Welcome, Guest! - or
Easy to remember!  »  VinNews.com

Brooklyn, NY - After Outrage Hasidic Newspaper Issues Statement On Altered White House Photo

Published on: May 9, 2011 03:18 PM
Change text size Text Size  
Bookmark and Share
A photograph of President Barack Obama and his staff watching the operation that killed Osama bin Laden that was digitally altered to remove Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Counterterrorism Director Audrey Tomason is shown in last week's edition of the Brooklyn weekly Di Tzeitung, Monday May 9, 2011. The Orthodox Jewish newspaper has apologized for digitally altering the photo, saying that its photo editor had not read the "fine print" accompanying the White House photo that forbade any changes. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)A photograph of President Barack Obama and his staff watching the operation that killed Osama bin Laden that was digitally altered to remove Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Counterterrorism Director Audrey Tomason is shown in last week's edition of the Brooklyn weekly Di Tzeitung, Monday May 9, 2011. The Orthodox Jewish newspaper has apologized for digitally altering the photo, saying that its photo editor had not read the "fine print" accompanying the White House photo that forbade any changes. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)

Brooklyn, NY - Much has been written about a controversial altered photograph of the White House situation room published by Der Tzeitung, a Chareidi newspaper, based out of Brooklyn.  The photo, which was taken live as senior officials were watching the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound, showed neither Secretary of State Hillary Clinton nor Director of Counterterrorism Audrey Tomason, both of whom were present but were removed from the photo in keeping with Chareidi standards of modesty.

Advertisement:

News of this photo spread quickly, with major news services worldwide lambasting Der Tzeitung for removing the two women from the photo, something that was deemed both an insult to Clinton, Tomason and women worldwide, in addition to violating specific White House instructions that the photo not be altered in any way.

Der Tzeitung released the following statement today in response to the furor that has erupted regarding the altered photo:

The White House released a picture showing the President following “live” the events in the apprehension of Osama Bin Laden, last week Sunday. Also present in the Situation Room were various high-ranking government and military officials. Our photo editor realized the significance of this historic moment, and published the picture, but in his haste he did not read the “fine print” that accompanied the picture, forbidding any changes. We should not have published the altered picture, and we have conveyed our regrets and apologies to the White House and to the State Department.

The allegations that religious Jews denigrate women or do not respect women in public office, is a malicious slander and libel. The current Secretary of State, the Honorable Hillary R. Clinton, was a Senator representing New York State with great distinction 8 years. She won overwhelming majorities in the Orthodox Jewish communities in her initial campaign in ‘00, and when she was re-elected in ‘06, because the religious community appreciated her unique capabilities and compassion to all communities. The Jewish religion does not allow for discrimination based on gender, race, etc.

We respect all government officials. We even have special prayers for the welfare of our Government and the government leaders, and there is no mention of gender in such prayers.

All Government employees are sworn into office, promising adherence to the Constitution, and our Constitution attests to our greatness as a nation that is a light beacon to the entire world. The First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion. That has precedence even to our cherished freedom of the press! In accord with our religious beliefs, we do not publish photos of women, which in no way relegates them to a lower status. Publishing a newspaper is a big responsibility, and our policies are guided by a Rabbinical Board. 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.

We are proud Americans of the Jewish faith, and there is no conflict in that, and we will with the help of the Almighty continue as law-abiding citizens, in this great country of our’s, until the ultimate redemption.


More of today's headlines

Wawayanda, NY - Two small planes collided over a wooded area in upstate New York, killing the pilots in a fiery wreck that scattered debris over a large swath of rural... Jerusalem - At a gathering at the Belzer Beis Medrash in Yerushalayim in honor of the start of the summer z’man, the Belzer Rebbe described BlackBerrys as an...

 

You can now automatically hide comments - New!

Don't worry, you can always display comments when you need to.

Total95

Read Comments (95)  —  Post Yours »

1

 May 09, 2011 at 03:52 PM MoeMoe613 Says:

I'm happy they issued a statement. It always surprises me to see how many people rush to assumptions. I guess it shows us the miles of difference between our culture and theirs. It's good that we're able to preserve our treasured community by remaining mostly separate, but it does put us at high risk of miscommunication.

I personally think that the paper should not have run the picture even if the White House did not include the warning about altering the photo. They simply should not have published the photo. Misrepresenting history is dishonest and the Jews who taught the world about honesty should keep to a code of absolute honesty, especially in a publication.

At the same time I understand how this happened. The paper wanted their readers to see this historic photo and, for reasons I completely understand, has a policy not to publish pictures of women, so they fell to the temptation of publishing a doctored photo, glossing over their standards of honesty. It was wrong, it was a mistake, but understandable.

We should draw a lesson from here that G-d holds us to a higher standard and He knows we can achieve absolute levels of honesty.

2

 May 09, 2011 at 03:52 PM Chelsea Says:

Sorry, but you can't truly respect women if you're busy erasing every vestige of femininity from your publications. It's like you're talking the talk, but not walking the walk. And the stuff about "tznius?" I just don't buy it. The message to women is, "Don't attract one iota of attention to yourself. Just make sure you cook and clean and wash your kids' clothes and...." But don't ever do anything to c"v allow our sacred, pure men to even momentarily glance at you. If you do, we'll simply erase you. Make like it never happened. How insulting!

3

 May 09, 2011 at 03:55 PM Internet-Assur Says:

oh please, that is a load of bull. there are many brooklyn publications that do publish pictures of women and the fact that they dont doesnt mean they are any more "modest".

4

 May 09, 2011 at 03:24 PM DB_from_LI Says:

OUCH!

5

 May 09, 2011 at 03:26 PM JG123 Says:

"We even have special prayers for the welfare of our Government and the government leaders"
When is the last time a non-Modern Orthodox shul said this tefila? I highly doubt anyone reading your newspaper has even heard the tefila.

6

 May 09, 2011 at 03:28 PM Anonymous Says:

It was a staged photo anyway

7

 May 09, 2011 at 03:31 PM Mitzi Says:

This is insanity. Anyone that would get turned on by the original picture needs to be in therapy.

9

 May 09, 2011 at 03:32 PM sugnur Says:

Credit Failedmessiah.com - shame on you VIN you are taking info from this site

12

 May 09, 2011 at 03:40 PM Anonymous Says:

The whole picture was changed before being released. The papers in front of Hillary Clinton was blocked out so no one can see what is there. What's the whole stink about?

13

 May 09, 2011 at 03:43 PM TannaKamma Says:

Stupid how this triviality was blown out of proportion, some people really have nothing better to do than look for imagined problems with a magnifying glass...

14

 May 09, 2011 at 03:44 PM ComeOn Says:

The reason why the White House said not to alter the photo was because they were afraid someone might put bin Laden in the room planning his own "death"!!!

15

 May 09, 2011 at 03:45 PM ComeOn Says:

Or...
Take useless Obama out so he can get back to his golf game.

