He then asked, "If there are no other depictions of Moses or the Ten Commandments on the building except on the South Wall Frieze in the U.S. Supreme Court, then what about on the east side of the building where Moses is the central figure among others, holding both tablets of the Ten Commandments, one in each arm?"
Notice the word 'on' and what it refers to.
But DuBord's tour guide said those – too – were the Ten Amendments.
Nowhere in the article does it say that the author talked to "a woman at the information desk." The only SC representatives mentioned are both 'tour guides.' One would think the tour guides would have accurate information. But the one you refer to as an info-babe said...
"Her response shocked me as much as the guide inside the Court chamber. 'There is no depiction of Moses and the Ten Commandments like that on the U.S. Supreme Court,'" DuBord said he was told.
Once again note the use of the word 'on' and the all inclusive language "There is no..." It makes the author's point that disinformation is being disseminated at and about the SC artwork.
Except, there's nobody claiming that Moses isn't Moses.
And no one claimed that anyone said that.
Nor is there anyone claiming that the tablets held by Moses are the Bill of Rights.
But it does say that.
The current information office at the Supreme Court declined to talk on the record with WND when asked about Ten Commandments representations on the building, referring questioners to the website.There, a document does indicate "Moses" is one of various lawgivers portrayed in the friezes, but the site doesn't mention "Ten Commandments." It does mention the "Ten Amendments."
Right. That paragraph is about DuBord's conversation with the lady at the information desk. She's the one I mentioned who didn't know about the East Pediment until she looked at a picture of it. She did not deny it was Moses with the Commandments once she saw it. The article only says she was surprised when she saw the photo.
But DuBord's tour guide said those – too – were the Ten Amendments.
And that's the tour guide I mentioned who didn't know about the Commandment's on the courtroom door. That's what that sentence is about.
Nowhere in the article does it say that the author talked to "a woman at the information desk."
That's because it's a poorly written article. If you follow the link in the article and read Dubord's piece, it makes more sense.
Me: Except, there's nobody claiming that Moses isn't Moses.
You: And no one claimed that anyone said that.
I thought you were making that claim when you said, "Moses has been reduced to a non-entit[y]."
Me: Nor is there anyone claiming that the tablets held by Moses are the Bill of Rights.
You: But it does say that.
The current information office at the Supreme Court declined to talk on the record with WND when asked about Ten Commandments representations on the building, referring questioners to the website.I don't know what website the author is talking about there. The Supreme Court has information on its website, here. The document about the South Wall Frieze (that's the frieze with Moses as one of various lawgivers) says the following about Moses:There, a document does indicate "Moses" is one of various lawgivers portrayed in the friezes, but the site doesn't mention "Ten Commandments." It does mention the "Ten Amendments."
Moses (c. 1300s B.C.) Prophet, lawgiver, and judge of the Israelites. Mosaic Law is based on the Torah, the first five books of the Old Testament. Moses is depicted in the frieze holding two overlapping tablets, written in Hebrew, representing the Ten Commandments. Partially visible from behind Moses’ beard are Commandments six through ten.The document doesn't mention the Ten Amendments.