Sunday, August 21, 2016

Unpleasant but Factual - Hillary's America: The Secrets of the Democratic Party

There was a time in the sixties when the words of a man from Mumbai would be considered groovy.  But this is 2016 and progressive critics have dubbed Dinesh D’Souza’s film “dumb” and "evil" without portfolio.  It is a documentary giving the filmmaker’s vision of an issue.  Michael Moore’s vision in Bowling for Columbine indicted the NRA, gun owners and Charlton Heston, in person, for the Columbine killings and all crimes done with a firearm.  Moore was given an Oscar. Bill Maher made a documentary about his own Religulous prejudices.  Ebert gave three and a half stars. 

Does anyone in a relativistic society care about truth?  The historical record is not only ignored but recreated to suit the current pathology of those in power to justify immorality by creating a mythology, choosing who is good and who is evil, even if it makes no sense.  They project their own sins upon their enemies.  Just keep repeating the mythology in school and media, silence those who disagree, shame the innocent and soon everyone really will love Big Brother. 

Dinesh D'Souza, our man from Mumbai who admits to being a bit disappointed in his adopted country, recounts the time he did in a Federal detention center for in a moment of wild enthusiasm he donated over the limit to a friend who was running for public office.  This after making another documentary which was critical of the current administration, the Feds threw the book at him.  While serving his time D'Souza spoke to gang members, one of whom bragged about an insurance scam upon vulnerable urban poor, wherein the gang paid for their life insurance and then murdered their victims to collect.  "All crime is about stealing.  The big criminals are still at large.  The system doesn't go after them because they run the system," said D'Souza.  Gang members may do time but criminal political agendas in power go unpunished, even unnoticed. 

So favoring the current party in power and with tongue firmly planted in cheek D'Souza presents a series of re enactments, a cinematic flowchart of inhumanity starting with the first Democratic President, the redoubtable Andrew Jackson.  To quote Alexis de Tocqueville on the Trail of Tears, “One couldn't watch without feeling one's heart wrung.”  I knew the history but I cried and I am not a Democrat.  Yes, the Trail of Tears was how the Democratic party handled what they termed, “Indian Removal”.  Genocide.  Those who survived were put on desert reservations far from the forests and fields they farmed and hunted in.  If all crime is stealing, look upon the theft of the lives of the First Nations and African Americans.  In the trailer, there is an worn artifact on a table.  Leather and silver, like a dog collar, it reads, "Property of A. Jackson" and a number.  We see a woman being lashed and around her neck is that collar.  She was not a number, she was a person.  Her name was Betty.  Andrew Jackson, in writing, ordered an overseer to give a slave named Betty 50 lashes.  Mr. D’Souza never said why but, I will tell you.  Betty got 50 lashes for doing extra laundry for someone without Mrs. Jackson’s permission.  Laundry was brutally hard work then.  I will never forget poor Betty.  I could find no DNA testing or documents to corroborate President Jackson’s scene beckoning his unwilling slave into his bed but as far as I am concerned, his term on the $20 bill is over.  Jackson The Musical probably won't be on Broadway anytime soon, but if you read about him you will see people can change.

The Democratic party was the party of slavery.  The Republican party was the party of abolition.  We think political rhetoric can't get any worse than in our era but the savage caning of Republican Senator Charles Sumner by Democratic Congressman Preston Brooks on the floor of the Senate chamber over a speech using sexual imagery to mock pro slavery Democrats publicly divided the two parties nationwide.  D'Souza goes so far as to say the Civil War was between Democrats and Republicans.  Lincoln, the great emancipator was a Republican and free African Americans began to take their places so long denied by running for public office on the Republican ticket in the South.  It wasn't long before the Klan rode out.  Jim Crow and disenfranchisement lasted for decades.
Ida B. Wells, beautifully played in the film by Gidget Taylor, said every black household in the South should have a Winchester rifle for protection.  Wells was a courageous African American teacher turned journalist, a one woman anti lynching campaign after a friend and two companions were lynched.  Their crime?  Opening a successful general store.  Ida refused to give up her seat and was put off a train, reminiscent of Ghandi.  She was a founder of the NAACP and devout Republican.  She never lived to see an anti lynch law passed.  FDR would not because he needed Southern Democrats to support his New Deal, so murder continued.

