Jewish Newspaper Photoshops Hillary Clinton Out of Iconic Photo
- Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:13am by
Jonathon M. Seidl
- Print »
- Email »
By now, it’s become an iconic photo, and could come to define this administration. But if you happen to have seen the Situation Room photo featuring the president and his national security team in the Jewish newspaper Der Tzitung, the photo (and history) looked very different.
This is the original picture:
But this is the photo according to Der Tzitung:
Notice anything? There are no women. Most obviously, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is photoshopped out. So too is Audrey Thomason, the counterterrorism analyst peeking out from behind other onlookers in the back of the original photo.
Why? According to the website TheJewishweek.com, it’s because the paper is an Ultra-Orthodox Hasidic Jewish publication, and therefore refuses to publish images of woman.
“The Hasidic newspaper will not intentionally include any images of women in the paper because it could be considered sexually suggestive,” the site says.
According to that site’s author, Rabbi Jason Miller, the newspaper not only violated the pictures copyright, but it might be guilty of an even greater “crime.”
“Der Tzitung edited Hillary Clinton out of the photo, thereby changing history,” he writes. “To my mind, this act of censorship is actually a violation of the Jewish legal principle of g‘neivat da’at (deceit).”
The Gawker website Jezebel puts it cleverly: “Ultra Orthodox Hasidic newspaper Der Tzitung is telling its readers like it isn’t.”
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 700 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 533 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 359 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 357 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 352 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 352 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 359 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 272 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 148 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 352 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (225)
libbsrnuts
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:16amHillary sexually suggestive – NOT. Bill Clinton can confirm that. He’s probably photoshopping her out of various pics and inserting Monica and other assorted subordinates.
Report Post »hempstead1944
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:15amToo bad American newspapers don’t do the same……
Report Post »Al J Zira
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:15am@tompaineknowsthescore: You’re right. I would have second thoughts if it were a Muslim publication. Probably because the Muslims have a history of brutality toward women where as the Israelis, not so much.
Report Post »freedomweiner
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:22amHillary is Jewish.
Report Post »Florida_Freedom_Fighter
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:14amDon‘t bother photochoppin’ the two on the left………….they’re useless to the Nation anyway……
Report Post »Liberal_Atheist_Critical_Thinker
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:13amCemoto78 said -
“I’d like to photoshop Obama right out of the white house.”
Originality, depth of insight, forward thinking, scholarly approach to the stories – these are the types of comments I come to The Blaze for every day. Keep ‘em coming.
Report Post »Lucy Larue
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:46amLIB ATH CRIT THINK,
Originality, depth, forward thinking, scholarly?! Hmmm.
I am puzzled.
A truly critical thinker would have known to avoid ANY story with the theme…,Hillary was “photoshopped” out….,that is if they were REALLY here for depth and insight.
Perhaps the LIBERAL part of you won out over that teensy CRITICAL THINKING part of you.
The liberal part of you must have known there would be some lowbrow snarky comments.
As you know LIB ATH CRIT THINK…,lowbrow SNARK is the Liberal’s forte.
Report Post »Huffpo and KOS ring a bell?
muhamadhater
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:12amId sooo do Hillary…..from behind!!! hehehe
Report Post »RebelSon
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 10:17amCareful. If you happened to see the reflection of that in a mirror you’d probably turn to stone. Or at least wish you could. Then again, her image probably doesn’t reflect in the mirror, so you’d just look silly.
Report Post »seadude
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:11amDamn wish I could do that…..Just poof the “B” is gone….lol
Report Post »BlazingInSC
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:10amI can see where publishing women’s images could be considered sexually suggestive in ultra orthodox sects of religions — but what exactly do the rules say about publishing Hillary Rodham Clintons?!?
Report Post »lawsonhouse
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:04amHillary Clinton considered sexually suggestive???? Somebody somkin’ the BAD hash…
Report Post »BlackAce41
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:03amI could think of many other photo’s to do that with. Wait i think this government has already done it.
Report Post »Meyvn
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:01amHehe.
Report Post »SnowWolf
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:55amHeard about the new drink called a Bin Ladin?
2 shots and a splash of water!
