The Jewish newspaper Der Tzitung recently “reimagined history” when it published a version of the iconic White House photo (above) that photoshopped out Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and counterterrorism analyst Audrey Thomason (that picture is below):
The Blaze originally reported on that story here:
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).”
Der Tzitung has now issued an apology for revising history:
Der Tzitung responded in an emailed statement, that the photo editor did not read the fine print on the picture and the newspaper has since apologized to the White House and State Department. “In accord with our religious beliefs, we do not publish photos of women, which in no way relegates them to a lower status… Because of laws of modesty, we are not allowed to publish pictures of women, and we regret if this gives an impression of disparaging to women, which is certainly never our intention. We apologize if this was seen as offensive.”
Der Tzitung’s full statement appears here.
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (109)
ISLAMICO
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:48pmhttp://www.tubeislam.com
Report Post »WHITE LOTUS2x
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:44pmTerrydooooo……..not many on this site voted for obama and certainly wouldnt vote for hilly. What you been drinkin? Lotus.
Report Post »Mr. Nice Guy
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:43pmWelcome back Mrs. Clinton. Now do us all a favor and challenge Mr Obama for your party’s nomination.
Report Post »TerryDo
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:00pmI second that request that Hillary Rodham Clint challenge Barack Hussein Obama for the Democratic nomination.
And all of your cheap stupid jokes about Hillary are childish and pathetic. The majority of you wish you were as intelligent, as powerful and as well respected for Hillary’s diplomatic and political astuteness.
Report Post »She would have been the best president American would have had to date! Instead you losers voted for Obama the boob!
WHITE LOTUS2x
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:50pmTerrydooooo……you voted for hilly???? Thats as bad as voting for obama. Lotus.
Report Post »pandora
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:30pmThey may not like Hillary in Israel after the things she has criticized them for recently. They like her in India though. They consider cows sacred.
Report Post »smak
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:20pmDon’t they have journalism schools over there?
Report Post »Navyveteran
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:19pm“…any images of women in the paper because it could be considered sexually suggestive,”
Is there a man alive that looks at Hillary and be considered to be sexually aroused? Hell her husband Bill doesn’t even find her attractive. In fact she could be the poster girl for abstinence.
Report Post »Welcome Black Carter
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 10:21pmIf that does not get it done I might sugest a Nancy Pelosi centerfold…
Report Post »CAINWORKSFORFED
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:19pmDear Fellow Patriots,
It has come to my attention that Tea Party favorite Herman Cain is not who many think he is. This man was deputy chairman from 1992-1994 of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, and was the Chairman of the same bank from 1995-1996. Prior to this, he worked in the military industrial complex, working on ballistics for the navy. This man is not the outsider that people seem to think he is, he is in fact the ultimate insider, posing as an outsider. He is running to protect the secrecy of the Federal Reserve. This man is an enemy of liberty, and I hope he can be exposed for what he is. I hope a true American Patriot like yourself can expose the deceit that Herman Cain is spewing. If Herman Cain wins, we will never be able to target the Federal Reserve. We must stop him at all costs.
– A fellow Patriot.
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:24pmplease provide link
but, i doubt your information is correct…………….there are other hermane cains in this world
Report Post »Stu D. Baker-Hawk
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:19pm“…Because of laws of modesty, we are not allowed to publish pictures of women, and we regret if this gives an impression of disparaging to women, which is certainly never our intention. We apologize if this was seen as offensive.”
I’ve seen dumb, but this takes the cake. If you ask me, ultra-orthodox Hasidic Jews have a lot in common with their Muslim neighbors: they’re both doofasses!
Report Post »www.IMovedOn.org
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:03pmI’m sorry you have such strong feelings on the issue – clearly the paper in question did a silly, dumb (and illegal) thing violating the copyright and doctoring the picture. The concept of modesty is one that is lost on today’s world.
Clearly there is a line somewhere between publishing a picture of Hillary in the situation room and a picture of Lady Gaga accepting a music award in one of her half-naked outfits. The line is there somewhere. This paper caters towards a group of Chassidic Jews who however you feel towards them understands there is a line and that various among them draw it in different places. Therefore since the paper wants to sell papers to all of them, the paper makes a rule – no pictures of women…period.
The photo editor who doctored the photo was clearly wrong.
But their rule is “their rule”…you don’t have to buy their papers.
Report Post »foobear
Posted on May 10, 2011 at 7:17amThe White House shouldn’t have copyright over the photo.
Any photo taken by a public employee is automatically put into the public domain.
Report Post »Teapartywoman
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:19pmOk ok I get it Hillary this Hillary that God your like children. The real story would be if they replaced the picture with Bill now that would’ve made Hillary plow her stack, now that is a story.
Report Post »Rob
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:15pmScrew political correctness! They can print what they want!
Report Post »trooper
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:10pmNever cave in to your beliefs, especially to your enemies demands!
Report Post »TJexcite
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:08pmThey will be very confused when Hillary or Sarah become POTUS.
When Tzipi Livni does something worth a photo do they not show the photo. If she ever becomes PM what would they do then. If Bibi did not have a coalition of small parties she would be.
Report Post »PER100
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:05pmHillary and …not even Bill goes there!
Report Post »gARbones
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:04pmjust funny
Report Post »geonj
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:04pmobama looks like he just woke up from a very drunken night.