Margaret Sanger, Hillary Clinton's self proclaimed "hero" and racist eugenicist is chillingly portrayed by Andrea Cohen speaking to KKK wives and drifting ghostly through a women's clinic. Sanger was no advocate for women.  The women who won us suffrage, a Republican cause, considered abortion a crime against women and of course children.  Suffragettes called President Wilson, who did screen Birth of a Nation in the White House, "Kaiser Wilson".  Sanger wanted people she looked down upon like non-whites, Jews and Catholics to disappear.  Sanger even wanted people who suffered from mental illness, addiction, cancer or heart disease to be sterilized.  Sterilization was the order of the day and Hitler got ideas from both the Soviets and the Americans.  Soon we hear the racist quote by Lyndon B. Johnson who figures you have to give African Americans "something" to win them back.  The party gets a face lift, the all new Democratic Party; tolerant, liberal, champions of civil rights but the control is still there behind the curtain with the Wizard of Oz.  Barack Obama called this "plantation politics".  He and Hillary would know, as they were taught "community organizing" by Saul Alinsky   Saul Alinsky, a mercenary man with a pathology about power, crime and shaming your opponents, staged "fart-ins" and "piss-ins".  Urban neighborhoods became politicized but the standard of living didn’t change.  Strange, decades of Democratic control, in return for social programs, did not eliminate urban poverty or improve education and opportunity.  The urban poor had become as dependent on government aid as the First Nations did on those arid reservations.  It didn't change the high proportion of African American young men living in jails when they should have been living the American dream with their wives and children.  Alinsky said he wanted to take our country back but he never said back to what.  Alinsky was so slick he gave kudos to Satan in his book yet worked with church ministries, Catholic and Methodist which was how he met Hillary.

So what did I take home?  Dinesh D’Souza said,  “Crime is about stealing.”  Genocide, slavery, euthanasia, abortion are all the theft of a person’s life.  What about government rationing of health care?  What about forbidding the free exercise of religion?  What about forbidding free speech?  What about the bio technocracy of denying children born of surrogates knowledge of their biological parents?  Yes, the theft of a person’s life.  A large controlling government is not the answer.  So why do a majority of Americans now embrace it?  They've been carefully taught they can't live without government control because the "progressive" Democrats own our institutions of learning, entertainment and news media.  The zeitgeist of "plantation politics" is still very much with us and with the support of so many of our fellow Americans who do not care to know American history but prefer a virtual fantasy under Big Brother or Big Mother, the zeitgeist of plantation politics is here to stay. 

Friday, March 1, 2013

Obama's HHS Mandate Forces Us to Violate Our Religion

Obama administration to federal judge: We can force your wife to violate her religion


http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/obama-administration-to-federal-judge-we-can-force-your-wife-to-violate-her?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed

Benjamin Berwick: “Well, your honor, I think, I think there are two distinct ideas here: One is: Is the corporation itself religious such that it can exercise religion? And my, our argument is that it is not. Although again, we admit that it is a closer case than for a lot of other companies. And then the second question is, can the owners–is it a substantial burden on the owners when the requirement falls on the company that is a separate legal entity? I think for that question precisely what their beliefs are doesn’t really matter. I mean, they allege that their religious beliefs are being violated. We don’t question that. And we don’t question that that is the belief.
Judge Reggie Walton: But considering the closeness of the relationship that the individual owners have to the corporation to require them to fund what they believe amounts to the taking of a life, I don’t know what could be more contrary to one’s religious belief than that.
Berwick: Well, I don’t think the fact this is a closely-held corporation is particularly relevant, your honor. I mean, Mars, for example–
Judge Walton: Well, I mean, my wife has a medical practice. She has a corporation, but she’s the sole owner and sole stock owner. If she had strongly-held religious belief and she made that known that she operated her medical practice from that perspective, could she be required to pay for these types of items if she felt that that was causing her to violate her religious beliefs?
Berwick: Well, Your Honor, I think what it comes down to is whether there is a legal separation between the company and—
Judge Walton: It’s a legal separation. I mean, she obviously has created the corporation to limit her potential individual liability, but she’s the sole owner and everybody associates that medical practice with her as an individual. And if, you know, she was very active in her church and her church had these same type of strong religious-held beliefs, and members of the church and the community became aware of the fact that she is funding something that is totally contrary to what she professes as her belief, why should she have to do that?
Berwick: Well, your honor, again, I think it comes down to the fact that the corporation and the owner truly are separate. They are separate legal entities.
Judge Walton: So, she’d have to give up the limitation that conceivably would befall on her regarding liability in order to exercise her religion? So, she’d have to go as an individual proprietor with no corporation protection in order to assert her religious right? Isn’t that as significant burden?

