Cheney Meat-Carving Photo Creates Uproar

What a title huh?

Hey Vice-Precedence Blog readers. Well, I was worried about what I would write today, since former VP Cheney went under the knife yesterday for elective back surgery. You can read all the details below in the quick little blog I posted yesterday on learning the news. From all reports-the surgery went well.

So I was worried, but luckily(?) a new story was revealed. This week in NEWSWEEK a photo was published showing former VP Cheney sticking a knife into a piece of meat on a bloody carving board with a quote about the CIA torture controversy we've been covering. You can see the picture above.

Pulitzer Prize winning photographer David Hume Kennerly was very upset with how NEWSWEEK cropped his photo and made sure to call attention to it in an essay called "Chop and Crop". Here's what he wrote in its entirety:

"The Sept. 14th Newsweek cover line — “Is Your Baby Racist?” — should have included a sub-head, “Is Dick Cheney a Butcher?”

Featured inside the magazine was a full-page, stand-alone picture of former Vice President Dick Cheney, knife in hand, leaning over a bloody carving board. Newsweek used it to illustrate a quote that he made about C.I.A. interrogators. By linking that photo with Mr. Cheney’s comment and giving it such prominence, they implied something sinister, macabre, or even evil was going on there.

I took that photograph at his daughter Liz’s home during a two-day assignment, and was shocked by its usage. The meat on the cutting board wasn’t the only thing butchered. In fact, Newsweek chose to crop out two-thirds of the original photograph, which showed Mrs. Cheney, both of their daughters, and one of their grandchildren, who were also in the kitchen, getting ready for a simple family dinner.

However, Newsweek’s objective in running the cropped version was to illustrate its editorial point of view, which could only have been done by shifting the content of the image so that readers just saw what the editors wanted them to see. This radical alteration is photo fakery. Newsweek’s choice to run my picture as a political cartoon not only embarrassed and humiliated me and ridiculed the subject of the picture, but it ultimately denigrated my profession.

Photojournalists fight the credibility battle every day, from combating digitally faked photos to being lumped in with the paparazzi, a group of camera-carrying cretins who have no respect for anything, particularly the people they hound. In the case of my Cheney photo, Newsweek is guilty not just of blurring but of blowing up that line between tabloid-style sensationalism and honest photojournalism.

This incident is another example of why many people don’t believe what they see or read. And America clearly notices these shifts in journalism. This week, the respected Pew Research Center for the People and the Press released a poll stating that nearly two-thirds of Americans surveyed believe that news stories are inaccurate and biased — 25 years ago, the number was half that.

We photojournalists have a long and storied tradition of striving for objectivity. Many of my colleagues have died flying that banner. I consider myself as much historian as photographer, having spent a 40-year career endeavoring to make photographs that inform, not misinform. My heroes are the likes of Joe Rosenthal, who photographed the Marines raising the flag over Iwo Jima; Eddie Adams, whose photo of a South Vietnamese police officer shooting a Viet Cong suspect changed the course of a war; and countless others who have hung their lives out to capture the facts through the lens of a camera. Their photos have provided a raw and unflinching view of the world and have contributed to a free society’s understanding of sometimes harsh reality.

The advent of digital photography and the proliferation of instant images have dulled the power of historical photos against the steady and relentless 24-hour drumbeat of the “breaking story” syndrome, which holds publications and networks hostage to the relentless demands of feeding the News Monster. It doesn’t help to have the photos misrepresented on top of that.

However, I still believe in the power of the image to empower, embolden and inspire. Photojournalists, editors and writers must continue the struggle to turn their trained minds and eyes to telling and showing the truth, and holding that quivering line of credibility against what is beginning to feel like insurmountable odds."

Well, Kennerlys essay created an uproar from the Right as a perfect example of the "liberal media bias". K. Daniel Glover who has worked for Congressional Quarterly and The National Journal who now writes for the conservative website Accuracy in Media stated that:

"NEWSWEEK's reputation will continue to plummet as long as it keeps looking at the world through a lens with the cap on it."

NEWSWEEK Vice-President of Corporate Communications Frank J. DeMaria responded to Kennerly's essay with a statement of his own on behalf of the magazine:

We doubt any reasonable reader would, in David’s phrase, think something “sinister, macabre, or even evil” was going on in that image as presented. Yes, the picture has been cropped, an accepted practice of photographers, editors and designers since the invention of the medium. We cropped the photograph using editorial judgment to show the most interesting part of it. Is it a picture of the former vice president cutting meat? Yes, it is. Has it been altered? No. Did we use the image to make an editorial point — in this case, about the former vice president’s red-blooded, steak-eating, full-throated defense of his views and values? Yes, we did.

Some people are saying that there is more outrage at this cropping of the photo than about the former VP's support of questionable interrogation tactics. Some say this is the worst kind of psuedo-journalism. Its an interesting controversy- another controversy in the long string of them surrounding this polarizing VP.