Report Post »liberalsarealiens
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:54amNow you about made me spue my Cherrios all over the keyboard! Best joke of the day … Hilary and sex in the same sentence.
Report Post »smak
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:50amThey sure arouse easily.
Report Post »Rob
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:41amHow about photoshopping the socialist out of the White House…
Report Post »justsomedad
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:36amHillary Clinton…..Sexually Suggestive?
I don’t think so.
Report Post »RepubliCorp
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:09amIf you are into Goats
Report Post »GeorgieJo
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:21amSame sentence with SILLARY and SEX?
Report Post »LMAO
NC
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:35amdustyluv, sharia law has nothing to do with the paper editing nor the story.
“the paper is an Ultra-Orthodox Hasidic Jewish publication, and therefore refuses to publish images of woman.”
NC not a post whore)
Report Post »smak
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:29amTheir version of Playboy is a big seller.
Report Post »TwoLazy
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:27amAlas, if it was only that easy …..
Report Post »RepubliCorp
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:08amyep…….take Obummer out and put Allen West in. With Allen doing a M60 Rambo on the rest of the room.
Report Post »stereojoe
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:26amBill Clinton owns 55% of this newspaper and said, “Uh, when I pick up the newspaper in the morning, the last gosh darn thing I wanna look at is ol’ Hill-Rod’s face. I did that once and look how it turn out!”
Report Post »Rickfromillinois
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:22amI’m for freedom of religion but often it gets to the point of silliness. Did the newspaper at least tell their readers that they had done so? I am not going to point out the possible parallels between this group and another that is often in the news.
Report Post »Hollywood
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:05pmUltra-orthodox section in Jerusalem is not a place you want to walk in during Shabbat[Sabbath]
Report Post »They will count your foosteps, then stone you if you take too many! Better than blowing you up with a body bomb, I ‘spose.
I am a strong supporter of Israel, just not the fringe nuts,when they try to IMPOSE,by stoning, their beliefs!
HillBillySam1
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:21amI don’t understand why everyone is so upset with what “Der Tzitung” did……Bubba does the same thing with every family photo in the Clinton household……
Report Post »Dustyluv
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:20amSharia law …women are nothing…
Report Post »Karen DeSimone
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:29amCorrection, that law is only in Muslim culture. Orthodox Jewish culture is different
Report Post »jeffyfreezone
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:50amApparently in either one, women aren’t very highly thought of.
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:29amTo refuse to show the pictures of women is not necessarily to think lowly of them if it out of respect for the sexual nature that men have of looking at women.
It is only a picture of them nbeing erased, not them women themselves. If they also punsihed women for showing themselves personally you could conclude contempt for women.
I don’t agree with their policy here but I can understand it as not being necessarily mysogynistic, unlike sharia law.
Report Post »Robert-CA
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 1:00pmJust imagine 2 radical fractions on each side & that they want to bring peace to the middle east .
Report Post »I’ve heard of this group , even some of them throw rocks @ people dining in restaurants on a Saturday & Israeli police chase them down & arrests them .
Hollywood
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 6:56pmFar from True! Women are Property in Islam, as was Muhammad’s 6 year old wife Aisha.
Report Post »Cemoto78
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:19amI’d like to photoshop Obama right out of the white house.
Report Post »Marylou7
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:27amI’ll go along with that one.
Report Post »gunslingerpatriot
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:46amPhotoshop the KBPOTUS via impeachment!
Report Post »Freedom1984
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:09amAgreed!
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 1:27pmWell, he’s *literally* out of place in that photo.
Report Post »CatB
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 4:40pmLooks like he got the “kiddy chair” from the photo.
Report Post »the_zazzy
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:17pmThe Navy Seals just “photoshopped” bin Laden out of life…like he was never there!
Report Post »raiderglenn
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:19amif it were only that easy to get rid of her….. ; )
Report Post »SlimnRanger
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:24ampublishing pics of women in the news paper could be sexually suggestive?,Hilliary sexy?? i don’t think so
Report Post »grandmaof5
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:26amIsn’t that the truth! There are a few more in that pix we could do without also, if only…..
