USA's first Antifa terrorism trial has a verdict

Nine North Texas Antifa cell fascists just got hit with major guilty verdicts in federal court on Friday for their roles in the violent July 4 attack last year on the Prairieland ICE Detention Center in Texas.

One of the fascists was convicted of attempted murder.

The jury convicted the nine fascists on a range of serious charges, including rioting, providing material support to terrorists, conspiracy to use and carry an explosive, and using and carrying an explosive during what prosecutors described as a coordinated North Texas Antifa Cell assault that left a local Alvarado police officer shot in the neck.

FBI Dallas Special Agent in Charge R. Joseph Rothrock called the incident a "coordinated attack" on the facility holding illegal immigrants ahead of deportation.

Two individuals were also convicted of conspiracy to conceal documents.

According to the Department of Justice, Benjamin Song was pegged as the attack's leader. He handed out firearms and recruited participants for the operation. Song was convicted of attempted murder of federal officers for the unlawful attempt to kill with malice aforethought the Alvarado Police Officer and for unlawful discharging of a firearm in the attempted murder of two correctional officers and an Alvarado Police Officer, since he was the shooter who hit the officer in the neck.

Song bolted from the scene like a roach when the lights come on, but he got nabbed on July 15, 2025, while most of the other suspects were arrested shortly after, per the DOJ.

Song now faces up to life in prison, with a mandatory minimum of 20 years, the Department of Justice press release noted. Seven others could see only 10 to 60 years, and Daniel Rolando Sanchez Estrada might get up to only 40 years.

"These guilty verdicts and convictions rightly reflect the vicious, armed attack that these Antifa cell members planned and executed against law enforcement and detention center officers on the night of July 4 last year," U.S. Attorney Ryan Raybould said in a statement.

"Their terrorist acts, attempted murder, vandalism, and explosives launched at a detention facility were a far cry from some peaceful protest or First Amendment expression. Because of the prompt action of first responders that night and tenacious work of our law enforcement partners in tandem with the prosecutors in my office, sixteen people have been brought to justice for these violent acts and their attempts to conceal them. We will continue in this mission to hold others accountable who perpetrate such violence and fund these ANTIFA groups in the Northern District of Texas."

Notably, the attackers used monikers in their group chats to plot the riot. They also set off fireworks and trashed the place, including spray-painting "F*ck You Pigs" on a building. How mature.

This was no spontaneous outburst. It was a calculated ambush on law enforcement, and the jury saw right through any claims otherwise. Justice served.

Thanks for following Brain Flushings, guys. Please consider subscribing, and if you would like to support my work, visit the sponsors on this page, or you can Buy Me A Coffee. 

Tweet

Actress wants prison time for fat-shamers

Being fat is unhealthy and it makes you feel slower because you are slower with many of the activities you might want to do, such as walk up a long flight of stairs, or catching a bus. It's also a known cause of many serious medical conditions such as hypertension, diabetes and heart disease.

But that isn't what this post is about.

There's an actress, Jameela Jamil, who wants to classify "fat-shaming" as hate speech, First Amendment be damned.

Now fat-shaming is wrong and cruel because its intention is to make a fat person feel bad about their excessive weight.

And calling Jews "termites" is wrong because it is intended to dehumanize Jews. And calling liberals "morons" is cruel, since it makes morons feel bad because it gives them a bad name. But it isn't illegal--it's simply wrong.

But it's freedom of speech to do so, and the remedy to this disgusting speech is more speech from the other side, the other opinion. Because who is it to determine what is hate speech over free speech? Certainly not you or me. It will end up to be the government, and we all know what happens when the government takes over something.

Jamil announced announced last week that she would start a company based on her Instagram account, “I Weigh,” which focuses on body positivity. She said in a tweet last Wednesday that one of her new company's  “main goals is to work towards a policy change that means this way of talking about people’s bodies is considered hate speech.”

“Fat-phobia is real, it is pervasive and prevalent and is damaging the mental health of millions,” she added, obviously not understanding the term "phobia," or irrational fear. Fat-shaming has nothing to do with fear of being fat or fear of fat people, it's a form of abusive negative speech that when used against a person of girth, needs to be countered with an intelligent put down of the moron [there I go again insulting morons] who fat-shamed.

But to make it illegal is an attack on the U.S. Constitution.

Jamil's tweet was a response to a Twitter user who posted photos from a tabloid showing two female celebrities in bathing suits. In one photo, Rebel Wilson wears a one-piece bathing suit with the caption: “The stand-up comedian, 29, made a big splash in Pitch Perfect, and does the same when she hits the surf!”

Not very nice.

Now one might not see this as cruel, but the comment is made among other photos mocking celebrities for their looks, including Tara Reid’s “botched surgery.”

The person who posted this crap is obviously an anal sphincter of the first kind.

Another photo posted by the same sphincter shows “Glee” actress Lea Michele in a bikini bending over with the caption: The 28-year-old singer’s most famous role was on Glee, but her biggest rolls are…” the photo cuts off. The image includes a circle around her torso and the words “roll player.”

And so on with other famous people.

Jamil explained that her Instagram account and her new company aren't about “making women feel more better” [more better is redundant, which, like excessive fat, is an excess of words] but about “encouraging people to see beyond their exterior and celebrate attributes that aren’t about their aesthetics.”