We here at "Vice-Precedence" believe in giving you the unvarnished, non-partisan truth, so I would like to post Kennerlys picture in its entirety here on the blog. However its protected and copyrighted, so the best I can do is post the cropped photo, remember-NEWSWEEK cropped it to show just the former VP sticking the knife into the piece of meat on the bloody carving board-not the entire picture of the Cheney Family. However here is the link to Kennerlys article so you can see the whole picture. When viewed in its entirety without the quote about the CIA issue, it is simply a picture of an American family-maybe not some peoples idea of an "ideal" American family. But certainly a unique one in many ways.

http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/17/essay-9/?hp

Let us know what you think of this story. Keep spreading the word about "Vice-Precedence". Finally, to all our Jewish readers-Happy New Year! Have a great Rosh Hashannah weekend. L'shana Tova! Thanks!

Matt Saxe

Cheney Naming Controversy-Go Cowboys!

Hey Vice-Precedence readers!


Well, as you probably all know, former Vice-President Cheney is a historic VP, not only because of the power and influence he wielded in the Bush White House from 2000-2008, but also because he is the first person in the Executive Branch to hail from the great western state of Wyoming! Cheney served in the House of Representatives for the "at-large" district of the state for 10 years, 1979-1989 before being named Secretary of Defense by the first President Bush.

Wyoming is a truly beautiful state known for its amazing wild places-its the home for the U.S.'s definitive and most famous national park-Yellowstone, as well as its proud cowboy heritage as indicated by its Rodeo Days, and the image of a cowboy on a bucking bronco on its license plate and state quarter which you can see here on the blog, and in the nickname of the University of Wyoming-the Cowboys, where VP Cheney received his B.A. and his Masters in political science.

Well, today in Laramie at his alma mater there will be some controversy as the University dedicates the new Cheney International Center on campus. The building is being named in honor of former VP Cheney not only for his service to the U.S., but also because of the $3.2 million he and his wife Lynne donated over their years during his vice-presidency for the complex. Mr. and Mrs. Cheney will both be in attendance today as the new center is dedicated.

Some folks in Laramie in the heart of one of the reddest Red states, are not so happy about it and are protesting the dedication and have a petition signed by over 150 people about naming the center for Cheney. Suzanne Pelican, who started the petition and is an extension educator in the university's College of Agriculture is quoted as saying:

"Cheney's support for harsh interrogations - torture, some say - is one reason to oppose naming the center after him. We feel that by naming it the Cheney International Center, that the programs and UW can't avoid being identified with that ideology and that approach to global politics that the Bush-Cheney administration championed."

Nancy Sindelar is also opposed to the naming of the center for the former Vice-President. She is a Laramie resident who just happens to be with the group Veterans for Peace. "Mr. Cheney is not the best example of demonstrating how nations should get along with each other," said Sindelar, "Putting his name on an international center is counter intuitive."

So, today Sindelar and Pelican will both be part of a protest march to the UW campus quad, Proxy's Pasture, where the ceremony will take place. They have said they will be present, but have promised to not disrupt the ceremony.

The President of the University of Wyoming, Tom Buchanan, responded to the controversy by writing an Opinion piece for the Casper Star-Tribune saying that protesters need to realize that "tolerance and diversity cut many ways," and to think of how beneficial the center will be for students on campus.

"Whether you are Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, Catholic or Protestant, gay or straight, white or black, you are welcome at the University of Wyoming. Should we subject potential donors and the purpose of their gift to public referendum? I think not," Buchanan wrote.

So far Mr. Cheney has not commented on the controversy, (as usual) and there has been no word yet if he will be called to testify about the CIA issues as we reported, and he still has not revealed the title for his book! As soon as we hear anything about it any of those things here at Vice-Precedence, we'll let you know. Thanks for reading and keep spreading the word on Vice-Precedence! We need your support and appreciate everything you do for us. Thanks.

Matt Saxe

Cheney and the CIA-Part 2. Plus Cheney on Town Halls.

"I just think it's an outrageous political act that will do great damage long-term to our capacity to be able to have people take on difficult jobs, make difficult decisions, without having to worry about what the next administration is going to say,"

These were former VP Dick Cheney's words on Sunday on "Fox News Sunday" in response to the decision made by Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate whether CIA operatives used torture in their interrogations of suspected terrorists, and if it was politically motivated and if by doing this it increased the risks to national security that all Americans are currently living under.

