Comments on: Chasidic Paper Releases Statement Following Media Firestorm For Altering White House Photo

By: newsie123

newsie123 — Wed, 11 May 2011 01:56:27 +0000

yashrus, check the 4th paragraph, i might have missed it if it stated it differently somewhere else let me know! i just think its crazy that they say they are not allowed to post pics of women, what do you think?

By: adamrants

adamrants — Tue, 10 May 2011 20:04:36 +0000

The fact that the Jewish community fails to see the danger in altering history as it happens speaks poorly of the integrity you hold your media outlets to. To literally take our Secretary of State out of the photo, is not irresponsible, it discredits any account of history taken by people with this same philosophy on women. This shows an extremism that is dangerous across all faiths. Whatever you point of view on women, the paper has altered history, the photograph is a lie, and the paper is nothing more than a joke written by delusional individuals.

By: Milhouse

Milhouse — Tue, 10 May 2011 17:38:38 +0000

MDG, who cares about “a journalistic point of view”? All that matters is a Torah point of view.

The tefillah “hanosen teshua lamlochim” was printed in siddurim, and said in the big shuls, only for the benefit of the government spies. It was NEVER said in the small shuls where there were no informers, and everyone used to know that.

By: nfgo3

nfgo3 — Tue, 10 May 2011 15:25:24 +0000

No. 17: Are you saying that the tefillo does not work, because it did not help Nixon avoid his disgraceful mistakes?

By: YonasonW

YonasonW — Tue, 10 May 2011 14:46:10 +0000

Yawn!

By: Mottel1

Mottel1 — Tue, 10 May 2011 13:49:42 +0000

This writer was present in the shul of Rabbi Avigdor Miller ZT”L when he recited this tefillo in the 1970s. At that time President Nixon was convicted by the media IMMEDIATELY in the aftermath of the Watergate situation. In order to show support for the President, he organized a letter writing campaign and allowed his name to be used in newspaper ads. During this period, he also PERSONALLY rose before Musaf on Shabbos and said this tefillo.

By: nfgo3

nfgo3 — Tue, 10 May 2011 13:43:03 +0000

No. 14 writes, in part: “It seems the only controversy involves secular Jews, who really aren’t that important (and all bigots anyways, so who cares).”

Did you really mean to say that all secular Jews are bigots? If so, that is about as sensible as saying that all frum Jews have obsessive-compulsive disorder. Such a statement, in part, is a breach of the mitzvah of Ahavas Yisrael.

By: yashrus

yashrus — Tue, 10 May 2011 13:15:55 +0000

Newsie 123

This is what the statement says…

“In accord with our religious beliefs, we do not publish photos of women”

How can you change it to fit your own agenda and put it in quotes as if you are merely quoting their statement?

By: akuperma

akuperma — Tue, 10 May 2011 11:54:07 +0000

FIRESTORM?????

I follow a good many goyish news sites, and they find this “controversy” to either be lacking in newsworthiness (i.e. they don’t cover it) or more of a human interest story (as in “what are these old fashioned people doing now?). It seems the only controversy involves secular Jews, who really aren’t that important (and all bigots anyways, so who cares).

By: mark levin

mark levin — Tue, 10 May 2011 05:57:29 +0000

12, they have standards so leave them alone! give them credit they deserve.

I dont know what the issue is anyway because the picture was a LIE! They were not watching it live. Ponetta told that to the press but only the brits had the guts to print it!