Scroll down for updates...

Little Eliza, the Royal wedding flower girl was not in this original, so-called 'iconic' White House press photo, but now Secretary of State Hillary Clinton isn't either.

If you recall, this photo was originally thought to be the moment when Osama bin Laden's head was blown away by a Navy SEAl commando sharpshooter last week. But the photo has since been invalidated by Hillary herself who says she was coughing -- not recoiling in horror -- when the picture was taken.

Well, the photo is back in the headlines today after a religious, ultra-orthodox Jewish newspaper, Der Tzitung, cut Hillary and another woman out of the picture that ran on its front page on Sunday.

Why would anyone be surprised that the editor of an ultra-orthodox Jewish newspaper would rather see Hillary barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen than in a room full of virile men?

In that culture, women and men are not equally yoked. Women know their roles and they happily assume their positions behind their men, who in turn provide for them and their children. It's an arrangement that works for them.

According to Rabbi Jason Miller, a blogger for The Jewish Week, the newspaper cut Hillary and the other woman out of the photo “because it could be considered sexually suggestive.”

CNN called the newspaper for comment and is still awaiting a response.


I didn't see this coming at all! According to the Washington Post blog, Der Tzitung's editor has apologized for Photoshopping Hillary Clinton out of the so-called 'iconic' WH photo.

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 “In accord with our religious beliefs, we do not publish photos of women, which in no way relegates them to a lower status...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.” Read the full statement at the bottom of the post.

  • Erica

    “because it could be considered sexually suggestive.”??? :dead: @ their logic :coffee:

  •!/Birdshu Bird

    To each his own. I try not to judge other cultures. And I must say, Hillary doesn't appear to be coughing to me. I think she just doesn't want to be seen as weak considering her political position.

  • Aye_Jay_Tee

    :dead: at the flower girl photoshopped in...LoL

  • Man, I just don’t care™

    I ain't goin lie, the way Hillary coverin that mouth and got them eyes all buck. I just envisioned myself hittin her from the back and she tryin no to wake the neighbors.


  • 2cents

    Please take bitter looking baby out of the pic :

  • Dawn Sheen

    This is no different than me crossing out 4 of my baby daddy names on my hips, arm, thigh, left breast and neck.. and I am not Jewish

  • mrsloveleighwilliams

    because nothing says sexually suggestive like a woman dressed in a full business suit

  • YSoSerious

    I agree with BIRD.

    That is all. :yawn:

  • Daisy

    I agree w/Bird on this as well. I hate blood and I would have covered my entire face peaking through my fingers :lol:

  • Sandra Rose

    I updated my post. The newspaper editor has apologized for cutting Hillary out of the picture.

  • mrsloveleighwilliams

    So are they saying that had the editor read the fine print and was aware that the woman was Secretary Of State she wouldn't have been edited out? If it is against their religious belifs do they make the exception for heads of state? Sounds like paper editor is shifting blame to the photo editor at first but comes back and says it's their belife system. So which is is? Their belifs or someone dropped the ball?

  • AllNYC

    Hillary wasn't hardly offended. It's been a long time since anyone thought she was "sexually suggestive." Just sayin'.

  • avidreader

    When they photoshopped the picture,thats considered deceit, which is a no-no in their religion.

  • Sandra Rose

    AllNYC says:

    Hillary wasn’t hardly offended. It’s been a long time since anyone thought she was “sexually suggestive.” Just sayin’.

    Why did I find that funny? :lol:

  • Sandra Rose

    @ mrsloveleighwilliams: the photo editor gets the side eye for not knowing who she is :huh:

  • prynsexxx

    Sandy you wrong for putting that lil girl in there. LMAOOOOOOOOOOO