16

 May 09, 2011 at 03:45 PM Babishka Says:

What a lame, fake "apology." This was a major fail and Chillul Hashem. Anyway, all noozpeppers are treyf possul.

17

 May 09, 2011 at 03:49 PM Swiss Says:

Kudos for the statement.
Well written, attention to detail and to the point.
"milah b'selah......"

18

 May 09, 2011 at 03:49 PM shanda Says:

The statement reads:

our greatness as a nation that is a light beacon to the entire world.

This refers to klal yisrael (ohr lagoyim) NOT the USA

And

Americans of the Jewish faith

We are jews that are presently living in USA

Both of the above statements are scandalous, shameful and a Chilul Hashem !!

19

 May 09, 2011 at 04:01 PM Anonymous Says:

Stupid

20

 May 09, 2011 at 04:05 PM ThatsWhatSheSaid Says:

Reply to #9  
sugnur Says:

Credit Failedmessiah.com - shame on you VIN you are taking info from this site

Sorry, but in this instance you are mistaken - look at the article there, it actually links to THIS article as its source!

But I understand why you would think that it was the other way around...

21

 May 09, 2011 at 04:05 PM grandpajoe Says:

It would have been better to have left out the picture - I was listening to a local talk radio show this morning - and found it quite disturbing that they brought this issue to the listeing public.
Lifa as a frum jew in the goyish community is difficult enough and now to have to respond to indiviuals about this is absurd.
Think Before you PRINT!

22

 May 09, 2011 at 04:12 PM shredready Says:

please their statement is full of nonsense.

1. Did they have a disclaimer on the photo or in the article and say that Hilliary Clinton was part of the photo but because of Halacha (dubious) reason they edited her out. If they did that then maybe if not their excuse is BS.
2. I wonder how many of the readers and editors of that newspaper say a prayer for the US government and their officials
3. "The allegations that religious Jews denigrate women or do not respect women in public office, is a malicious slander and libel." Lets see a frum lady run for office and see what happens.
4. did not mention that they voted for her at 98% rate and then her husband pardoned some yiddin.
5 We do have a bracha about not being a woman.

Why don't they just say the truth and stick up for their believes and say it is based on the torah and stop lying

I would think they are wrong but at least have some respect for them

23

 May 09, 2011 at 04:32 PM Nirah-Lee Says:

Reply to #5  
JG123 Says:

"We even have special prayers for the welfare of our Government and the government leaders"
When is the last time a non-Modern Orthodox shul said this tefila? I highly doubt anyone reading your newspaper has even heard the tefila.

Who said he is referring to that mi shebairach?
Check your Yomim Noraim shmoneh esrei! ;)

24

 May 09, 2011 at 04:32 PM AlbertEinstein Says:

Reply to #5  
JG123 Says:

"We even have special prayers for the welfare of our Government and the government leaders"
When is the last time a non-Modern Orthodox shul said this tefila? I highly doubt anyone reading your newspaper has even heard the tefila.

Just to belie your doubts: In my non-MO Shul, the last time we said the tefillah for the US Government was two days ago, together with the tefillah for Eretz Yisrael (not Medinas Yisroel), and for chayalei Tzahal.

25

 May 09, 2011 at 04:34 PM Trachtglat Says:

Der Tzeitung mentioned in their press release that "We even have special prayers for the welfare of our Government and the government leaders.."

My questions are; where are those prayers found in their siddurim and when do they actually say them??

26

 May 09, 2011 at 04:42 PM A_Simple_Chussid Says:

Reply to #7  
Mitzi Says:

This is insanity. Anyone that would get turned on by the original picture needs to be in therapy.

Not publishing photos of women is a matter of principle.
Nobody will stand there and say, "Hmmm, let me see... What are the chances that someone will be affected by this?
You know what? The chances are pretty low; I'll go ahead and put in the picture..."

27

 May 09, 2011 at 04:54 PM yaakov doe Says:

From what we see of Mrs Clinton in the photo she is dressed 100% tznius, assuming that a non Jewish woman is not obligated to cover her hair.

28

 May 09, 2011 at 05:07 PM ShmuelG Says:

Reply to #24  
AlbertEinstein Says:

Just to belie your doubts: In my non-MO Shul, the last time we said the tefillah for the US Government was two days ago, together with the tefillah for Eretz Yisrael (not Medinas Yisroel), and for chayalei Tzahal.

And you think your shul is not modern? Oh my!

29

 May 09, 2011 at 05:08 PM Anonymous Says:

They never explained why they removed the women from the photo.

30

 May 09, 2011 at 05:09 PM josephf Says:

The U.S. Government by law cannot hold any copyrights. Any photo (non-classified) is, by law, in the public domain and may be altered in any way by anyone (notwithstanding the disclaimer the White House attached, which has no legal effect.)

31

 May 09, 2011 at 05:10 PM DRSLZ Says:

Correct me if I am wrong, but as I recall with the exception of AMI magazine, no magazine or newspaper catering to the 'ultra' orthodox community published a picture of Rebbetzin Fogel, HaShem inkom damah, who was viciously murdered by Arab terrorists in Itamar weeks ago. (Other media did publish her photo; she completely covered her hair, for those who "need" to know.)

Sefarim about Gedolim used to include photographs of their rebbetzins and family members (who by now had passed away).

I find the unwillingness of haredi media to publish photographs of women troubling,

That said, I'm saddened if reports that a Jewish website publicized this.

32

 May 09, 2011 at 05:10 PM Anonymous Says:

They should have just explained that they are extremist Charedim and all would be understood.

33

 May 09, 2011 at 05:11 PM JS Says:

The statement is well intended but missed the point - excluding pictures of women from a publication is demeaning and denigrating by its very nature. I do understand why a religous publication would want to require that women (and men as well) be pictured in modest dress (as the women in the White House picture were). This exclusion of women is not Hallacha. It is, I believe, a misguided and fearful reaction to a secular culture that is highly immodest and truly degrading of both genders.
However, I do feel that there are better ways to react - requiring, as I said, only pictures of both genders in very modest dress. Finally, it is very sad and even tragic that the Failed Messiah Blog - such negative,hostile and harmful force - bring this to public awareness. It is only the unaccountable internet blogging system that allows such a destructive Failed Messiah outlet to operate and influence so many unsuspecting and disaffected people.

34

 May 09, 2011 at 05:13 PM enlightened-yid Says:

If a woman's face is issue of modesty, why don't they start putting their women in burkas already like their Arab cousins? Or is the fact that Hillary is not wearing an Indian hair wig is the issue of "modesty"?
This Chassidic "news paper" has the gall to even come up with any excuse for something very obvious to the world? It's like watching Libyan foreign minister lecture journalists that Kadaffi forces are not attacking their own civilians despite all the evidence the world was seeing live.

As for Orthodoxy and role of women, there is "respect" for women but it's built around misogynistic understanding of what women are allowed and not allowed to be in society. And their roles are dictated by male-dominated religious institutions.