Report Post »PalinPal
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:28amif it were only that easy to get rid of him….. ; )
Report Post »BIGJAYINPA
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:47amI think that is the first time I ever saw Hillary and sexually suggestive in the same sentence. I don’t think even Bill ever used that phrase and we all know what they say about him and a snake. Don’t wait for photoshop to get rid of the others. DRAFT ALLEN WEST NOW!!!!
Report Post »tompaineknowsthescore
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:51amyou’d complain more vehemently if it was an islamic paper, Extremists in ALL religions hate women and hold unsavory views in general.
Report Post »Mainer forever
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:51amI wish we could “photo-shop“ Hilliary out of the ”real” picture….Know what I mean? Then on to BHO…photoshop him out too!!!
Report Post »MikeyScott
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:57am“sexually aggressive”? Hillary??? What planet did they say this happened on?
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:07amNotice, not just Hillary, the other lady in the background has been photoshopped out as well.
Report Post »Thatsitivehadenough
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:08amIf only we could photoshop Obama out of the White House.
Report Post »GETLIFE
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:09amRAIDER: :D!!! All first comments should be as good!
Report Post »Ironeagle
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:24amShack!
Report Post »Mannax
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:38amWhile the picture improves with Hillary out of it, Audry isn’t hard on the eyes.
Report Post »BetterDays
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:54amWhat about the other men in the room? Why only one gal and Mr. Clinton? And perhaps they should have labeled the Jewish personage haters, but that’s a lot of labels, I’m guessing.
Report Post »Sad strange world we live in, where people aren’t free and nation that were friends are treated with disdain.
rappini
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 9:30amIt appears that both women were shopped out of the picture Hillary and Tomason the squirt way in the back.
Report Post »Now this is Art
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 9:35amthey’re no better than the muslims in their treatment of women
Report Post »NOTAMUSHROOM
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 9:38amSexually suggestive? What does that say about Orthodox men that any image of a woman, including Hillary Clinton (give me a break!) might be sexually suggestive? I guess that’s all women mean to Hasidic Jews? Any similarities with Muslims here?
Report Post »Sinista MACE
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 9:45am***To the Kung Fu Fighting Theme”
“Everybody was Photo- Shoppinnng!”
***Chinese Music***
“They didn’t kill Bin Laaaaaden!!”
Report Post »Professional Infidel
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 9:49amPhoto shop them all out! Vote 2012
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 10:05am““The Hasidic newspaper will not intentionally include any images of women in the paper because it could be considered sexually suggestive,” the site says.”
How does this apply to Clinton? I don’t see the connection.
Report Post »Lotus503
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 10:13amIf they were Photoshopping out anti-semites, the room would be almost empty.
Report Post »MASTER YODA
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 10:55amBut hillary can’t be sexually suggestive. Opposite effect she has. Rub her out there is no need.
Report Post »AzDebi
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 10:57amI swear, the world has gone completely mad! My God, my God, my God…the stupidity of it all!
Report Post »Platonician
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 11:22amAnother reason to admire the Jewish people and culture. I just wish the liberal media here would do the same to all pictures of the androgynous monster called Hillary, only Jacko matched her on weirdness.
Report Post »tarbush
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 11:39amThey should have not published the picture at all instead of violating copyright. There is no one (yet) forcing them to publish anything.
Report Post »Creestof
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 12:10pmWho wants to chip in and get them a subscription to Playboy?
Report Post »Hula Calhoun
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 12:36pmKinda weird, looks to me in the original photo that the women were photoshopped IN!
Report Post »Susan Harkins
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 12:40pmOMG — Guys, I was just reading ‘Home & Garden” Magazine the other day and was looking at the section on remodled kitchens…well…
the first time a thumbed through the pictures, there was this pretty cabinet and sink display…I turned back, and then all of a sudden, I saw Hillary standing there, peeling potatos!
They photoshopped her back into the kitchen!!!
Report Post »A Doctors Labor Is Not My Right
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 12:47pm““The Hasidic newspaper will not intentionally include any images of women in the paper because it could be considered sexually suggestive,” the site says.”
Women are sexually suggestive by definition! What with all their walking and talking and being women. Sheesh!
