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