http://krestaintheafternoon.blogspot.com/

Official Court Transcript  http://www.adfmedia.org/files/TyndaleTranscript.pdf

Monday, February 25, 2013

Pope Benedict Steps Aside So Another May Lead


Pope Benedict the Great
 
Many friends have asked me what I think about Pope Benedict's decision to retire.  Pope Benedict has been my ideal of a Pope.  His book Jesus of Nazareth is the greatest work of theology I've ever read.  I do encourage everyone out there to read any of his books.  He makes me proud to be Catholic in these difficult times.  He makes sense of Covenant theology and how our faith is deeper in history than we imagine.  I liked Pope John Paul II's writing but his long poetic sentences made for heavy reading.  Pope Benedict has a gift for making theology easy for the layperson as well as very uplifting.  Pope Benedict has been my favorite Pope, like an Uncle.  I admired him as Cardinal Ratzinger.  I recall when he was elected some people didn't know who he was.  He was the right hand man of Pope John Paul II and the most famous theologian in Rome.

Joan's Rome a great site for news of the Vatican.
http://www.ewtn.com/news/blog.asp?blogposts_ID=1671&blog_ID=1

What Pope Benedict and Hilary Clinton have in common

Pope Benedict didn't retire in order to rest.  Pope's are notorious for not complaining.  The Pope has suffered with heart trouble, a pace maker.  He's been told he cannot fly long distances.  A report has just come out that he cannot see well out of one eye.   I suspect,  he was told not to fly for a clotting problem.  Hilary Clinton has had to step down from her duties as Secretary of State because she could not fly.  She had a blood clot and now has double vision in one eye after a fall http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/25/the-medical-issue-that-closeup-pictures-of-hillarys-glass-may-reveal/
Pope Benedict also fell.  Could it be that he and the former First Lady suffer from a similar condition? 

We will have a new Pope by Easter

Next year, world youth day, a tradition begun by John Paul II and carried on by Pope Benedict, won't happen without a new Pope.  Gone are the days when a Pope can reside in the Vatican and pray, hidden from the world.  We live in a world which not only loudly voices hate speech towards the gentle Catholic Church but makes laws prohibiting Catholics from living as Catholics.  At least that is the case in the United States of America with the President's HHS Mandate.  The Pope is carrying a heavy cross now.  Just the opposite of what some are saying in the press.

http://www.ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/Vatican.php?id=7032  So far from shirking responsibilities and other conspiracy theories, the Pope is acting on behalf of the Church and the world.  Please remember him in your prayers along with all those Cardinals who will be voting for the next Pope.  We'll let the Holy Spirit choose the one we need as has been done since Jesus called St. Peter, "the rock on which I will build MY CHURCH."  Singular not plural.

Show your support with prayers and messages to Pope Benedict!
 http://www.priestsforlife.org/novenas/papal-election.htm
On the lighter side, show your support for Pope Benedict with groovy buttons and bumper stickers.
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2013/02/show-your-support-for-pope-benedict/

Struck by lightening

The Vatican is one of the highest places in Rome so lightening strikes happen all the time.  No one notices.  Until a Pope retires.  It makes me smile
We can tell the world, "not to worry".  Lightening bolts hit the Vatican whenever they have a shower in Rome.  There is actually a lightening rod on top.  It didn't happen when the Holy Father made the announcement, it actually looks like evening.  But many news sources,  anti Catholics and anti Vatican II "Catholics" took this to justify whatever complaint they had against the Church or Pope Benedict.  It's funny how secular networks chide superstitious people for relating a natural disaster to God.  Then they jump on a story like this saying, "ooooo see, see?".  (I surfed to see the secular news from the NYT to CNN with conspiracy theories saying the Pope isn't sick.  Then off track bets and what ifs about the new more liberal pope they hope to have.  As Flannery O'Connor wrote 'the church without Christ.')