Former VP Cheney did this interview on "Fox News Sunday" his first since the announcement by the AG's office that an investigation was going to take place, from his ranch in his home state of Wyoming. Mr. Cheney went on to say, as he has said many times before, that it is his belief that the Bush Administrations use of "enhanced interrogation techniques"-particularly the controversial type known as waterboarding, in which water is poured on to the face of a prisoner to simulate drowning-prevented further terrorist attacks and saved American military and civilian lives. Many people consider waterboarding torture, while others do not. Waterboarding was used on all three top Al-Queda leaders who had been captured repeatedly, including the "Ringleader of 9/11" Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was subjected to it 183 times. It was clear from his use of the term "enhanced interrogation techniques" that Mr. Cheney doesn't consider waterboarding torture.

Cheney furiously lashed out at the Obama administration saying that this second guessing by AG Holder and others "offends the Hell out of me frankly."

He went on to accuse President Obama of leading "an intensely partisan, political look-back at the prior administration."

"The approach of the Obama administration should be to come to those people who were involved in that policy and say, 'How did you do it?' " Cheney said. "Instead, they're out there now threatening to disbar the lawyers who gave us the legal opinions."

This comment leads many to believe that this was the first confirmation by someone in the Bush Administration that a Justice Department classified report will recommend that two former Justice Dept. lawyers have disbarment proceedings launched against them for giving their approval to the use of the interrogation techniques.

Both of these lawyers are no longer in the Justice Department: John C. Yoo is a professor at UC Berkeley (how the hell does a Bush Administration official land in liberal bastion "Beserkley"?) , and Jay S. Bybee is now a federal judge.

Cheney further went on to say that he doesn't think that CIA agents should be put up on criminal charges for using waterboarding excessively, or for having made mock execution threats on prisoners with an electric drill and a gun.

"So even these cases where they went beyond the specific legal authorization, you're OK with it?" Fox News moderator Chris Wallace asked.

"I am," former VP Cheney answered, making clear that he is not backing down from what he believes to be right.

As to whether Mr. Cheney is willing to help out the Justice Department in its investigation, it would seem the answer is, probably not without a fight.

"It will depend on the circumstances and what I think their activities are really involved in," Cheney said.

In previous blogs I have reported on how many claim Mr. Cheney said President Bush "went soft" at the end of his term regarding his disagreeing with VP Cheney on issues like pardoning Scooter Libby and attacking Iran, and going along more with popular opinion. On Sunday Cheney refuted these reports saying that they were "wrong". However, with all the anecdotal evidence, especially what was revealed in the TIME Magazine cover story article in July, I find it hard to believe him here.

He also gave hints about his still untitled book, saying that it will "lay out my view of what we did" including where he and the President agreed and disagreed. He also gave it a little plug saying:

"Its going to be a great book."

Wow. I have to make sure I reserve my copy-once he's actually given it a title.

As usual with something this controversial people on Capitol Hill and around the country are taking sides. For the most part Conservatives think this whole investigation is overblown and completely partisan, while Liberals think that it needs to be done to cleanse the country of the stain of torture and to reveal the truth. However, well known liberal Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California has misgivings about the investigation.

She said she understood Attorney General Holder's reasons for launching the probe, but "the timing of this is not very good" because the Senate Intelligence Committee, which she is the Chairperson of, is already investigating CIA interrogation and detention techniques.

"Candidly, I wish that the attorney general had waited," she said on CBS' "Face the Nation."

Meanwhile in his own party, Senator John McCain (R. of Arizona-do I really need to tell you this?) went on CBS's "Face the Nation" hours after Cheneys interview and while he disagreed with former VP Cheney about the use of waterboarding (he believes its torture, and I think if anyone in the country knows what torture is-he does) but agreed with him about the investigation by the AG office being unneccessary.

"I think the interrogations were in violation of the Geneva Conventions and the convention against torture that we ratified under President Reagan," said the former Republican candidate for President. "I think these interrogations, once publicized, helped al Qaeda recruit. I got that from an al Qaeda operative in a prison camp in Iraq… I think that the ability of us to work with our allies was harmed. And I believe that information, according go the FBI and others, could have been gained through other members."

When "Face the Nation" host Bob Schieffer pressed him about how he could have learned that from a member of Al-Queda, McCain replied with a story telling how he and his good friend Sen. Lindsey Graham, (R-S.C.) had an interview of their own with a captured "high-ranking member of al Qaeda," McCain said that the prisoner told them that pictures of detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib had allowed the terrorist organization "to recruit thousands of young men."

However, despite his acknowledgment and his own personal example that the use of these "enhanced interrogation techniques", (and in his opinion torture techniques), were in violation of international law — laws ratified by the United States that he himself has fought for - and were counterproductive — Senator McCain still insisted that Attorney General Holder was wrong to launch an investigation into the matter.

"I believe the President was right when he said we ought to go forward and not back," he said. "I worry about the morale and effectiveness of the CIA. I worry about this thing getting out of control and us harming our ability to carry out the struggle we are in with radical Islamic extremism."

"For us now to go back, I think would be a serious mistake." McCain concluded.

