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.

“An immediate apology [from the committee] would be very nice,” Barker said. “Maybe acknowledge the fact that yes, they screwed up.”

The background — featured in the carefully choreographed hour leading up to the president’s Sept. 6 speech accepting the Democratic Party’s nomination — showed four ships with radar designs not used in the U.S. fleet.

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.)

http://www.navytimes.com/mobil.....erans-tribute-091112

That's dumb. It was the production team that screwed up, not Obama.

For all you know the film editor is a republican.

it just proves that most American's get all frothed up over war, not even knowing who/what the enemy is.....

education is not a politicians strong point

Quoted from Tommy

That's dumb. It was the production team that screwed up, not Obama.

For all you know the film editor is a republican.

And maybe the guy that hung the "Mission Accomplished" banner was a Democrat?

Quoted from 1975

And maybe the guy that hung the "Mission Accomplished" banner was a Democrat?

Zing!!! +1

They finally got their dream! The Soviets took over our military (at least in the video and I guess they had to settle for that.)

There are no such thing as mistakes in that world. Someday when you grow up, you will find that out.

A perfect example of outsourcing American jobs overseas!!!!

Just more proof of the incompetency of the current administration.

Do you seriously think that anyone on that platform picked out that footage?

This is how it works.
The production team purchases what is called "stock footage", because it's cheaper than filming it, and it's frequently hard to find what you need that's HD enough to be blown up to that size.
If they ever blew up something from YouTube to that size, each pixel would be the size of a beach ball.

So the producer contacts a "content creator", or "stock house" asking for say, "navy footage".
The provider sends samples, and the producer picks one he likes, assuming it's the US navy and goes with it.
After all, the guy went to film school, not West Point.

How many of you can honestly say you noticed the discrepancy before it was pointed out to you?

Bush's "Mission Accomplished" banner though, was very more than likely, picked by Bush himself, and that my dears, WAS NOT AN HONEST MISTAKE.

Quoted from Tommy

Do you seriously think that anyone on that platform picked out that footage?

This is how it works.
The production team purchases what is called "stock footage", because it's cheaper than filming it, and it's frequently hard to find what you need that's HD enough to be blown up to that size.
If they ever blew up something from YouTube to that size, each pixel would be the size of a beach ball.

So the producer contacts a "content creator", or "stock house" asking for say, "navy footage".
The provider sends samples, and the producer picks one he likes, assuming it's the US navy and goes with it.
After all, the guy went to film school, not West Point.

How many of you can honestly say you noticed the discrepancy before it was pointed out to you?

Bush's "Mission Accomplished" banner though, was very more than likely, picked by Bush himself, and that my dears, WAS NOT AN HONEST MISTAKE.

These conventions are highly scripted and you can bet that someone from Obama's team was checking and signing off on every thing that was shown on those monitors.  Hell - Ronald Reagan's campaign team and Clinton's team went so far as to provide every major speaker with advice on what color clothes to wear when going up to speak so as to look best on camera.  Absolutely nothing is just left to chance -- unless the candidate's team is a bunch of bumbling fools and idiots.
If they were NOT smart enough to have someone from the team checking and signing off on these things -- then I still stand by my statement that the administration is incompetent and needs to be replaced.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

These conventions are highly scripted and you can bet that someone from Obama's team was checking and signing off on every thing that was shown on those monitors.  Hell - Ronald Reagan's campaign team and Clinton's team went so far as to provide every major speaker with advice on what color clothes to wear when going up to speak so as to look best on camera.  Absolutely nothing is just left to chance -- unless the candidate's team is a bunch of bumbling fools and idiots.
If they were NOT smart enough to have someone from the team checking and signing off on these things -- then I still stand by my statement that the administration is incompetent and needs to be replaced.

Keep telling yourself that.
Obviously, I will defer to your vast pool of knowledge on the subject.

Go sit in the corner clueless boy.

that's what happens with internet cut and paste.....

Quoted from Tommy

Keep telling yourself that.
Obviously, I will defer to your vast pool of knowledge on the subject.

Go sit in the corner clueless boy.

You obviously can't counter with anything intelligent so - as usual - you resort to personal attacks.  That says a hell of lot about you, and it is not saying anything good.