The Church must change? or "Let your unformed worldly conscience be your guide."

Or is it Catholics who need to conform to Christ's teaching?  I found this appalling editorial  and decided it needed a rebuttal.  It cries out for one.  
www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/guest-voices/post/the-catholic-church-must-change/2013/02/13/5790689a-7606-11e2-95e4-6148e45d7adb_blog.html
I don't see the sisters in the photo throwing rocks.  The author, Mr. Salt is the executive director of Catholics United, a non-profit, non-partisan national lay Catholic advocacy organization which wants a church of sorts to conform to their vision of modernity.  I post not because I agree, all nine accusations are false, in my opinion and I am not alone.  A brief perusal of a few Catholic news sources like EWTN, Al Kresta's Blog, Life Site News, 
Women of Grace, Zenit, The National Catholic Register just to name a few, would prove this on all counts.  And yet, the Washington Post prints such editorials as if they were true and not just one man's biased personal diatribe.  Just look at the feeding frenzy of anti Catholic and anti Christian hate speech this article incited in the comments.  Who is the better for this? 

So here goes. If you don't believe me here are nine sites that contradict what Mr. Salt believes.

1. Woman dies because she is denied abortion in Ireland.  Not true.  
What the papers don't say is abortion is not a cure for E.coli or blood poisoning.  Reports were put on line before anyone knew her cause of death.
 http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/in-ireland-abortion-case-pro-lifers-warn-against-snap-judgments/

2. Assistant School Administrator fired for defending same sex marriage.  Not true.
The gentleman in the beany cap, see photo, placed a comment on his personal web site knowing if might cause contraversy.  He was not fired, only asked to recant or leave and he chose to leave. No need for a site here.  Simply common sense.  Or is it?  The school Administrator said he followed his conscience.  Jesus never said, "let your conscience be your guide."  That was Jiminy Cricket in Walt Disney's PinocchioChurch teaching says a properly formed Catholic conscience which means study of the Catechism.  A book which many Catholics have not read.  Why not?  It is available, affordable, easy to understand.

3.  Teen refused confirmation.  Not true.  
A sacrament in which the Holy Ghost is given to those already baptized in order to make them strong and perfect Christians and soldiers of Jesus Christ.  Catholic Encyclopedia.
Teen said pastor would not "loosen up" on issues like gay marriage.  Teen had photo on line supporting gay marriage.  Teen declined sacrament of this own free will.   
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/parents-claim-minnesota-priest-denied-son-confirmation-over-gay-marriage-vi/ 

4. Hospital denied Catholic status after performing life saving abortion?  Not true.
The hospital performed an abortion which was not necessary.  So the Bishop did his job.   
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/10/bp-olmsted-removes-catholic-status-from-another-phoenix-hospital/ 

5.  Bishop of Peoria compares President to Hitler and Stalin.  Not true.
Bishop Jenky's homily was superb and absolutely true.  If anyone saw an indirect link between the President's mercenary HHS Mandate and the policies of tyrants who persecuted Catholics in the past, so be it.  However, the Bishop never said the President was another Hitler or Stalin at all.  This knee jerk reaction must be due to a guilty conscience about taking away the civil rights of one's fellow citizens.  The intelligentsia railed against this Bishop and demanded he apologize for saying Catholics have been persecuted in the past.  One even claimed the Bishop, "needed a history lesson".  If anyone thinks Catholics haven't been persecuted, I suggest they blow the dust off their history books and take a good look at the policies of the President they supported. 
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/notre-dame-faculty-show-support-for-bishop-jenkys-recent-homily-remarks 

6. Bishop Finn convicted of protecting guilty priest, still on duty?  Not true.
If you read this case you will see a political morass.  Try putting yourself in the Bishop's shoes.  
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/criticisms-of-bishop-finn-described-as-misleading-dishonest 
Read how Bishop Finn wasn't popular because he was a "theological conservative" and pro life.  Read how Kathleen Sebelius, governor, fits in when the Attorney General had to fight to investigate abortion clinics who failed to report the rape of minors.  Revealing and sickening. 
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/can-bishop-robert-finn-get-a-fair-hearing