"There is no discrimination against race or gender in Jewish religion" Really? Did they forget the endless discrimination against "brown Jews" in yeshiva systems or the fact that women in religious world are born as second class? We don't even allow them to learn Gemorah or trust a single woman as a witness in court becuase their brains are "different" from a male, but ye women in Judaism are "equal" to men. I love their spin....

35

 May 09, 2011 at 05:16 PM cynic Says:

Reply to #25  
Trachtglat Says:

Der Tzeitung mentioned in their press release that "We even have special prayers for the welfare of our Government and the government leaders.."

My questions are; where are those prayers found in their siddurim and when do they actually say them??

Think back to the musical "Fiddler on the Roof" and the blessing for the Czar....

36

 May 09, 2011 at 05:34 PM newtransplant Says:

I still have trouble withe non recognition of the female gender. I am frum, chassidish, married with children to a husband who disagrees with me over this. I feel, very strongly, that women are a lower class Jew than men. I have yet to find someone who offers me a good explanation. One person told me it is a rachmonus on those men who don't look at women at all because they obviously cannot control their taivos, my husband pooh poohed this idea......

37

 May 09, 2011 at 05:34 PM stamanaar Says:

To # 9 I agree with u 100%. To take information from a website that only knows how to make choizek from our frum chareidi leaders is an insult. Even more so that a website like yours which is respected in the chareidi community should be doing it.Even if what they say is correct! The mere fact that it comes from them puts it the category of sefer shekosvo min....

38

 May 09, 2011 at 05:51 PM seagul47 Says:

a long time since I've agreed with Anonymous.

It's stupid.

Have you ever gone into a girls' school and all you see are pictures of Rabbonim. No women for the girls to emulate?

And when they refer to the tfilo for the malchus--how many chassidishe (or for that matter Litvishe) shuls actually say the tfilo. So whom are they kidding!

What would they have done if Mrs. Clinton had been elected president? They would have all stood in line to have their pictures taken with her.

39

 May 09, 2011 at 05:56 PM Username2011 Says:

Reply to #21  
grandpajoe Says:

It would have been better to have left out the picture - I was listening to a local talk radio show this morning - and found it quite disturbing that they brought this issue to the listeing public.
Lifa as a frum jew in the goyish community is difficult enough and now to have to respond to indiviuals about this is absurd.
Think Before you PRINT!

You shouldn't be listening to O&A anyway ;)

40

 May 09, 2011 at 05:58 PM harveycfinkel Says:

Reply to #1  
MoeMoe613 Says:

I'm happy they issued a statement. It always surprises me to see how many people rush to assumptions. I guess it shows us the miles of difference between our culture and theirs. It's good that we're able to preserve our treasured community by remaining mostly separate, but it does put us at high risk of miscommunication.

I personally think that the paper should not have run the picture even if the White House did not include the warning about altering the photo. They simply should not have published the photo. Misrepresenting history is dishonest and the Jews who taught the world about honesty should keep to a code of absolute honesty, especially in a publication.

At the same time I understand how this happened. The paper wanted their readers to see this historic photo and, for reasons I completely understand, has a policy not to publish pictures of women, so they fell to the temptation of publishing a doctored photo, glossing over their standards of honesty. It was wrong, it was a mistake, but understandable.

We should draw a lesson from here that G-d holds us to a higher standard and He knows we can achieve absolute levels of honesty.

This is just like the Muslims, they are nuts and so r u.

41

 May 09, 2011 at 06:22 PM Truth Says:

It boiles down to one issue, they think fine print is only "fine print". Any profesinal law abiding company with standards to listen to the law would never have alterd this photo or any photo with restrictions. its a mentality that they feel above the law.

42

 May 09, 2011 at 06:42 PM am oretz Says:

Reply to #30  
josephf Says:

The U.S. Government by law cannot hold any copyrights. Any photo (non-classified) is, by law, in the public domain and may be altered in any way by anyone (notwithstanding the disclaimer the White House attached, which has no legal effect.)

you are absolutely wrong, and are unaware that there is a big business out there of companies buying rights to photos in small newspapers and then suing web sites that reproduce them.

Don't talk about what you don't know. bad enough that you're uneducated, but there is no reason for you to mislead other people.

43

 May 09, 2011 at 06:42 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #24  
AlbertEinstein Says:

Just to belie your doubts: In my non-MO Shul, the last time we said the tefillah for the US Government was two days ago, together with the tefillah for Eretz Yisrael (not Medinas Yisroel), and for chayalei Tzahal.

by "non-MO shul", do you mean Conservative or Reform?

44

 May 09, 2011 at 06:47 PM FredE Says:

Reply to #37  
stamanaar Says:

To # 9 I agree with u 100%. To take information from a website that only knows how to make choizek from our frum chareidi leaders is an insult. Even more so that a website like yours which is respected in the chareidi community should be doing it.Even if what they say is correct! The mere fact that it comes from them puts it the category of sefer shekosvo min....

Whatever happened to the Rambam "Tkabel Emes MeMi Sheh Omro" ?
Accurate reporting is accurrate reporting. Its not as if what FailedMessiah said wasnt true after all.

This is just one more symptom of Orthodox Talibanism. Its gotten a loss worse in recent years. We need to treat this with the scorn and derision it deserves.

45

 May 09, 2011 at 07:02 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #36  
newtransplant Says:

I still have trouble withe non recognition of the female gender. I am frum, chassidish, married with children to a husband who disagrees with me over this. I feel, very strongly, that women are a lower class Jew than men. I have yet to find someone who offers me a good explanation. One person told me it is a rachmonus on those men who don't look at women at all because they obviously cannot control their taivos, my husband pooh poohed this idea......

You are absolutely right, your husband is absolutely wrong, and, for the record, I am not a woman - I'm a frum "shteebel-yid", but i absolutely agree with you that women are second-class citizens in the frum world. I'll point out that since men are not required to wear a shaitel, it is clear that women are actually morally stronger than men, as they won't be overcome with physical desire if they see an uncovered head or a bare arm

Single people, by the way, are a rung lower than you in the frum world. Try to find a siddur or machzor that addresses a man's requirement to light yomtov candles and then make kiddush with or w/o a shehechiyonu, or what a single person is supposed to do for a pesach seder, other than going to mooch off someone else (just a few examples)....

46

 May 09, 2011 at 07:05 PM Alteh-Bucher Says:

Much ado over nothing.

Since when does anyone care about "Der Tzitung " anyways?

47

 May 09, 2011 at 07:15 PM InformedConsent Says:

I have yet to see one comment in this thread which combines objectivity, sensitivity, accuracy, truth while addressing the heart of the matter. I don't claim to do much better.

The negative reputation of those who read Der Tzeitung often blinds those who feel degraded, by unpopular, poorly articulated ideals concerning the female gender. from truly understanding their subjective opposition.

Emotion skews logic.

Is it possible, that we as human beings, have strayed so far from understanding our inborn splendor, that simply not publishing pictures of women is considered degrading?

