Border Patrol Agent Attacked By 6 Illegal Aliens; One In Custody

Six illegal immigrants allegedly attacked a border patrol agent trying to arrest them in Calexico, California, Tuesday night, leaving the agent with injuries.

The agent reportedly witnessed the group illegally enter the U.S. near the Calexico West Port of Entry and New River, so he pursued them. The agent originally arrested one of the illegal immigrants, who was put in the back of his service vehicle, before attempting to chase down the rest of the group.

While the agent was in pursuit of the rest of the illegal immigrants, one of them allegedly jumped out of the river and was able to open the door to the agent’s service car, letting the suspect who was placed in custody free. The two then jumped back in the river, trying to flee from the agent, who spotted the two fleeing, while the rest continued to run.

The two men then assaulted the agent as he tried to arrest them. The rest of the illegal immigrants in the group then reportedly began throwing objects at the agent, while the agent called for backup.

Border Patrol agents were able to arrest the one illegal immigrant who escaped custody. He was placed into federal custody and is awaiting charges. The five other illegal immigrants safely made it back across the U.S.-Mexico border.

“The New River and immediate surrounding area remains one of our most challenging and dangerous areas to work,” El Centro Sector Assistant Chief Patrol Agent David S. Kim said in a statement. “The border wall system replacing the old fencing in that area is a solid step in mitigating those challenges.”

This incident comes just days after an illegal border-crosser broke both of his legs and injured his back after...

Big Tech Shows "Net Neutrality" Battle Was About Power, Not an "Open Internet"

The de-platforming of Alex Jones and InfoWars is a subject that has a number of layers to it, including the responsibilities social media companies have to free speech — particularly in a world where the lines between Big Tech and Big Government are increasingly blurred. While I’ll leave others to debate those particular subjects, these developments — and reactions to it — do help provide clarity to another heated tech-related debate: the hypocrisy of “net neutrality” advocates.

After all, there is a ton of overlap between those who advocated Title II regulation of the internet and those celebrating the deplatforming of Alex Jones. This is particularly true among the most powerful players in this debate, including legislators and leaders in the industry.

Consider, for example, the reaction from Big Tech to the FCC's repeal Title II regulation last December.

Facebook’s Sherryl Sansberg published a statement saying: “An open internet is critical for new ideas and economic opportunity. ... We're ready to work with members of Congress and others to help make the internet free and open for everyone.”

Google encouraged online activists to “take action,” in order to “protect the free flow of information and help make sure the Internet is available to everyone, everywhere.”

Apple went so far as to say:

An open internet ensures that hundreds of millions of consumers get the experience they want, over the broadband connections they choose, to use the devices they love, which have become an integral part of their lives.

What consumers do with those tools is up to them — not Apple, and not broadband providers.

Fast-forward eight months later and now those that demanded ISPs treat all content equally are the very same platforms actively deciding what content is or is not permissible for consumption.

This is hardly surprising to anyone who has paid attention to the debate. Google and Apple’s lip service to the importance of protecting tech startups has never jived well with their app stores serving as the greatest filters to what new products can be easily accessed by the consumer public. Tellingly, both have caved to government pressure whenever an app — no matter how popular — has frustrated legal authorities.

What is all the more repulsive about the tech giant’s contributions to the net neutrality debate is how potentially dangerous their disingenuous crusade was to the future of internet in America.

After all, largely overlooked in FCC Chairman Ajit Pai’s willingness to stand up to Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page, and the other titans of tech is that it was a major victory for the future of online service: 5G.