Honestly, Jamil probably means well and is a successful signaler of virtue, but you cannot allow hate speech to be equal to a hate crime.

Well here we are in the beginning of a new year and the world still hasn't come to an end with President Trump in the White House, in spite of what the media and the left [but I repeat myself] would have you believe.

I hope that you will follow Brain Flushings throughout the year and feel free to comment on any issues of concern. Please subscribe and check out the sponsors on these pages too.




Tweet

Dems got it backwards on democracy

The survival of our democracy depends on the adherence to the Bill of Rights. Democracy never depends on banning any right guaranteed by the finest document ever put to paper.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) is calling for more tech companies to ban more sites that he and his party disagrees with, like Facebook, YouTube, Apple, Pinterest, and Spotify have done to Infowars. Murphy says the survival of American democracy depends on it.

Murphy has it a** backwards: the survival of our democracy depends on our ability to express ourselves and defend ourselves against the tyranny of government, just like the tyranny of censoring free speech erodes democracy.

If it's Alex Jones today, who will it be tomorrow? Ben Shapiro?Sean Hannity? Robert Spencer? Pamela Geller?

Even the speech of Milo Yiannopoulos, which is as detestable as Alex Jones', should not be banned because the more these idiots talk, the more normal people can see their lies.

But Chris Murphy and his ilk are more dangerous than both Jones and Yiannopoulos.

"Infowars is the tip of a giant iceberg of hate and lies that uses sites like Facebook and YouTube to tear our nation apart," Murphy said. "These companies must do more than take down one website. The survival of our democracy depends on it," he tweeted Monday.

Murphy never explains just who determines what are the lies. He also doesn't understand that free speech is not the speech we want to hear, but the speech we don't want to hear. It's a person's right to say whatever he wants to say and our right to not listen, to walk away, to disagree and use more speech to debate.

Speech that calls for violence or puts lives at risk is already illegal.

And no, Alex, we are not 'all Alex Jones'. Just because someone defends your First Amendment right to free speech, doesn't mean they like you or believe a word you say. You are a loathsome individual who deserves not to be taken seriously, but that's the only restriction that should be placed on your words.

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and take a moment to visit the sponsors on this page. Thank you.

Tweet

Turkey arrests 1,656 social media users

Istanbul -- Authorities have formally arrested 1,656 people over the past six months for allegedly supporting terrorist organizations or insulting government officials on social media. They are also investigating over 10,000 others, according to the Interior Ministry.

Turkey does not have the same rights that we sort of still have here, as presented in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and freedom of speech or expression isn't protected. Of course, with the way liberals are trying to call all free speech 'hate speech,' it may merely be a matter of time when the U.S. will resemble other European or even Middle Eastern countries.

In a statement released by the Interior Ministry, it said that legal action had been taken against 3,710 people identified by police. Of those arrested, 1,203 were released on probation, 767 were released and 84 are still being held.

The charges include: provoking hatred among the people; praising terrorist organizations; disseminating terrorist propaganda; openly declaring allegiance to terrorist groups; insulting statements (such as: "Erdogan's breath smells like a bicycle seat on a hot summer day") and targeting the indivisibility of the state or safety of citizens.

Personally, I have no problem how they're dealing with issues regarding actual terrorism or those groups involved in it, but it looks as if Turkish leadership wants to take away all rights to free expression.

Turkey declared a state of emergency after a failed coup in July. Thousands of people were detained, and tens of thousands of public servants were purged over alleged ties to outlawed groups.

Human rights groups and Western governments have expressed concern over the crackdown, which some believe is targeting political opponents and critics, much like American college campuses target straight white conservative students, free speech and Israel. But Ankara claims the action they're taking are necessary precautions in the fight against terrorism across the country.

As global immigration soars, we will likely see more crime and acts of terrorism in the future.


Tweet

Political Correctness v US Constitution

Robert Copeland, 82 year old Police Commissioner of Wolfeboro, NH, exercised his First Amendment Right and now is being asked to resign. He was at a local restaurant and "pulled a Donald Sterling." I do not know the words he used, however, he made a racial slur aimed at Barack Obama.

But Copeland has the right to say whatever stupid thing he wants to say. He will be judged for his honesty or stupidity by his peers. Yes, he was stupid to say it, and even more stupid to say it in a public place, but if all of us lost our source of employment for saying something insensitive, untrue, or stupid, most of us would be on the dole, and that would make Obama happy.

The town manager and board of selectmen joined with residents in demanding the resignation of Copeland, who held the post since March. 

Over 100 town residents were at the commission's meeting to demand the resignation., but Copeland said that he won't apologize for using the expletive slur, because he believes that Obama meets the criteria for it. Whether you believe that or not, we need to ask ourselves if Copeland has the right to say what he wants without jeopardizing his job. We need to consider the Constitution.

Here's a refresher on the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

We have this as part of the Bill of Rights not for speech that we agree with, but for speech that may offend us. To punish someone for exercising this right, is a way to put an end to having this right.

I have mixed feelings about the situation. On one hand, Copeland represents the town, but on the other, we are systematically eroding away our rights through Political Correctness. What might have been a tongue-lashing in the past for such behavior, has become a severe punishment by people who are just as fallible as the miscreant who perpetrated it.

Tweet