The answer, of course, is yes. We have become a fragile and out of touch race. Der Tseitung, due to the obvious social climate, should refrain from publishing any pictures at all.

To have predicted this reaction to this specific picture would have been impossible. Yet, to have predicted that one day, one picture, would provoke such a response - would not have been far-fetched.

What lessons can we take?

48

 May 09, 2011 at 07:22 PM ProminantLawyer Says:

So, if clinton or ms. alaska were president, they would wnot put there picture in the rag?

49

 May 09, 2011 at 07:56 PM shredready Says:

Reply to #47  
InformedConsent Says:

I have yet to see one comment in this thread which combines objectivity, sensitivity, accuracy, truth while addressing the heart of the matter. I don't claim to do much better.

The negative reputation of those who read Der Tzeitung often blinds those who feel degraded, by unpopular, poorly articulated ideals concerning the female gender. from truly understanding their subjective opposition.

Emotion skews logic.

Is it possible, that we as human beings, have strayed so far from understanding our inborn splendor, that simply not publishing pictures of women is considered degrading?

The answer, of course, is yes. We have become a fragile and out of touch race. Der Tseitung, due to the obvious social climate, should refrain from publishing any pictures at all.

To have predicted this reaction to this specific picture would have been impossible. Yet, to have predicted that one day, one picture, would provoke such a response - would not have been far-fetched.

What lessons can we take?

when you are a newspaper you have an obligation to tell the truth.

They had other options and choose not to use them
1 just cover the faces
2 no put up the picture
3 say there where woman there but deleted them for halacha reason.
but since they air brushed it out they are deceiving their readers, implying that woman where not involved in this historic mission.

if some of the readers only read this newspaper for news they would be living and telling their children lies about this.

That is a lesson do not lie tell the truth the whole truth

50

 May 09, 2011 at 08:01 PM Anonymous Says:

I think their apology was well written. Oh, well, now everyone will know about their newspaper. Watch subscriptions go up for a while! Hey, advertisers, now may be the time!

51

 May 09, 2011 at 08:02 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #38  
seagul47 Says:

a long time since I've agreed with Anonymous.

It's stupid.

Have you ever gone into a girls' school and all you see are pictures of Rabbonim. No women for the girls to emulate?

And when they refer to the tfilo for the malchus--how many chassidishe (or for that matter Litvishe) shuls actually say the tfilo. So whom are they kidding!

What would they have done if Mrs. Clinton had been elected president? They would have all stood in line to have their pictures taken with her.

seagul47 Says: “ a long time since I've agreed with Anonymous."

this is probably the funniest post I ever read on VIN.

Hey, Seagullible, did you ever wonder how this guy Anonymous posts SO much for every article? where does he find the time, do you think?

52

 May 09, 2011 at 08:02 PM Anonymous Says:

Can you imagine if we had a woman president? They will never be able to show a picture of the President - and with anyone!

53

 May 09, 2011 at 08:15 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #27  
yaakov doe Says:

From what we see of Mrs Clinton in the photo she is dressed 100% tznius, assuming that a non Jewish woman is not obligated to cover her hair.

So what from jewish tzniusdige womem they also don't put in pics !!!

54

 May 09, 2011 at 08:17 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #31  
DRSLZ Says:

Correct me if I am wrong, but as I recall with the exception of AMI magazine, no magazine or newspaper catering to the 'ultra' orthodox community published a picture of Rebbetzin Fogel, HaShem inkom damah, who was viciously murdered by Arab terrorists in Itamar weeks ago. (Other media did publish her photo; she completely covered her hair, for those who "need" to know.)

Sefarim about Gedolim used to include photographs of their rebbetzins and family members (who by now had passed away).

I find the unwillingness of haredi media to publish photographs of women troubling,

That said, I'm saddened if reports that a Jewish website publicized this.

two recent items come to mind: an ad from a frum toy store that came out right before Purim - with all the girls' faces blurred out; and an article in a frum newspaper from last week that had a "glowing" article about a girls' program, yet all the pictures with people in them were of boys! The first item (toy store ad) reminds me of comment made during the "Kennedy" rape trial several years ago. The victim was shown in court with a blue dot over her face. The comment I heard was that this is just objectifying the victim - the press was just making her a "body" with no face. That's exactly what was happening in the ad.

As for the article in the frum paper, I just find it plain insulting to the girls and young women who are being helped by this program. I also find it insulting when there are glowing articles about wonderful Rebbetzins out there & the pictures they show are their husbands. These wonderful women are people in their own right & should be treated as such. If it's against your policy to not have pictures of women (as warped as that seems to me), then don't publish any pictures in the articles.

55

 May 09, 2011 at 08:19 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #50  
Anonymous Says:

I think their apology was well written. Oh, well, now everyone will know about their newspaper. Watch subscriptions go up for a while! Hey, advertisers, now may be the time!

If your logic includes a comment that says an otherwise irrational position that distorts even the most contorted notion of daas torah was nonetheless "well written", you clearly should be on the editorial board of this rag. In a world where we thought we had seen how low journalists could go, these slimeballs manage to break new ground and insult women in general and convey a notion to the world that jewish women are a subordinated class.

56

 May 09, 2011 at 08:34 PM k9hara Says:

Here is my humble take.

We should all admit that we are all somewhat hypocritical. Let me explain. In the frum world we all understand that pics of women in newpapers is basically a no-no. Whether we agree with it or not, we basically accept it. Why? because of tznius issues, of course! But we all allow our wives and daughters to walk through the streets. Sometimes dressed even more "dressed-up" than Hillary was in the picture? And I assume that it is not only me, but the editors of this very newspaper (and all the Yateds, HaModias, Binahs, Mishpachas, Zman, etc, etc) editors wives and daughters are also in the street at some point in the day. But for some reason, for the ladies to walk in the streets, work in the stores, be our secretaeries and accountants it's okay, but once their picture is taken then it becomes problamatic??

While I understand the newspapers policy, how do we explain it to the world, when many of own do not/ cannot keep to the standard??

57

 May 09, 2011 at 08:55 PM shredready Says:

give the media some credit most that I saw are revising the story with the apology from the paper

58

 May 09, 2011 at 08:59 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #56  
k9hara Says:

Here is my humble take.

We should all admit that we are all somewhat hypocritical. Let me explain. In the frum world we all understand that pics of women in newpapers is basically a no-no. Whether we agree with it or not, we basically accept it. Why? because of tznius issues, of course! But we all allow our wives and daughters to walk through the streets. Sometimes dressed even more "dressed-up" than Hillary was in the picture? And I assume that it is not only me, but the editors of this very newspaper (and all the Yateds, HaModias, Binahs, Mishpachas, Zman, etc, etc) editors wives and daughters are also in the street at some point in the day. But for some reason, for the ladies to walk in the streets, work in the stores, be our secretaeries and accountants it's okay, but once their picture is taken then it becomes problamatic??

While I understand the newspapers policy, how do we explain it to the world, when many of own do not/ cannot keep to the standard??

