I was merely informed that I had been put on "Read Only" status implying that any
postings would be blocked. I have no idea whether this will get through or not.
malinda
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
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
|