Report Post »PER100
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:03pmman, not even Bill thinks of her that way! but leave it out, some poor Isrealite wont have nightmares tonight. it would have been the Clinton under the bed
Report Post »gARbones
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:03pmnothing said about the woman in the very back? she was cut too…
Report Post »gARbones
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:05pmoh my bad – guess they did :>O
Report Post »miles from nowhere
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:02pmMuslims have no respect for women in there culture, (Sharria Law), in Hillarys case I have no respect for her, but I respect the majority of women.
Report Post »teahugger
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:49pmYour comment is miles from nowhere! This is from a Jewish paper, not a muslim paper…and Jews do not adhere to sharia law.
Report Post »geonj
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:02pmwho care what an israeli paper does. we only have 1st amendment rights here.
Report Post »JUSTANOTHEROPINION
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 4:58pmStupid is as stupid does. Just sayin.
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 4:58pmLOL they should have erased the child in chief
specially because he and valeri jarrett tried to stop this to begin with
anyone notice how pissy he looks in that picture? that is because he was unaware of this operation until the last minute, and was yanked off the golf course and made aware at the same time. his face reminds me of a child that just lost his toy because he was being bad
kudos to hillary and pannetta for doing this behind his back
Report Post »the zipper
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 4:57pmWow, Hilary and “sexually suggestive” in the same sentence. Never thought I’d see the day.
Report Post »smak
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:05pmDidn’t we go through all these jokes in the earlier story?
Report Post »biohazard23
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 4:56pmWould they have done the same if she had been wearing a burqa? Wait, why ISN’T she wearing a burqa?? Those cankles are scary.
Report Post »BetterDays
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 4:55pmWell if I was working at that paper I wouldn’t want Mr. Clintons picture in it either, just saying.
Report Post »“be as wise a serpents and as harmless as doves.”
CatB
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 4:54pmWhat about for leaving Obama in? Kiddy chair!
Report Post »Gas137
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 4:54pm“…any images of women in the paper because it could be considered sexually suggestive,”
This is a case of extermely ultra conservative orthodoxy.
Report Post »CatB
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 4:58pmHillary? ROFLMAO
Report Post »13th Imam
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:03pmPee Break??? Timing is everything
Report Post »Eric_The_Red_State
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:06pmI totally understand.
Report Post »I try and cut Hillary out of every picture that I have – figuratively and literally
JJ Coolay
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:06pmNot sure why an apology was necessary. They don’t owe a foreign country an apology for their belief system and their publications based on that.
Report Post »Eric_The_Red_State
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:07pmHay waidaminute – Hillary is a WOMAN?
I always thought…… well……
(Damn – slipped one past the ol’ radar there)
Report Post »JJ Coolay
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:09pmUnless this Jewish publication isn’t an Israeli publication??
Report Post »Gold Coin & Economic News
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:25pmNo big deal, Hillary should be used to this. Bill cut her out of his life every time he had an affair.
Report Post »Big Bob
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:31pmIt wasn’t just Hillary they left out they left out the woman in the back row also.who was that and why didn’t they apologize to her also
Report Post »jeffyfreezone
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 5:56pmSomeone should tell them it’s the 21st century, someone should tell the Muslims too.
Report Post »Eric_The_Red_State
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 6:10pmThey also cut out the good looking one in the back of the room…..
Report Post »Finch88
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 6:21pmHillary a woman… more like not.
http://politicalbowl.com – Political Videos
Report Post »independentvoteril
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 6:31pm@CatB… have to agree Hilary.. an image of a woman???
Report Post »Jhn'1
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 6:35pmI don’t have a problem with the cut, as much as the apparent photoshop to negate that neither woman was ever there, and what appears to be a caption that does not admit that someone that actually was there is not illustrated. Had the picture had a blob or blur or censor mosaic, or whatever, and the caption indicated that both women were there, it would be fine.
Report Post »Between the misleading caption and the picture altered to make both women appear to never have been there, it does reek of historic revisionism.
dr_funk
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 6:49pmSo, why did they cut him out again? There must be some mistake…
Report Post »Rational Man
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:14pmI didn’t need or expect an appology.
Report Post »I agreed with their decision to delete Clinton.
Professional Infidel
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 7:25pmWhy don’t I get it??? Whats wrong with doing that? Was it the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy??
Report Post »ArmyGirl
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:12pmThis is just one more thing that men use to oppress women with, women don’t decide these things, men do, this is nothing new, it has nothing to do with “modesty” they see women on the streets don’t they? Body Language has more communication than actual words out loud does, a picture is nothing compared to real life interaction, if men can’t control their urges that is their problem, all throughout history men have come up with multiple ways to control women and push them down.
Report Post »I know this is off subject: Men made up Shariah Law…women did not and are forced to deal with it.
Welcome Black Carter
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:21pmIt’s a mans world… I see no problem here.
(lol)
Report Post »psycodad36
Posted on May 9, 2011 at 8:31pmcan’t in my wildest drunken stuppors think of hillary as sexy
Report Post »Love Bandit Bestid
Posted on May 10, 2011 at 8:59amHer image was gone,
Report Post »but her stank lingered a while.
Well-Armed-Lamb
Posted on May 10, 2011 at 12:56pmI guess women don’t get aroused by seeing images of men. Not these men anyway.
Report Post »Marcobob69
Posted on May 10, 2011 at 7:53pmThe Jewish guy that blotted out Hillary forgot one. Second from the left……..
Report Post »