7. Inquisition of Nuns for caring for the poor?  Nunsense!
The Church laudes holy women who care for the sick, the elderly and the poor and who pass on the faith the Church teaches.  This is about dissident religious who have becomed bored and follow a new age, secular mind set.  Religious sisters who say they are "beyond Jesus".  Sounds scary doesn't it?  That's because it is and it should have been investigated long ago.  Sisters who speak for a small minority of dissidents not for all consecrated religious. Things move slow at the Vatican but I guess the Church converts like Christ, one person at a time.   
or you may also like
 

8. Lesbian denied Communion.  Not true.  She received Holy  Communion.

For those who have thought they'd seen everything.  The Washington Post printed anything but the facts.  The real victim here was the good priest who was first scandalized and then publically libelled for being "insensitive".  Don't miss this story!      
http://www.cfmpl.org/blog/2012/03/06/washington-post-guilty-malpractice/
Further information: the on line confessions the accusor made prior to this event.  The priest should get a medal but he's got something better.  He suffered something for the Eucharist.
or you may like

9. Church forces Catholics to take unheard of oath.  Not true.
If you teach Sunday school or at a parochial school for a Roman Catholic parish, you teach the CatholicismIt's expectedLoyalty oathes should present no problem to any faithful Catholic.  If you think infanticide is merely a hot button political issue which people may form their own opinions on, you need to re think being a teacher at a Catholic school.  It's the Jiminy Cricket song again, "Let your unformed wordly conscience be your guide."   I don't think so.

Peace and a fruitful Lent,

Citizeness Journalist 
Until next time, Apophus or The Comet is Coming, Hurray, Hurray, the Comet is Coming Today, Today!

Monday, February 18, 2013

The Hobbit Movie Review


THE HOBBIT OR NOT MY RADIGAST


 
This little fellow, we called him Pipkin, fell from a tree.  He is a bit stunned in this photo.  
Happily, he survived to make his own little nest in a hollow tree one day. 

It never ceases to amaze when screenwriters think their plots and vision of a classic book improve on the original.  If you saw Peter Jackson's first installment of The Hobbit, and heard the syllables of annoyance at the end, you know.  The beloved story has been stretched like a rubber band to include "selective" back story.  Could we at least have Tolkien's back story from the book?  Fans know the story.  Those who don't shouldn't be told what is going to happen before it does.  It's called suspense.

Now for Tolkien fans, like me, you want to listen to the BBC radio version made in 1968 with a standout performance of Bilbo by Paul Daneman.  He's my Bilbo with no apologies.  The recording is a real treat.
http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/The_Hobbit_%281968_radio_series%29

Run don't walk and get yourself a copy.  Smaug and the raven are so well voiced. Mr. Daneman was able to convey a Bilbo panic attack over the radio which was funny and most convincing.  The "good morning" sequence is so well played.  It revealed Bilbo's kind and yet insincere nature which he conquers.  We see ourselves in him.  Bilbo doesn't want to help Gandalf so he gets rid of him but invites him to tea tomorrow to save face.  Then slams the door.  Haven't we all done that?   But tomorrow comes.  "Tea!  Gandalf!  Better get another cup and saucer!"  Poor Bilbo answers the door expecting one guest and gets 14.  Jackson's dwarfs simply barge in like a band of thieves.  The politeness was markedly cut.  No, "Your servant and your family's,..."  Jackson's miscast lithe dwarfs are a mystery.  The only explanation for their youth and irreverent humor?  Was it was done for an audience of young men who usually purchase the largest number of cinema tickets?  (We took my 83 year old father who was the only person of his age group in the cinema complex.  A few fifty year olds and the rest all under 30.  So you see the age group catered to.)   Dwarfs, even young dwarfs, have an aspect of dwarfism and long beards.  They look old.  This was a bunch of 20 to 30 something men with long arms and fingers.  In Lord of the Rings, Gimli was doubled and had the proportions of a fictional dwarf.  What happened in The Hobbit?  I cannot guess but funny hats and hairdos do not a good dwarf make.  No, the invitation to tea was cut from Jackson's movie.  Did Jackson think it too English, too old fashioned or too sophisticated for an audience of today?  So it doesn't make a lot of sense when Bilbo allows these totally unexpected dwarfs to come in on him and to patiently tolerate them wrecking the house.

