As expected, you only see what you thing supports your own case. What you quoted out of context makes clear that there were different grievances in this part of the original draft.
"The real force of this grievance" refers to one of three indictments, not all three. He's not saying that it was all about slavery and slave revolts.
Look at the bottom of page 106: "The phrase 'excited domestic insurrections amongst us' was meant to include both loyalists and slaves while making the Declaration less vulnerable to attack." QED.
It goes on to say that not only did the other side attack the contradiction of supporting slavery in the name of freedom, but also the very idea that loyal subjects of the king could be domestic insurrectionists. The Tories didn't think they could be insurrectionists, but they clearly understood that Jefferson was referring to them by that label.
“As expected, you only see what you thing supports your own case.” (sic)
Perhaps you did not read my post #456 in its entirety. I state:
“For the tally book, author Benson says that Gary Wills says that the term domestic insurrection refers to both slave and loyalist insurrections. I don’t think that is right for reasons I will explain - rather I’ll ask Thomas Jefferson to explain - in a separate post.”
Authors Benson and Wills have a somewhat different view than mine on an important aspect of this discussion and I acknowledge it; but they do support my view on the larger issue I am making.
I don’t understand how acknowledging the differences supports your claim that “you only see what you thing supports your own case.(sic)”