Dear K9hara
Maybe the issue for you is that your own hypocricy is hurting you. Sorry if your wife or daughters won't follow your efforts to make them dress in burkas but kol hakovod to them for defying you.

59

 May 09, 2011 at 09:17 PM festayid Says:

this story is all over the news, bottom line has become a major chillul hashem, i shudder when I think about the din vcheshbon of the editors of this paper

60

 May 09, 2011 at 09:27 PM JenG Says:

Sorry, but no. You do not doctor a photo and say it's for religious reasons -- that's dishonest. Erasing a woman from a picture is denigrating women, no matter how you look at it. The 'apology' is disingenuous -- it's the same as "I'm sorry if you were offended," which is NOT an apology for the action itself, only a half-hearted apology for your reaction. It still says your reaction is the problem, not the action that caused it.

Erasing women from photos and history is disgusting. If a religion demands the erasing of women from photos, I cannot imagine a justification that makes it not a denigration of women.

61

 May 09, 2011 at 09:29 PM Babishka Says:

Many years ago, someone showed the Lubavitcher Rebbe OB"M a new magazine for children and wanted his haskomah. The Rebbe looked through the magazine and said, "where are the pictures of the girls?" He said he would give a haskomah only if boys AND GIRLS were included in all the pictures. Look at any issue of the magazine for Tzivos Hashem or for that matter any Chabad publication, you will see photos of men and women, even together. Also, in most Chabad homes you will find portraits of the Rebbeztins along with the Rebbeim.

62

 May 09, 2011 at 09:34 PM Pereles Says:

Reply to #46  
Alteh-Bucher Says:

Much ado over nothing.

Since when does anyone care about "Der Tzitung " anyways?

nobody cares...except that it's made headlines all over including AOL's news page. What a chilul Hashem

63

 May 09, 2011 at 10:12 PM Anonymous Says:

It was on the local news tonight with a lead-in entitled "A Taliban Grows in Brooklyn" and it went downhill from there. This newspaper has done more to create a chilul hashem than all the pritzius they claim to be fighting against. Hopefully, even the Chareidi tzibur will show their disgust with this action and boycott the newspaper.

65

 May 09, 2011 at 10:21 PM JamesDean Says:

The name of this newspaper should be changed to Der Sheker V'Chazav.

Photos document events that occurred.

To publish an altered photo and not state that is has been altered is a lie.

Their response is even more damaging. Jews like this cause Anti Semitism.

66

 May 09, 2011 at 10:24 PM Truth Says:

Reply to #41  
Truth Says:

It boiles down to one issue, they think fine print is only "fine print". Any profesinal law abiding company with standards to listen to the law would never have alterd this photo or any photo with restrictions. its a mentality that they feel above the law.

The real truth is they can alter any picture the gov. puts out. It's automaticaly in the public domain. Go back to failed messiah.com. Don't quote law, if you don't know any. First learn how to spell English and then study American law.

67

 May 09, 2011 at 10:27 PM frum woman Says:

As a frum ultra-orthodox woman, I think you all have it all wrong. No other society in the world is as overprotective and caring for their women. These halachos and added gedarim are meant to protect us and I than Hashem I am part of this wonderful nation. The entire strength of a Jewish home rests n the woman. How can you say we are second class? We are behind the scenes, but oh so powerful. Can you imagine a show being performed and the technical directors not attending? Well we do a lot more than just the technical work and are proud of our roles. I am sure that there are plenty more women who feel this way, but they bh do not waste their precious time on the internet and 'put down' blogs. Yes, in our merit we will merit the redemption. May it come speedily in our days.

68

 May 09, 2011 at 10:30 PM Babishka Says:

Seriously, how many people ever even heard of "Der Tzeitung" much less actually read it? Before this outrage, I mean.

69

 May 09, 2011 at 10:34 PM Truth Says:

Reply to #42  
am oretz Says:

you are absolutely wrong, and are unaware that there is a big business out there of companies buying rights to photos in small newspapers and then suing web sites that reproduce them.

Don't talk about what you don't know. bad enough that you're uneducated, but there is no reason for you to mislead other people.

You can buy the right of a private newspaper, not a gov. photo. Why are you misleading people? What's your agenda -Anti-chassidish?

70

 May 09, 2011 at 10:47 PM Anonymous Says:

Anyone calling this a Chilul Hashem please back your statement up with clear logic, not some emotional baggage. Whatever happened to freedom of religion ? Freedom of press ?, calling them the Taliban ?, do you have any clue as to the extent of the torture and intolerance of the Taliban ?

Some of you need a lesson in respecting the ideas other then their own.

Degrading to Woman, hmmm.....the newspaper wasn't printed with the intention of erasing woman from history, rather it's a modesty issue to them, while you and I might not live a similar life-style however we must respect those that do as long as it doesn't infringe on our own.

Haters will be haters!

71

 May 09, 2011 at 10:50 PM ExpatriateOwl Says:

josephf Says: "The U.S. Government by law cannot hold any copyrights. Any photo (non-classified) is, by law, in the public domain and may be altered in any way by anyone (notwithstanding the disclaimer the White House attached, which has no legal effect.)"

NOT entirely true! The U.S. Government does hold copyrights and other intellectual properties, and does, in certain areas, enforce those intellectual property rights. (While in the employ of the U.S. Government some years back I had occasion to deal with the issue).

In the particular instance at issue, it is most highly unlikely that any litigation, civil or criminal, will result. But Der Tzeitung had no right to alter the image, not even under halachic norms.

72

 May 09, 2011 at 11:00 PM Truth Says:

Reply to #42  
am oretz Says:

you are absolutely wrong, and are unaware that there is a big business out there of companies buying rights to photos in small newspapers and then suing web sites that reproduce them.

Don't talk about what you don't know. bad enough that you're uneducated, but there is no reason for you to mislead other people.

It's scary the reaction that the world has when it comes to anything religious esp. the frum Jewish religion. I wasn't there in that time, but all the anti-semitism that this has provoked reminds me of pre-war Europe. We see even on this site so many self-hating Jews. I saw thousands of anti-semitic comments all over the net. Even if the newspaper committed a crime (which they didn't), it's still shocking the reaction. We live in such a liberal society were you can abort fetuses, men and women can Marry their own gender. Anything goes, but what is the world up in arms about -something they perceive as a denigration of women. (Btw, I read newspapers with women pictures in it, but I respect that way of thought, even if I personally don't do it.) They are pitiful hypocrites. Not only Don't babies in their mother's stomach have any rights, but a lot of Goyishe companies won't give Jobs to people who are Shomer Shabbos, "claiming" "Undue Hardship". This happenned to me over and over. This world will end and Yetamu Chatoyim Min Haaretz and Reshayim Od Ainum! This includes all the assimilated Jews who find nothing better to do than to put down Jews who don't look at women!

