Herbert,
I think the problem is in the content of your posts themselves. They are
extremely emotional and not conductive to discussion. Around your posts
there has been a very informative discussion on the attitude of other men
of Jefferson's time contrasting his reaction to slavery with others of the
same time.
In order for you to complete your argument, you would have to have DNA
from Jefferson himself, and from all of Sally's children, plus that of
other light-skinned slaves born at Monticello ... Lacking such
scientificity, everything else is opinion ... And like a**holes, we each
and all have an opinion.
Why not join the discussion on manumission?
Anne
At 02:27 PM 4/17/01 -0400, Herbert Barger wrote:
>Dear fellow list readers,
>
>Reference the recent apologizing message that was posted on this list by the
>list owner. I also would like to apologize for any inconvenience, which I
don't
>believe I may have caused in posting on a subject to the vitality of our
>nation's history. Now Ms. Roderick may not desire that I post a line or two
>from a message she sent me, "Please REFRAIN from using VA-HIST and
VA-ROOTS ANY
>FURTHER for disseminating information about the Jefferson/Hemings issue."
If I
>can no longer discuss the subject with you......am I not gagged? Wasn't it
>Jefferson and other brave founding fathers that guaranteed freedom of speech?
>The two lists we are speaking about which Ms. Roderick holds the switch to, I
>am assuming, must be paid for by taxpayers of Virginia, BUT in establishing
>these valuable lists we must assume that they encourage debates and a central
>point to discuss our common interests. Ms. Roderick is free to post the
private
>letter to her raising my objections to her remarks, if she so desires.
>
>Yes, I agree with some subscribers that the topic may not interest some, as
>some topics do not interest me, but I have found and know what the delete
>button is there for and I frequently use it. I don't complain that their
topic
>continues for several days doesn't agree with my beliefs so the discussion
>should be curtailed. From the kind of posts I see on this list and those sent
>privately, it would seem that the topic, Jefferson-Hemings, is very much
on the
>minds of serious historians and researchers such as yourselves. Up until the
>release of the 600 page Scholars Commission Report on April 12, 2001 it
was an
>all in-house study by Monticello employees, with a small scattering of
>consultants. The members of the Scholars Commission are independent scholars,
>not beholding to anyone and volunteering their time and funds. Everyone
working
>on this DNA fiasco (and it is just that, serving the agendas of certain
>people), are volunteers because we have seen the injustice that certain
agendas
>(yes we know what and where they are), are being heaped upon Mr. Jefferson
and
>eventually upon you the citizens of our great country. Our argument and
>research does NOT try to address the slavery issue, the political and
>historical life of Mr. Jefferson.
>
>We are discussing the DNA findings and the various warped interpretations
>spread by certain groups and individuals, because I and others KNOW what has
>happened and what is happening. And the results of the study is in quiet
>different contrast to that of Monticello. There was ABSOLUTELY no need for
the
>Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation (NO, strike that, they are now just
plain
>Thomas Jefferson Foundation.....a title they sued the now newly named Thomas
>Jefferson Heritage Society for), to arrive at the conclusion they did. Even
>Annette Gordon-Reed (a book which the TJMF relied heavily on for their
>findings), says that there is NO proof that the descendant of Eston Hemings
>was a descendant of Thomas Jefferson. Also how could Monticello research
state
>that possibly ALL of Sally's children were sired by Jefferson, just because a
>DNA match was found by "SOME" Jefferson DNA and a descendant of Eston
>Hemings......HOW COULD THEY COME TO THAT CONCLUSION.....only ONE was tested,
>Eston? DNA eliminated Tom Woodson, another claimed son of Sally Hemings and
>Thomas Jefferson, twice.
>
>It must be noted that an African-American woman hired to PUSH the ORAL
slavery
>issue at Monticello was placed as Chairman of that groups study group. They
>even consulted with an Afro-American Group doing research there, the Getting
>Word Project, which has several recognized names on this board, including
>Professor Julian Bond, Chairman of NAACP and History professor at UVA. At the
>Monticello web page you may see the entire listing. Since I had assisted Dr.
>Foster with the history part of his study I suggested to Dr. Dan Jordan at
>Monticello that I be permitted to appear before their study group and give my
>thoughts and findings......this never happened as it didn't happen with Dr.
>Foster when I proposed a meeting to match science and family history
(which he
>thought may be a good proposal), when he received the DNA findings back. I
also
>informed Dan Jordan (ditto for Dr. Foster), the "researchers", of another
>source of DNA in a grave in Kansas, thus adding another son of Sally's for
>testing. he DID NOT pursue it or mention it in his TJMF Report of Jan. 26,
>2000. After giving oral permission, I sent official forms for Hemings family
>members to give permission to get the DNA from William Hemings, by phone they
>agreed, but have long refused and state that they are happy with their family
>ORAL history, what are they afraid of? Are you the serious reader, happy with
>these tactics, I AM NOT?