There is something criminal about taking a short children's novel about mercy, innocence and a plea for peace on earth and turning it into three three hour slash'em ups complete with characters who never existed. Characters who we know and love were so changed we don't recognize them.  One would think in three hours they would at least be faithful and use everyone's favorite scenes.  Nope.  Where is the talking wallet?  Where were the talking worgs and their worg queen?  Where is the delightful scene with the trolls?  The character development with Bert and his companions was genius.  In the original they were better than the Three Stooges.  Poetry.  So they did a re write.  Why wasn't Bilbo afraid?  After all Bilbo is a very small person in a wide world, he is a little Hobbit, a little Englishman who has led a sheltered comfortable life and does miss his little Hobbit hole.  It is only after he must summon all his strength, swallow his pride, and sacrifice himself for his friends that he changes into a heroic figure.  He is scared to death throughout the book.  His character develops and improves with each adventure.  The actor taking over for Ian Holm, as if any actor could take over for him, did a fine job.  My only criticism is this.  He was so relaxed, even blase.  So the thought of the journey scared him but imminent dismemberment and death did not?  Golem, Andy Serkis' magnum opus, icky and tricksy as ever, was fine.  Now imagine Bilbo is lost in a dark cave.  He sees Golem very violently kill a goblin he intends to eat for supper.  Bilbo needing an ally to find his way out engages in conversation, then a challenge at riddles.  Golem says if Bilbo loses then, "we eats it."  Martin Freeman's Bilbo, thinks sagely, and agrees as if he'd just bet on a football match.  And who flat ironed Bilbo's hair?  Compare his hair with Ian Holm's Bilbo.

Barry Humphries, of Dame Edna fame, was never better as the Goblin King.  I didn't know he had such a terrific range and hope to hear him in even better roles.  My only disappointment  besides his character's violent end was they didn't use Mr. Humphries' own face but used a computer animation instead.  O well.

Elijah Wood, Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving and Christopher Lee all turn up along with Ian Holm and Ian McKellan.  Sadly, all but Cate and Hugo look a good ten years older.  Not good considering this action happens decades before Lord of the Rings.  And Lady Galadriel's appearance, albeit lovely and nostalgic, will confuse because wood elves are not like the angelic high elves.  Wood elves?  Think Laurence Olivier's Richard III on a bad day.

The Radigast segment, looked like a page out of Brian Froud's and Alan Howe's Fairy Book.  Did it not?  A sleigh drawn by hares?  Darling,... if it had been in another movie.  The movie Radigast was Sauruman's idea of "Radigast the Fool."  But anyone Sauruman called fool was actually a good person.  I regard the character from the novel as a sort of Tolkeinized St. Francis.  A tall, noble, red bearded gentleman in brown robes looking out for the animals.  My impression anyway.  This comic relief Radigast just didn't fit the bill albeit the actor Sylvester McCoy did a fine job with the script he was given.  Ian McKellan's Gandalf was nuanced as smoking something that did more for Radigast than tobacco.  Many critics remarked on this.  If it was meant as a drug culture moment, it was irresponsible and out of place.  If it was a comic relief, I didn't hear anyone laughing.  I did love the little hedgehogs and there just better be animals setting the table at Beorn's house, that's all I've got to say....

The redoubtable and charming Ian McKellan defends gay marriage saying the blessing thing is just a bit extra - defining marriage as a legal contract.  But there wouldn't be legal contracts to define marriage if not for the hardness of our hearts.  I love Sir Ian's Gandalf.  I can't imagine another actor in the role.  However, on the marriage issue, he's got it backwards.  Marriage is a Sacrament between a man and a woman, defining them and all of us.  When that is considered an afterthought, you have two people with a piece of paper betwixt them.  We are not just souls and not just bodies.  We are both.  Men and women.  When we reduce each other to terms like "fetus", "plumbing" and "property" we deny our sexuality and our identity as human and become things to be used. 

Until next time Pope Fiction or The End is Near.

Peace,

Citizeness Journalist 

  One Race, The Human Race By Caroline Niesley James Forten “Free Man of Color”, Revolutionary War Veteran & POW, Prominent Phil...