73

 May 09, 2011 at 11:08 PM shvigger Says:

Reply to #61  
Babishka Says:

Many years ago, someone showed the Lubavitcher Rebbe OB"M a new magazine for children and wanted his haskomah. The Rebbe looked through the magazine and said, "where are the pictures of the girls?" He said he would give a haskomah only if boys AND GIRLS were included in all the pictures. Look at any issue of the magazine for Tzivos Hashem or for that matter any Chabad publication, you will see photos of men and women, even together. Also, in most Chabad homes you will find portraits of the Rebbeztins along with the Rebbeim.

So what does that mean, that lubavitchers respect women more than Satmerers?

74

 May 09, 2011 at 11:17 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #67  
frum woman Says:

As a frum ultra-orthodox woman, I think you all have it all wrong. No other society in the world is as overprotective and caring for their women. These halachos and added gedarim are meant to protect us and I than Hashem I am part of this wonderful nation. The entire strength of a Jewish home rests n the woman. How can you say we are second class? We are behind the scenes, but oh so powerful. Can you imagine a show being performed and the technical directors not attending? Well we do a lot more than just the technical work and are proud of our roles. I am sure that there are plenty more women who feel this way, but they bh do not waste their precious time on the internet and 'put down' blogs. Yes, in our merit we will merit the redemption. May it come speedily in our days.

The only "redemption" you should look forward to is from the man or men who have brainwashed you in the belief they are "protecting you" by you throuh this type of despicable behavior. There is nothing protective about treating women as some form of lower life or chattel. Thats for the Taliban, not jews. Hopefully, this story will be a wake-up call to the frum community and a source of liberation for jewish women. How pathethic of you to defend this as somthing positive.

75

 May 09, 2011 at 11:17 PM shredready Says:

Reply to #72  
Truth Says:

It's scary the reaction that the world has when it comes to anything religious esp. the frum Jewish religion. I wasn't there in that time, but all the anti-semitism that this has provoked reminds me of pre-war Europe. We see even on this site so many self-hating Jews. I saw thousands of anti-semitic comments all over the net. Even if the newspaper committed a crime (which they didn't), it's still shocking the reaction. We live in such a liberal society were you can abort fetuses, men and women can Marry their own gender. Anything goes, but what is the world up in arms about -something they perceive as a denigration of women. (Btw, I read newspapers with women pictures in it, but I respect that way of thought, even if I personally don't do it.) They are pitiful hypocrites. Not only Don't babies in their mother's stomach have any rights, but a lot of Goyishe companies won't give Jobs to people who are Shomer Shabbos, "claiming" "Undue Hardship". This happenned to me over and over. This world will end and Yetamu Chatoyim Min Haaretz and Reshayim Od Ainum! This includes all the assimilated Jews who find nothing better to do than to put down Jews who don't look at women!

i think you missed the point.
they could have blocked out the photo to show that at least a woman Hillary was there. Did they mention that they Photoshopped her out of they picture and that she was part of the operation?

If they did you have a point. If not then they misrepresented history and the role of woman in this historic operation.

76

 May 09, 2011 at 11:26 PM Aron1 Says:

B"H, we live in a country filled with freedoms. Any newspaper is free to print whatever they want, as long as it's not willful libel. Look at the National Enquirer or the New York Post, for example. The public is free to purchase or read that newspaper, or not.
However, I do feel that full disclosure was in order in altering the photo and that the newspaper in question made an honest mistake in failing to provide that disclosure.

77

 May 09, 2011 at 11:37 PM shredready Says:

steven colbert did a funny skit on this

78

 May 09, 2011 at 11:47 PM shredready Says:

question

did they state in the paper that the image was manipulated and that Hillary was omitted from the pic

79

 May 09, 2011 at 11:58 PM JohnJay60 Says:

Wow, this is bizarre. There is still no explanation of WHY they altered the photo. I am not interested in whether they had authority to do so.

80

 May 10, 2011 at 12:28 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #67  
frum woman Says:

As a frum ultra-orthodox woman, I think you all have it all wrong. No other society in the world is as overprotective and caring for their women. These halachos and added gedarim are meant to protect us and I than Hashem I am part of this wonderful nation. The entire strength of a Jewish home rests n the woman. How can you say we are second class? We are behind the scenes, but oh so powerful. Can you imagine a show being performed and the technical directors not attending? Well we do a lot more than just the technical work and are proud of our roles. I am sure that there are plenty more women who feel this way, but they bh do not waste their precious time on the internet and 'put down' blogs. Yes, in our merit we will merit the redemption. May it come speedily in our days.

your comment was hilarious.

My only concern is that some foolss on this website will think you were being serious!

81

 May 10, 2011 at 12:33 AM Embarrassed to be frum Says:

Reply to #56  
k9hara Says:

Here is my humble take.

We should all admit that we are all somewhat hypocritical. Let me explain. In the frum world we all understand that pics of women in newpapers is basically a no-no. Whether we agree with it or not, we basically accept it. Why? because of tznius issues, of course! But we all allow our wives and daughters to walk through the streets. Sometimes dressed even more "dressed-up" than Hillary was in the picture? And I assume that it is not only me, but the editors of this very newspaper (and all the Yateds, HaModias, Binahs, Mishpachas, Zman, etc, etc) editors wives and daughters are also in the street at some point in the day. But for some reason, for the ladies to walk in the streets, work in the stores, be our secretaeries and accountants it's okay, but once their picture is taken then it becomes problamatic??

While I understand the newspapers policy, how do we explain it to the world, when many of own do not/ cannot keep to the standard??

aside from your illiteracy, you are arrogant in thinking that others are as hypocritical as you are.

The rest do NOT think it is a "no-no" as you call it to see a picture of a woman.

If you can control your animal urges if you see a woman's bare arm or leg, then go find a mental health professional immediately.

Most of us, and the goyishe world as well, are perfectly capable of keeping our hormones in check when looking at a simple photograph, or even a live woman for that matter.

If this is problematic for you, again, I urge you to seek professional help.

82

 May 10, 2011 at 12:42 AM arrogant self-righteous hypocrites Says:

Reply to #70  
Anonymous Says:

Anyone calling this a Chilul Hashem please back your statement up with clear logic, not some emotional baggage. Whatever happened to freedom of religion ? Freedom of press ?, calling them the Taliban ?, do you have any clue as to the extent of the torture and intolerance of the Taliban ?

Some of you need a lesson in respecting the ideas other then their own.

Degrading to Woman, hmmm.....the newspaper wasn't printed with the intention of erasing woman from history, rather it's a modesty issue to them, while you and I might not live a similar life-style however we must respect those that do as long as it doesn't infringe on our own.

Haters will be haters!

I really love how you and other hypocrites call this a "modesty issue".

Please explain what was immodest about either of the woman in the photo?

Or is it that chassidishe people have animalistic urges they can't control whenever they see a picture of a woman?

Everyone is afraid of offending people when they say it is a religious issue of modesty. As a frum-from-birth Boro Park senior citizen, this is a load of bull. There is no question whatsoever that women are treated as second-class citizens in the frum world, especially by the chassidish velt, and you are an even bigger embarrassment for publicizing it.