But to the broader point: Women do cause all of the world’s problems, when you think about it.
Report Post »101
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 12:50pmThey got learned by MSNBC
Report Post »nuchsh
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 12:59pmthe difference between fundamentalist jews and fundamentalist muslims 1 photoshops out a head of a woman who isn‘t dressed accordingly to their standards and 1 literally removes the heads of women who don’t dress according to their believes
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 1:24pmI hate all kinds of censorship. I stand against it. Blaze moderators are being hypocrites. It’s going on here every day and we let it happen.
Report Post »Cesium
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 1:45pmI’m jewish, and I think hassidic jews(ultra orthadox) are as nuts as muslims …. they are actually a recent movement in jewish history starting in medieval times and don’t represent the whole history of jewish people.
Report Post »Rational Man
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 2:06pm“The Hasidic newspaper will not intentionally include any images of women in the paper because it could be considered sexually suggestive,” the site says.
————————————————————————————————————-
Hillary Clinton?……………..GAK!
Report Post »If that is the way their mind works, then so be it!…..I know I will be deleting that thought from my mind!…………YUK!
andrews042
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 2:50pmActually I am surprised her image even shows up on film. I know she can’t be seen in mirrors… (humor)
Report Post »ConscientiousObjector
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 2:51pmGuys I‘m sure that’s the stated reason, but the real reason is the ultra orthodox Jews disagree with America’s two state solution. Since Mrs. Clinton has been the American figurehead in that issue over there this is clearly a political, not a religious, statement.
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 3:36pmConscientiousObjector: “Guys I‘m sure that’s the stated reason, but the real reason is the ultra orthodox Jews disagree with America’s two state solution.”
Report Post »———–
Hillary speaks for Obama. Besides, the other woman was scrubbed from the photo as well. I don’t give a hoot why they censored it. If they don’t like it as is, then don’t publish the photo. Nobody was forcing them to do it. Sue the idiiots for copyright violation.
old white guy
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 3:36pmheh. who’s the puny guy in the left forground?
Report Post »CatB
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 4:37pmLOL .. maybe they should have put in Panetta .. I hear he was the real person who made the call .. perhaps he wasn’t invited so it would be easier to throw him under the bus if not successful?
Report Post »the_zazzy
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:03pmI have to admit…I do get a little turned on by her pant suits, graying hair, and increasing face wrinkles. Thanks for removing her so I don’t let my thoughts wander!
Report Post »UPSETVET
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:08pmI wish we could erase a few others in the photo, permanently, or at least from political and public office.
Report Post »Sheepdog911
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:09pmWhat’s wrong with this picture? … the President didn’t get scrubbed too.
Report Post »the_zazzy
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:15pmIs there anyway to “photoshop” B.O. right out of office?
Report Post »TruthLover
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 6:15pmOr MAYBE…Hillary was photoshopped IN to the photo to begin with? Hmmm…..lol.
Report Post »Hollywood
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 6:47pmShe should be photshopped out of office. She claimed to the press she was covering a cough, and it was not an expression of shock,tenseness etc.[supposedly as it would show her as weak]
Report Post »I didn’t make this up folks. Why do they ALWAYS have to lie about everything, even something as meaningless, as this? Her humanity almost was showing through, I guess, and THAT is not to be allowed?????
Tubman2010
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:24pmHa, ha, ha, ha!!
Report Post »jhaydeng
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:21pmEveryone can only dream of photo shopping out Hillary!!LOL!
Report Post »banjarmon
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 10:08pmIt’s just a Miss print
Report Post »MyPostingName
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 11:25pmYeah, this is an interesting insight into eastern news organizations.
I would like to point out the time stamps and comments above, please read the article before posting. Some folks have fast trigger fingers in here and repeat what the article says as a new observation. Nit picky i may be, however its interesting to see what people point out. Some of you don’t even read the article or previous comments.
Report Post »mbgtown
Posted on May 10, 2011 at 12:10amThe truth is, Obama had her removed……and this won’t be the last time he trys to get rid of her.
Report Post »Marcobob69
Posted on May 10, 2011 at 7:28amGotta agree with ya there, RAIDERGLENN!!!
Report Post »