While the interview with Cheney on "Fox News Sunday" focused mostly on the CIA issue, Chris Wallace also asked the former VP about the current health care debate. Mr. Cheney made it clear that he is 100% against President Obamas reform policies. When Wallace asked him what he thought of the Town Hall meetings where there have been all sorts of ugly incidents complete with screaming, name-calling, and crying all across the country, Cheney said he thought these meetings were "basically healthy".

“I think the fact that there’s a lot of unrest out there in the country that gets expressed in these town hall meetings,” Mr. Cheney said, “with folks coming and speaking out very loudly about their concerns, indicates that there are major, major problems what the administration’s proposing.”

Hmmm, I wonder what he thought about the anti-war protesters screaming invective while he was in office? Kind of different when the shoe is on the other foot I guess.

As soon as anything else breaks on this I will let you know. I will say that for my next blog, I will talk some more about this, but I will also be talking about documentary film-making and the frustration I feel about getting "Vice-Precedence" done. I feel its time to say something about it. Thanks VP readers!

Matt Saxe

Cheney and the CIA Plot! Plus more Birthdays.

Hey Vice-Precedence Blog readers! Well, over the weekend and in the last 24 hours there has been a lot of discussion about former Vice-President Cheney and if 8 years ago he illegally concealed from Congress and the American public a counterterrorism program the CIA was just starting.

New CIA Director Leon Panetta, who as I have already reported in this blog, has been very critical of the former VP's recent comments about how the Obama Administration is handling national security, put a halt to the program last month on June 23. The day after the program was dismantled, Director Panetta had meetings with both the Senate and House Intelligence committees who learned of the existence of this program for the first time and let them know that he had stopped it. This all is happening as the House is about to enter a debate into whether or not more government officials need to be informed about these kinds of secrets.

No one has yet revealed exactly what this program was meant to do or how it was going about it. It is known that the program was created very soon after the attacks on 9/11, at a time where a lot of ideas were being tossed around since no one knew if another attack was imminent and the general feeling of the country was-"Let's do something! Anything!"

Now some Democrats are calling for an investigation to decide if what VP Cheney did was legal. Of course there has been a lot of arguing along partisan lines on whether or not this deserves an investigation. I get the feeling that in a way, the Obama Administration almost doesn't want to dredge this up because it could damage their ability to work with Republicans on what they want to accomplish domestically in the economy, health care, and the environment. After all, this program was created 8 years ago, and never really got off the ground it seems. Director Panetta canceled it last month and Congress has been informed about it. It is over.

In fact, in an article in the NEW YORK TIMES an anonymous CIA officer says that no one in the agency protested against Director Panettas decision to terminate this program which is now causing all this debate.

“Because this program never went fully operational and hadn’t been briefed as Panetta thought it should have been, his decision to kill it was neither difficult nor controversial,” the official said. “That’s worth remembering amid all the drama.”

So maybe this isn't as big a deal as some people seem to think it is? Or is that just naive?

Does the fact that Cheney gave direct orders to CIA directors to not let Congress know about this effort demonstrate how important it was to the White House? Or does it say that the Administration felt that this program was so small and insignificant, that they felt they didn't really need to let Congress know? Does any of this matter at all since the program is deader than a beheaded zombie? What do you think?

As of today, former VP Cheney and no one on his staff at the time have commented in any way about this new controversy. Cheney has a history of wanting to keep government secrets....well, secret. Even going to the Supreme Court over the issue. What happens now? Well, people have their opinions of course:

Conservative: National Review: Michael Goldfarb writes, “From what I can tell this Cheney scandal story . . . is the mother of all nothingburgers. It’s hard for me not to see it as a ploy by Democrats to distract from the fact that the stimulus bill is a dud, healthcare is going badly and cap-and-trade looks like a disaster. The base always enjoys beating up on Cheney and the press likes that stuff too.”

Liberal: First Draft: Liberal Blogger Athenae writes: “Even with this major scary new revelatory whatever, no matter what it ends up being about, in about two weeks we’re going to have a resolution declaring it’s all okay, and nobody needs to go to jail or apologize or anything. I’d love to be proved wrong, by the way, but I don’t think I will be.”

I wonder if since Cheney's not talking about it now, if he will in his book? Congressional hearings on secret CIA programs would be a hell of a way to drum up some publicity for the still unknown titled book-and that's a secret that he's done a great job of keeping.

Well, what do you think? Please let us know, and also, let us know about things you'd like us to address here on the blog-we value our readers.

On another note-HAPPY BIRTHDAY former VP and President Gerald Ford and more importantly-JASON KLAMM! Co-producer and co-writer of "VICE-PRECEDENCE:Being Number Two in the White House" the documentary film, the book, and of course, here on the blog. Imagine that-one of the producers of the first ever documentary on the Vice-Presidency sharing a birthday with a Veep. Thanks for reading folks.