had to shut their doors because of their religious option to prefer heterosexual couples when adopting to homosexual couples, from Universities ceasing to give insurance to their students and staff, to forcing chaplains in the military to marry gay couples. These are the early consequences to stage one thinking…

You can add military chaplains to the mix. Decisions like these do not just affect “marriage,” they reverberate throughout all society. Special rights always sets up battles and shows how they destroy healthy thinking, for instance this dichotomy:

“If homosexuality is really genetic, we may soon be able to tell if a fetus is predisposed to homosexuality, in which case many parents might choose to abort it. Will gay rights activists continue to support abortion rights if this occurs?” ~ Dale A. Berryhill, The Assault: Liberalism’s Attack on Religion, Freedom, and Democracy

The question become this, then. Would conservatively religious people serving LESS in the military hurt or help our nation? Does forcing one to reject his religious conscience by Government edict good or bad for society? This is stage two thinking. About 0.1 percent of all American military personnel officially declare themselves to be atheists, while about 77% are Christians — with about 3,000 chaplains — of some flavor (Catholic, Protestant, and the like).  Would our military and national defense suffer if less-and-less Christians joined? The left never asks these questions, they merely legislate from emotional stances:

The Blaze has this portion on the matter:

According to a policy statement released by the administration yesterday, President Barack Obama “strongly objects” to provisions in a House defense authorization bill that would prohibit the use of U.S. military property in same-sex marriages and protect military chaplains who refuse to perform gay marriage ceremonies against their religious beliefs.

Arguing that the measure’s “overbroad terms,“ the Obama administration claims such a measure ”is potentially harmful to good order and discipline.”

…read more…

Commentary Magazine ends their wonderful article on this topic very astutely:

…If President Obama does veto the protections offered to chaplains by the House — as his Office of Management and Budget recommends — then it is possible to envision a future where Catholic, evangelical and Orthodox Jewish clergy will no longer be welcome as military chaplains.

At the American Conservative, Rod Dreher quotes American Jewish Congress chief counsel Marc Stern as saying that, “no one seriously believes that clergy will be forced, or even asked, to perform marriages that are anathema to them.” Yet the “sea change” that same-sex marriage will create in American law will bring with it consequences that advocates for this measure aren’t acknowledging. As Dreher writes:

The strategy of the pro-SSM side seems to be to deny that anything like this could possibly happen, and that people who say it could are being irresponsible scaremongers. Then when it actually happens, they’ll say oh, who cares; those bigots deserve what they get.

Dreher is right. The legal problem here is not so much the direct issue of redefining marriage from the traditional understanding of it being one man and one woman. Rather, it is the implications that stem from government sanction that will redefine some religious believers as being outside of not only mainstream opinion but literally outlaws and vulnerable to prosecution and/or defunding on the grounds of discrimination against gays.

The only way for advocates of same-sex marriage to avoid the stigmatizing of some faiths in this manner is to agree to legal stipulations that remove any possibility that religious institutions could be compelled to sanction behavior their religion regards as immoral. But if they refuse to do so, as the White House is indicating with its opposition to House protections for military chaplains, then gay marriage ceases to be a civil rights issue and becomes the focal point of a kulturkampf in which religious freedom is on the line. If that is the way things are heading, then military chaplains won’t be the last victims in the purge of believers.

…read more…