I defy you to explain what you called "a modesty issue". what exactly was the issue? to pretend that women are invisible? Does the frum world suggest that they should have covered their heads before the picture was taken? What was immodest about their appearance? and how does that fit in with the number of chassidishe yingerlad who watch sports or the olympics? are basketball players, runners or swimmers dressed modestly? Because it doesn't seem to stop them there, does it? and it doesn't stop women from watching, does it?

83

 May 10, 2011 at 01:01 AM jsjcbs Says:

The statement was excellently written. The message was clear and accurate. Shkoyach for your efforts.

84

 May 10, 2011 at 01:07 AM plainsimplehappy Says:

A storm in a glass of water!

Modesty is out of respect to women! We all know that there is a very fine line to cross and disrespect a women! All men are alike! Why isalways the trending topic of what michelle obama was wearing when she was giving a speech? Because by most its a piece of art! By us its a respected human being that deserves dignity and respect! Everyone is entitled to disagree where lines should be drawn like the officer who asked the school girls to dress modestly not to attract men and he is being scrutanized for it now! Others draw it by areas where its allowed or not allowed to touch a woman! We have our holy torah and we have our lines drawn far away from the point of the ditch! No touching other women! No communicating friendly with other women and no looking at other women. They are respected and they are reserved for their chosen ones and just keep away 500 feet...
Our lines are drawn and yes! We are proud to be jews in america! Were proud to have our kids listen to what we tell them! We are proud to stick with our first lovers to the end of our lives! Our wives don't have to live through the agony of hearing her husband say how pretty your friend looked like etc. No plastic surgery! No botox! No cow needels!
Btw: you remember how long ago NYTimes was still clean. Is it any different today than the NYPost? Again! We have our lines drawn! And those lines would even keep the missisipi river from flooding...

85

 May 10, 2011 at 01:25 AM ishbibele Says:

I don't understand you guys ,the Halocho states a man is not allowed to look on women ,how can a newspaper that caters to an haloocha obeying community post pictures of women ?Failed Messiah doesn't want to be orthodox ,fine but let other people be

86

 May 10, 2011 at 02:45 AM Truth Says:

Reply to #75  
shredready Says:

i think you missed the point.
they could have blocked out the photo to show that at least a woman Hillary was there. Did they mention that they Photoshopped her out of they picture and that she was part of the operation?

If they did you have a point. If not then they misrepresented history and the role of woman in this historic operation.

Maybe they should have -could be they are 100% wrong for what they did. They definitely didn't do it on purpose anymore than they do for every other picture of a woman.
But you missed my point - I was talking about the reaction to the alteration. Because of one newspaper, thousands of people all over the world are ready to send us to the gas chambers. I've never seen such sick hatred, so widespread before! There are literally thousands of anti-semitic remarks everywhere in the media. I didn't see such a reaction to all the muslims whom demonstrated and voiced opposition to the killing of Osama bin Laden. You definitley didn't see widespead hatred towards the muslims because of this. The world's hypocrisy is astounding. It must mean that Moshiach is on the near horizon.

87

 May 10, 2011 at 08:30 AM chulent Says:

Reply to #84  
plainsimplehappy Says:

A storm in a glass of water!

Modesty is out of respect to women! We all know that there is a very fine line to cross and disrespect a women! All men are alike! Why isalways the trending topic of what michelle obama was wearing when she was giving a speech? Because by most its a piece of art! By us its a respected human being that deserves dignity and respect! Everyone is entitled to disagree where lines should be drawn like the officer who asked the school girls to dress modestly not to attract men and he is being scrutanized for it now! Others draw it by areas where its allowed or not allowed to touch a woman! We have our holy torah and we have our lines drawn far away from the point of the ditch! No touching other women! No communicating friendly with other women and no looking at other women. They are respected and they are reserved for their chosen ones and just keep away 500 feet...
Our lines are drawn and yes! We are proud to be jews in america! Were proud to have our kids listen to what we tell them! We are proud to stick with our first lovers to the end of our lives! Our wives don't have to live through the agony of hearing her husband say how pretty your friend looked like etc. No plastic surgery! No botox! No cow needels!
Btw: you remember how long ago NYTimes was still clean. Is it any different today than the NYPost? Again! We have our lines drawn! And those lines would even keep the missisipi river from flooding...

Best comment. Very clear and to the point. Thank you

88

 May 10, 2011 at 09:45 AM MoeMoe613 Says:

Reply to #40  
harveycfinkel Says:

This is just like the Muslims, they are nuts and so r u.

I'm happy to hear you're open to understanding this. Next time you say "Elokeinu" and "Avinu Malkeinu" make sure to have in mind that you don't mean to include these Chasidim. You seem to have written them out of your family.

89

 May 10, 2011 at 11:58 AM A Says:

Reply to #73  
shvigger Says:

So what does that mean, that lubavitchers respect women more than Satmerers?

As someone who's had plenty of interaction with both Lubavitch and Satmar, I'd have to say that yes, Lubavitchers do respect and show that respect more to women than Satmars do.

90

 May 10, 2011 at 01:19 PM Rabbi Says:

I don't understand why all these yiden have an issue with the frum newspaper did. We Jews have a torah which we follow. There is no such a thing that ultra orthodox, modern orthodox, reform, etc. There is one thing a jew and the torah. The Hallacha in Shulchan Urech states that a man is not supposed to look even at the small finger of a strange woman. That has nothing to do with utlra, Taliban or people who have taeives, or all these rude comments of those people who put there feelings before torah. We live in a modern world, a world of unbeleivers, a world of "Kofrim", and to my opinion all those who have a problem with this hallacha in Shulchan Aruch is called a "Koifer betoiras Moishe". Every Jew is supposed to beleive that every word in the Torah is from Hashem. You cannot pick out the hallachas you like and leave behind the hallaches you don't. That's exactly what the reform tried doing, there is no such thing.

91

 May 10, 2011 at 01:23 PM RabbiKoon Says:

Reply to #5  
JG123 Says:

"We even have special prayers for the welfare of our Government and the government leaders"
When is the last time a non-Modern Orthodox shul said this tefila? I highly doubt anyone reading your newspaper has even heard the tefila.

I daven at an orthodox sfardic shul, every shabbas they make the mishberachs for U.S. government and soldiers as well as israeli soldiers.

92

 May 10, 2011 at 05:13 PM newtransplant Says:

Reply to #45  
Anonymous Says:

You are absolutely right, your husband is absolutely wrong, and, for the record, I am not a woman - I'm a frum "shteebel-yid", but i absolutely agree with you that women are second-class citizens in the frum world. I'll point out that since men are not required to wear a shaitel, it is clear that women are actually morally stronger than men, as they won't be overcome with physical desire if they see an uncovered head or a bare arm

Single people, by the way, are a rung lower than you in the frum world. Try to find a siddur or machzor that addresses a man's requirement to light yomtov candles and then make kiddush with or w/o a shehechiyonu, or what a single person is supposed to do for a pesach seder, other than going to mooch off someone else (just a few examples)....