As industry analysts like Peter Rysavy have explained:

"[N]etwork slicing, a key architecture for 5G, will allow an operator to provide different services with different performance characteristics to address specific use cases. It’s critical that quality of service management be employed in 5G because 5G is being designed for a wider range of use cases than prior technology generations and certain applications will need higher priority than other.”…

Even with access to new spectrum and peak throughputs that will exceed 1 Gbps, 5G networks will need to manage latency, reliability, massive numbers of connections and a mix of stationary and mobile users, Rysavy added. “The United States has assumed global leadership in 4G and enjoys deep LTE penetration, leading smartphone platforms, and a vibrant application ecosystem. But globally, countries and companies are investing in and concentrating on what will come next with 5G. Constraining 5G with rules that unnecessarily undermine its potential is economic folly,” he said.

Tellingly, the imposition of FDR-era-like regulation on internet service providers correlated with a significant decrease in telecom investment, stalling the development of American 5G at a time when America’s tech dominance is threatened by rivals like China.

This is not to say that private companies have an inherent responsibility to place “national interest” over their own bottom line, companies have the right to behave cynically. At the same time, those same companies deserved to be exposed for such behavior, and allow consumers to react accordingly.

Net neutrality was about control and regulatory capture, not online freedom. What tech giants are now counting on is that brand loyalty and market size will isolate them from the increased politicization of their content — something that may not be working out so well for Netflix.

At the end of the day, on the market it is consumers that are king. Will consumer apathy allow...

Pelosi promises: Voting for Dems in November will give ‘leverage’ to illegal immigrants

Not so fast, Ocasio-Cortez. You may be the current top dog on the crazy-statements leaderboard, but that doesn’t mean the old guard is willing to go down without a fight. Nancy Pelosi is still out there saying all kinds of ridiculous stuff, and she’s not about to let you hog all the glory.

If there’s one issue where Democrats are at odds with the electorate, it’s illegal immigration. Poll after poll indicates that their open-borders aspirations are killing their electoral chances outside of California and New York. The coasts are on board, but middle-America is decidedly not.

Dems, of course, don’t care. If you disagree with them, you’re one of the little people and you either need to be educated, silenced, or ignored. That attitude goes a long way toward explaining Nancy Pelosi’s recent presser, in which she made it clear that a vote for Democrats was a vote to give “leverage” to those who have entered the country illegally….

“We believe that we will have leverage when we win in November. And why is that important? Because it gives leverage to every family, to every mom who courageously brought her child across the desert to escape, to escape death, rape, gang violence, and the rest.”

That’s right in line with the ‘eliminate ICE’ message being offered by the party’s socialist base, and it should be the centerpiece of every GOP advertisement from now until November.

Here’s the video:



Congratulations, Democrats. Your presumed Speaker of the House just made it even clearer that you are, in fact, the party of...

Dutch politician commits suicide after revealing she was ‘gang raped by Muslims’

Willie Dille, city councillor in The Hague and member of the anti-immigrant Freedom Party, has taken her own life on Wednesday. She had just posted a video on Facebook describing her gang-rape as being part of an intimidation campaign over a year ago.

Mrs. Dillie was an MP for the anti-immigrant Freedom Party from 2010-2012 before returning to her seat on The Hague city council. Geert Wilders, the party’s leader, is an outspoken critic of Islam.

Local Freedom Party leader, Karen Gerbrands said, Dille “could no longer bear what had happened to her and the reactions she had had”, when confirming the suicide.

In the video, she stated how the gang demanded her silence during council debates and had recently had her life threatened and that “we will soon cut your throat and let you bleed to death.”

She appeared distressed and anxious in the video where she reveals in the video: “I just want the world to know the truth. 15 March 2017 I was kidnapped, raped and assaulted by a group of Muslims because they wanted me to keep quiet in the Hague city council.”

15 March last year was the day of the parliamentary elections. “After it happened, I did not tell anyone, I just did my debates the next day.”

She further stated she was leaving politics because she was afraid that someone might hurt her children. “I cannot live with that. They don’t like women at all. They don’t like me at all,” Willie said. “That’s why I decided to stop.”

The video was removed shortly after being posted. Police told local media on Thursday afternoon that they had been in contact with her regarding the rape, though she never felt she could officially file a formal complaint, a fear many rape victims suffer.

