NC Renegades

“The wisest thing in the world is to cry out before you are hurt. It is no good to cry out after you are hurt; especially after you are mortally hurt. People talk about the impatience of the populace; but sound historians know that most tyrannies have been possible because men moved too late. It is often essential to resist a tyranny before it exists. It is no answer to say, with a distant optimism, that the scheme is only in the air. A blow from a hatchet can only be parried while it is in the air.” — G.K. Chesterton, Eugenics and Other Evils

“Men often move too late.

Sure, men can move too soon too, but that isn’t a reason to call the opposite vice a virtue. Making waste through haste is not ideal, but neither is being hamstrung by being harangued by fussbudgets.

The time to cry out is at the first crime scene. Whatever is being done there out in the open is only going to accelerate once behind closed doors. A scheme once seen must be cut off before it comes to fruition. You do not have to wait for the hatchet to fall before being justified in taking evasive maneuvers.  Some will only sign off on your skepticism once it’s a proven fact. But you cannot protest your murder after the fact. At that point it becomes irrefutable as a fact, it is impossible for you to refute due to the fact of our demise. You must protest your murder while it is still being attempted presently if it is going to have any impact on your living into the future.

Tyrannies require lethargy. They need time to grow large enough to fend off an active attack. So, they take two steps forward and one step back until they are far enough along to advance without push back. The time to push back is at inch one, not mile forty.”

From Grok:

Yes, George Patton did express sentiments that could be interpreted as suggesting the United States fought on the wrong side in World War II, particularly in relation to his views on the Soviet Union and the post-war geopolitical landscape. However, it’s important to contextualize these statements within the broader scope of his beliefs and the historical record.

Patton was known for his strong anti-communist stance and his frustration with the Allied strategy that led to the division of Germany and the rise of Soviet influence in Eastern Europe. In his diaries and letters, Patton expressed regret over the outcome of the war, particularly the empowerment of the Soviet Union. For instance, he wrote in his diary about the Yalta Conference, criticizing the decisions that he believed handed Eastern Europe to the Soviets. He also made statements questioning the denazification process in Germany, comparing Nazis to Democrats and Republicans, which caused significant controversy and led to his relief from command as military governor of Bavaria.

One of the most cited pieces of evidence for Patton’s alleged belief that the U.S. fought on the wrong side comes from a quote attributed to him in various sources, suggesting he believed the U.S. should have aligned with Germany against the Soviet Union. However, the exact wording and context of these statements are often debated, and some historians argue that Patton’s comments were more about his tactical and strategic disagreements rather than a wholesale endorsement of the Nazi regime.

It’s also worth noting that Patton’s views were complex and sometimes contradictory. While he was critical of the Soviet Union and the post-war settlements, he was also a staunch advocate for the defeat of Nazi Germany during the war itself. His statements after the war reflect a mix of frustration with the geopolitical outcomes and his own personal disillusionment with his role in the post-war period.

In summary, while Patton did express regret and frustration over the outcome of World War II and the rise of Soviet power, attributing a clear-cut statement that the U.S. fought on the “wrong side” oversimplifies his views. His comments were more about his dissatisfaction with the post-war world order and his anti-communist sentiments rather than a rejection of the fight against Nazi Germany during the war itself.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What would cause Patton to believe this?

Update:

More from today…

h/t Dr. Ley

A discussion over Israel during dinner tonight brought up an interesting question: are Jews part of the remnant? According to Grok’s Biblical citations, the remnant in the New Testament comprises those who faithfully follow Jesus Christ, including Jewish believers who recognize Him as the Messiah and Gentiles who are grafted into God’s covenant people through faith.

What do you think? Provide verses supporting your reasoning. Comments which have no foundation will be deleted.

From Grok:

In the New Testament, the concept of the “remnant” refers to a faithful subset of people who remain true to God’s covenant and purposes, despite widespread unfaithfulness or apostasy. The idea is rooted in Old Testament usage (e.g., Isaiah 10:20–22, Micah 2:12) but is adapted and applied in the New Testament to describe those who accept and follow Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of God’s promises. Below is a concise overview of who comprises the remnant in the New Testament, based on its theological and textual context:

Jews and Gentiles United in Faith:

• The remnant expands beyond ethnic Israel to include Gentiles who accept the gospel. In Romans 9:24–27, Paul quotes Isaiah to describe how only a remnant of Israel will be saved, but he also extends God’s salvation to Gentiles, suggesting the remnant includes all who respond to God’s call through Christ (cf. Romans 11:17–24, where Gentiles are grafted into the olive tree of God’s people).
• The remnant is thus a spiritual Israel, defined by faith rather than ethnicity (Galatians 3:28–29).

The Church as the Faithful Community:

• The New Testament portrays the church—comprised of both Jewish and Gentile believers—as the continuation of God’s covenant people. This community is often seen as the remnant that remains faithful to God’s new covenant established through Jesus (e.g., Acts 2:41–47, 1 Peter 2:9–10).
• The remnant is characterized by perseverance, obedience, and faithfulness to Christ, even in the face of persecution or societal rejection (e.g., Revelation 12:17, where the remnant is described as those who “keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus”).

Eschatological Remnant in Revelation:

• In the Book of Revelation, the remnant is associated with those who remain faithful to God during times of tribulation. For example, Revelation 12:17 describes the remnant as those who are loyal to Jesus and resist the forces of evil, enduring until the end.
• This group is depicted as a faithful minority standing firm against spiritual and worldly opposition (Revelation 14:12).

Key Characteristics of the Remnant:

• Faith in Christ: The remnant is defined by their acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah and their commitment to His teachings.
• Grace and Election: The remnant is chosen by God’s grace, not by works or merit (Romans 11:5–6).
• Perseverance: They remain faithful despite trials, persecution, or widespread unfaithfulness (Revelation 2:10).
• Inclusivity: The remnant transcends ethnic boundaries, encompassing both Jews and Gentiles who follow Christ.

Summary:

The remnant in the New Testament comprises those who faithfully follow Jesus Christ, including Jewish believers who recognize Him as the Messiah and Gentiles who are grafted into God’s covenant people through faith. This group is marked by their commitment to God’s truth, perseverance in trials, and inclusion in the new covenant community, the church. The concept is most explicitly discussed in Romans 9–11 and Revelation, where it signifies a faithful minority preserved by God’s grace for His redemptive purposes.

Everyone is concerned about Artificial Intelligence replacing workers. There’s a good reason for this… AI is now at the level that it can do much of the work that humans do, faster and with fewer (or no) errors. AI can answer phones, write code, handle business bookkeeping, provide legal guidance, and schedule appointments. It can even solve complex problems that businesses pay outrageous amounts of money to “consultants” for currently. Not only that, but AI robots can operate vehicles, load cargo, package products and build… well, almost anything that humans now build. They can perform delicate surgery and cut the grass. So basically, Artificial Intelligence, especially with the exponential growth in capabilities and reasoning, can conceivably replace a great deal of the workforce.

…If people who work in the private sector are at risk of losing their jobs to AI systems, then if stands to reason that public sector employees should face the same risk. In fact, I submit that government workers, who are paid with money taken from hardworking citizens in the form of income taxes, by force if necessary, should be at far greater risk of losing their jobs. If an AI can do the job better than a person, for less money, then it is the responsibility of the taxpayers to force their representatives to make these changes, start reducing the cost of government, and therefore reduce the taxes private sector workers pay. These taxes include property taxes, and eliminating them would mean that people would actually be home and land owners, rather than tenants of the state.

How do we accomplish this? Please read the entire article here…

There will be pushback on this idea. Bring it on.