Good point there, my sister still lives at home so she is covered, but I know many single girls and boys and yes, they do have to 'mooch off' and find a seder and yes, they do have many more shailos to ask.

93

 May 10, 2011 at 05:17 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #67  
frum woman Says:

As a frum ultra-orthodox woman, I think you all have it all wrong. No other society in the world is as overprotective and caring for their women. These halachos and added gedarim are meant to protect us and I than Hashem I am part of this wonderful nation. The entire strength of a Jewish home rests n the woman. How can you say we are second class? We are behind the scenes, but oh so powerful. Can you imagine a show being performed and the technical directors not attending? Well we do a lot more than just the technical work and are proud of our roles. I am sure that there are plenty more women who feel this way, but they bh do not waste their precious time on the internet and 'put down' blogs. Yes, in our merit we will merit the redemption. May it come speedily in our days.

sure we are powerful behind the scenes but where is the recognition?! I am much happier doing my duty if I am recognised by people other than my children, as I'm sure most people are.

94

 May 11, 2011 at 08:45 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #83  
jsjcbs Says:

The statement was excellently written. The message was clear and accurate. Shkoyach for your efforts.

you are joking, right? Now anyone who saw the statement thinks all religious Jews are as stupid as people like you!

95

 May 11, 2011 at 08:47 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #84  
plainsimplehappy Says:

A storm in a glass of water!

Modesty is out of respect to women! We all know that there is a very fine line to cross and disrespect a women! All men are alike! Why isalways the trending topic of what michelle obama was wearing when she was giving a speech? Because by most its a piece of art! By us its a respected human being that deserves dignity and respect! Everyone is entitled to disagree where lines should be drawn like the officer who asked the school girls to dress modestly not to attract men and he is being scrutanized for it now! Others draw it by areas where its allowed or not allowed to touch a woman! We have our holy torah and we have our lines drawn far away from the point of the ditch! No touching other women! No communicating friendly with other women and no looking at other women. They are respected and they are reserved for their chosen ones and just keep away 500 feet...
Our lines are drawn and yes! We are proud to be jews in america! Were proud to have our kids listen to what we tell them! We are proud to stick with our first lovers to the end of our lives! Our wives don't have to live through the agony of hearing her husband say how pretty your friend looked like etc. No plastic surgery! No botox! No cow needels!
Btw: you remember how long ago NYTimes was still clean. Is it any different today than the NYPost? Again! We have our lines drawn! And those lines would even keep the missisipi river from flooding...

Your ideas are not only ridiculous, but you seem to be fairly illiterate as well.

Which Yeshiva gave you such a good education in writing skills?

96

 May 11, 2011 at 08:50 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #85  
ishbibele Says:

I don't understand you guys ,the Halocho states a man is not allowed to look on women ,how can a newspaper that caters to an haloocha obeying community post pictures of women ?Failed Messiah doesn't want to be orthodox ,fine but let other people be

I'm sorry, but do you ever leave your house? Do you drive, use the subway, fly anywhere, shop in stores? Have you ever been to a wedding? any simcha?

How is it possible that you don't look "on" women?

And where do you get the halocha that states "a man is not allowed to look on(sic) a woman"?

It is ridiculous, physically impossible and you misunderstand the halocha completely. Oh, I'm sorry, "haloocha".

97

 May 11, 2011 at 08:53 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #86  
Truth Says:

Maybe they should have -could be they are 100% wrong for what they did. They definitely didn't do it on purpose anymore than they do for every other picture of a woman.
But you missed my point - I was talking about the reaction to the alteration. Because of one newspaper, thousands of people all over the world are ready to send us to the gas chambers. I've never seen such sick hatred, so widespread before! There are literally thousands of anti-semitic remarks everywhere in the media. I didn't see such a reaction to all the muslims whom demonstrated and voiced opposition to the killing of Osama bin Laden. You definitley didn't see widespead hatred towards the muslims because of this. The world's hypocrisy is astounding. It must mean that Moshiach is on the near horizon.

You admit they are 100% wrong, and then say you don't understand why people are angry at us. You are STILL an idiot, have learned nothing since your previous postings.

You really don't understand why people in the real world are angry that we treat women so badly we claim we are not even allowed to look at a picture that has women modestly dressed in it? You don't even understand why the half of the world that are women are upset? You are mamash an am oretz, and THAT is the TRUTH!

98

 May 11, 2011 at 09:02 AM arrogant self-righteous hypocrites Says:

Reply to #90  
Rabbi Says:

I don't understand why all these yiden have an issue with the frum newspaper did. We Jews have a torah which we follow. There is no such a thing that ultra orthodox, modern orthodox, reform, etc. There is one thing a jew and the torah. The Hallacha in Shulchan Urech states that a man is not supposed to look even at the small finger of a strange woman. That has nothing to do with utlra, Taliban or people who have taeives, or all these rude comments of those people who put there feelings before torah. We live in a modern world, a world of unbeleivers, a world of "Kofrim", and to my opinion all those who have a problem with this hallacha in Shulchan Aruch is called a "Koifer betoiras Moishe". Every Jew is supposed to beleive that every word in the Torah is from Hashem. You cannot pick out the hallachas you like and leave behind the hallaches you don't. That's exactly what the reform tried doing, there is no such thing.

This Koifer (according to you) has a question. How are you allowed to go out on a shidduch date? Should you have to stay behind a wall and just have a conversation without seeing each other?

I am absolutely sure that every single shidduch date involves seeing more than the little finger of the strange woman, which as you point out is absolutely forbidden. How is it that these dates are allowed?

But what do I know, I'm a koifer, right? It's just that YOU said "You cannot pick out the hallachas you like and leave behind the hallaches you don't. That's exactly what the reform tried doing, there is no such thing. ”

So let me see, live woman you never met before, you can sit and talk and look at, even her little finger, and a picture of a female government official is forbidden? Who is the "Koifer" now?

99

 May 11, 2011 at 12:43 PM Truth Says:

Reply to #97  
Anonymous Says:

You admit they are 100% wrong, and then say you don't understand why people are angry at us. You are STILL an idiot, have learned nothing since your previous postings.

You really don't understand why people in the real world are angry that we treat women so badly we claim we are not even allowed to look at a picture that has women modestly dressed in it? You don't even understand why the half of the world that are women are upset? You are mamash an am oretz, and THAT is the TRUTH!

Your anger just proves that you're one of those self-hating Jews. I pity you. Because your brain can't seem to understand the difference between not looking at a picture of a woman and treating them badly. No where do Frum Jews as a majority treat women badly. Anti-semities will always have sort of excuse to spout their hatred. You are no different. Refuah Shelaima!

100

Sign-in to post a comment

Scroll Up
Advertisements:

Sell your scrap gold and broken jewelry and earn hard cash sell gold today!