Police spokesperson Hilde Vijverberg speaking to Dutch daily Algemeen Dagblad (AD) said:

“There was talk of rape. We offered her help and said we need a formal complaint and concrete evidence to start an investigation. But she did not make a formal complaint and we did not get any concrete information to enable us to launch an inquiry.”

Dille’s husband and a close friend say they don’t doubt her story. “The rape happened, I’m sure that it is the truth,” Caspar Reedijk, her husband, tells AD.

Linda, Dille’s best friend, who wants to be kept anonymous, tells the same newspaper: “She wasn’t sick or confused, I had daily contact with her.”

“Her husband, I and others who know Willie Dille don’t doubt one second of her story,” Linda tells AD. She says she knows why Dille did not file charges, but it’s not up to her to tell the reason for that.

She calls the hateful replies on social media to Dille’s death horrible because Willie was the sweetest and most helpful woman she knows.

Geert Wilders’ statement, released on Twitter, says he was shocked by...

Morning Mistress

The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #345

You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside? 

It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific, 

from the beautiful to the repugnant, 

from the mysterious to the familiar.

If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed, 

you could be inspired, you could be appalled. 

This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended. 

You have been warned.

Hot Pick Of The Late Night

The LEFT's beef with white people EXPLAINED

South Africa: Failed State INCOMING

Girls With Guns

China Collusion?

SCIENTIST CALLS OUT MEDIA ‘MISINFORMATION’ ON WILDFIRES AND GLOBAL WARMING

With wildfires engulfing over 620,000 acres of California, there’s been a concerted media campaign to single out man-made global warming as the primary force behind the deadly blazes.
But that’s not what the data suggests, according to University of Washington climate scientist Cliff Mass.

“So there is a lot misinformation going around in the media, some environmental advocacy groups, and some politicians,” Mass wrote in the first of a series of blog posts analyzing the California wildfires.

“The story can’t be a simply that warming is increasing the numbers of wildfires in California because the number of fires is declining. And area burned has not been increasing either,” Mass wrote.

Related: Big Government and Environmentalists Are Causing Massive Fires in Western States

Firefighters are struggling to put out the largest fire in recent decades, the Mendocino Complex fire, that’s consumed over 300,000 acres in northern California. Environmentalists and some scientists have pushed a media narrative that blazes across the state to global warming.

“Climate change is making wildfires more extreme. Here’s how,” PBS Newshour warned viewers on Monday, quoting Pennsylvania State University climate scientist Michael Mann.

“You warm the planet, you’re going to get more frequent and intense heat waves. You warm the soils, you dry them out, you get worst drought,” Mann said. “You bring all that together, and those are all the ingredients for unprecedented wildfires.”

The San Francisco Chronicle ran with similar coverage: “Scientists see fingerprints of climate change all over California’s wildfires.” The Chronicle also quoted Mann, who further argued global warming weakened the jet stream, causing extreme weather patterns to persist.

“These factors work together to produce the sorts of persistent extreme weather events — droughts, floods, heat waves, wildfires — that we’re seeing across the Northern Hemisphere right now,” Mann said.

However, Mass combed through California wildfire statistics, finding state figures showed a decrease in acres burned in four out of five regions. U.S. Forest Service data for public forests and lands in California shows mixed trends, with some regions having just as big of fires as in the 1920s.

“The bottom line of the real fire data produced by the State of California and in the peer-reviewed literature is clear: there has been no upward trend in the number of wildfires in California during the past decades,” Mass wrote on his blog.

“In fact, the frequency of fires has declined,” he wrote. “And in most of the state, there has not been an increasing trend in area burned during the past several decades.”

“Clearly, climate change is only one possible factor in controlling fire frequency and may not be the most important,” Mass wrote.

While seasonal weather is an important ingredient for wildfires, it’s not the only factor, making it particularly hard to attribute fires to global warming. Land management and population growth are also major factors, since most fires are...