>
>May I please list a sentence or two from the Dr. Ken Wallenborn report
>(Monticello minority report article which was denied public view until my and
>others complaint to the Chairman, TJMF) in the TJHS book, "It did not take
long
>to figure it out, however, as the committee's study outline seemed to be
taken
>almost directly from Annette Gordon-Reed's book." It didn't take Dr.
Wallenborn
>(a former long time professor at UVA and well known and well respected
>individual of the Charlottesville community who lives across the street from
>Dr. Foster), to think it time to complain to Dan Jordan about the tactics
being
>used by the study group. As stated before, this was an in-house study group
>(Dr. Wallenborn being an employee also by reason of being a long time
guide at
>Monticello who later resigned in protest) and Dr. Mike Moffitt also another
>guide resigned in protest and the two are on the board of the Thomas
Jefferson
>Heritage Society. Another statement of Dr. Wallenborn, after informing the
TJMF
>President that he was very upset at what was happening in the study
committee,
>"I informed him (Dan Jordan), that there were not many friends of Thomas
>Jefferson on the committee, and that the committee HAD ALREADY REACHED THEIR
>CONCLUSIONS." Another passage, "I sensed a strong power play aimed at the
TJMF
>to force them to accept something that was politically correct and not
>historically accurate." Another line, "As the committee began to throw out
most
>of the evidence that would exonerate Mr. Jefferson, it became even more
obvious
>that they were following Annette Gordon-Reed's lead, since this was the same
>tactic that she had in her book." Ken's complete thirteen page "EXPOSE" of
his
>participation in the Monticello report is in the TJHS book,
"Jefferson-Hemings
>Myth, An American Travesty" available from Amazon, B&N etc. Your local book
>dealer can special order it from the book data bank. They underplayed Mr.
>Jefferson's private statement of innocence to the rumors, to his Secretary of
>the Navy and Attorney General and more information, some twisted in meaning
>completely and feeble assessments such as, they dismissed the fact that
two of
>Randolph Jefferson's (Thomas brother) sons were at Monticello during the
>conception of three of Sally's children, YET, at age 16-17 and 20 (ages of
the
>boys at the time), was assessed as "being too young".....HA, HA. The
>Gordon-Reed book, has much information from the Fawn Brodie book. By the
way,
>Fawn Brodie was "thrown out" of her own church, the Latter Day Saints
(Mormon)
>for her bad-mouthing of the founder of LDS. Thus it was time to form an
>opposing society, The Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society to bring the truth to
>the world........and you have seen the fruits of "another opinion", never
>settle for one opinion of a trusted, "authority", regardless of the perceived
>public image.
>
> There MUST be opposition and vigilance in matters as great as our country's
>history. Yes, to get the word out is very disturbing and when that occurs in
>the very areas that Mr. Jefferson lived in and established his college in, it
>is even more important to question, WHY? Three or four large media outlets
and
>numerous small ones have "pretended" to cover both sides of the issue,
when in
>reality......they have not. The Wash. Post Ombudsman chastised 8 of that
papers
>reporters and correspondents for slanting and denying the "he's innocent"
side
>to get their story out. In recent TV productions on Sally Hemings, the PBS
>Frontline and the A&E Biography producers spent considerable time with me
>getting my side of the story that TJ was innocent. I informed them that my
>"other side" balance to the story would not be used.......it wasn't. I could
>name many others who have done just that, and I am contemplating on just
that,
>another companion book to: "The Jefferson-Hemings Myth, An American
Travesty",
>produced by the Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society.
>
>If you should not see any further articles on this list from me you will know
>why and please click on: www.tjheritage.org (all links) for on going
research,
>this story has not been finished.
>
>Herbert Barger
>Jefferson Family Historian
>
>Bill Bryant wrote:
>
>
>
>> I agree. I've read all the post and see nothing wrong. Just a lot of pro's
>> and con's as if we were making our case to the judge and jury. Is that not
>> the American way?
>>
>> Bill Bryant
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Henry Wiencek" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 6:12 PM
>> Subject: Re: gag orders?
>>
>> > I hope it's NOT true that some individuals have been barred from
>> > posting. If that is the case, then I protest. No one has posted
>> > anything obscene, libelous, or otherwise illegal. We all have 'delete'
>> > buttons and know how to use them. I for one do not wish to have any
>> > voices filtered out. That would truly make TJ roll in his grave, much
>> > more than anything we say about Hemings. I say, open the discussion to
>> > all -- else it's pointless. I want to hear what Mr. Barger has to say.
>> >
>> > Henry Wiencek
>> >
>> > To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
>> > at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>> >
>>
>> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
>> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>
>To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
>at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>
Anne Pemberton
[log in to unmask]
http://www.erols.com/stevepem
http://www.geocities.com/apembert45
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
|
