reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker expresses disbelief that a bioweapon was created and injected into people, causing more deaths than the Vietnam War. They argue that the spike protein alone is deadly and that the 1918 Spanish flu strain was cloned and injected instead of the SARS CoV-2 virus. They claim that the deaths were covered up and that people mistakenly believe masks stopped the flu. The speaker struggles with the idea that millions of innocent people, including their husband, were murdered and the truth denied. They emphasize the need for action to prevent such events from happening again.

Speaker 0 asks Dr. Fleming if he is prepared to testify that COVID-19 is a bioweapon, to which he responds affirmatively. Dr. Fleming's qualifications are briefly discussed, including his medical and law degrees, as well as his experience as an inventor and author. He is asked if he has the ability to read and interpret medical patents, to which he confirms. Dr. Fleming wrote a book exploring the possibility of COVID-19 being a bioweapon, providing evidence of gain-of-function research and funding sources. He also discusses genetic modifications made to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, including the PRRA insert and HIV insert, which are not naturally occurring. The research of Shi Zhengli and others is mentioned, highlighting their efforts to increase the virus's infectivity.

Speaker 0 described a guest whose 18-year-old daughter was injected with Pfizer and developed cancer. He stated that he has sat across numerous people who lost their children to these injections, with some deaths immediate and others gruesome, and that these people must testify to lawmakers and others recounting their stories repeatedly. He framed this as a massive crime that needs to stop. He asserted that the FDA was fully aware that these injections would cause cancer, citing published guidance documents. He claimed that the FDA regulates the industry and, in 2015 and 2013 (and even more recently), wrote extensive guidance documents explaining to manufacturers developing mRNA products that they must study risks, including cancer, death, fertility issues, blindness, strokes, and cardiovascular issues. He said these risks were documented as regulatory knowledge and that manufacturers were told they had to study these risks and exclude them. He also claimed that studying these risks in healthy volunteers was not allowed because it was considered unethical. He contrasted this with 2020, stating that “all of a sudden, all of this is solved,” calling it a joke, and that this period raised his suspicions, prompting him to investigate independently. He concluded by describing the situation as a premeditated crime in which regulators knew, and that the military conducted a “fake exercise” to capture all these pharmaceutical companies and compel them to create these weapons.

As a doctor, the speaker states they have never seen something so injurious to the human body, invading the brain, heart, and bone marrow. It allegedly stimulates antibodies to attack platelets and other cells, causing unprecedented blood clotting and blood vessel damage. The speaker cites data from the University of Pittsburgh suggesting it causes cancer. They question how a single protein can injure the brain, heart, bone marrow, and immune system, cause blood clotting, and potentially cause cancer, calling it a weapon. The speaker references three papers, including one by Farkas in Military Medicine and Tubei Yan in preprint, which reportedly conclude that it is a bioweapon according to strict military criteria.

- Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the possibility that a friend was murdered and suggest that both victims died suddenly from fast-moving cancer, a method they say the agency uses overseas to eliminate people. Speaker 1 admits he cannot prove this but notes the sudden deaths. - The conversation asserts that the US government has technology to infect people with fast-moving cancer and to perform cognitive and directed-energy warfare. Speaker 0 states the government has the technology to infect with fast-moving cancer and to do so absolutely. - In 1997, Speaker 1 describes a hearing on asymmetric threats where he chaired the research committee and focused on four threats: drones, cyberattacks, electromagnetic pulse (EMP), and cognitive warfare. He asserts that cognitive warfare is now being labeled by some as Havana syndrome and that directed-energy weapons are the underlying technology. - Speaker 2 recounts a recent homeland security hearing about foreign adversaries using direct weapons against US citizens, enabling incapacitation. He emphasizes the chilling nature of the briefing and criticizes current domestic leadership as foolish, corrupt, incompetent, and wicked. - Speaker 3 notes that up to 40% of the Air Force equipment budget in the 1990s was classified, making much of it “black.” He emphasizes that military and security research often precedes civilian medical science, and that servicemen were used in experiments without fully informed consent, referencing NK Ultra-era disclosures of thousands of service members used as subjects. - Speaker 4 discusses MKUltra, describing a Canadian experiment involving psychic driving with massive LSD doses, eye-tracking, and memory loss, funded by MKUltra and affecting civilians. He mentions Project Midnight Climax, where Johns were observed in brothels while subjected to LSD, and notes similar experiments by the British Royal Air Force and Army. The results of Midnight Climax are unknown, with no published after-action reports. - Speaker 3 adds that Secretary of Energy O’Leary stated under Clinton that over a half a million Americans had been used in human experiments over four decades without informed consent, including mind control, with no accountability. He argues that mind-control technology has advanced, and questions who should govern its use, given the lack of legal frameworks. - The discussion covers mind-effects research and the lack of treaties governing such technologies. They reference a European Parliament security and disarmament resolution (1999) addressing mind-effects and mind-control technology, and Russian Duma resolutions (2002) seeking similar safeguards. Zabigniew Brzezinski’s Between Two Ages is cited regarding electronically stroking the ionosphere to influence behavior over geographic areas, connecting it to HARP and other electromagnetic carriers capable of mass or individual influence. - Speaker 6 explains historical demonstrations of electronic mind control, starting with Jose Delgado’s remote manipulation of a charging bull using radio energy and electrodes, and notes later work showing noninvasive techniques to influence behavior using low-power magnetic fields. Speaker 7 reiterates Delgado’s animal studies and the potential for noninvasive methods to affect emotions and memory, with broader implications for humans. - Speaker 3 discusses the progression of research funded by DARPA and others toward higher-resolution control of brain activity, enabling controlled effects that override senses and create synthetic memories, raising questions about future justice and evidence. They describe European Parliament and NATO/US military interest in mind-control technologies and the absence of robust legal protections. - Speaker 9 presents advances in AI-enabled brain-reading and memory-altering devices, including mind-reading and emotion decoding, while Speaker 10 and Speaker 12 discuss privacy concerns, brain-data privacy laws (Colorado’s law adding brain data to privacy protections), and the availability of consumer devices that decode brainwaves. They warn that brain data can be misused by insurers, law enforcement, advertisers, and governments, with private companies often sharing data without clear disclosure. - The segment concludes with a note that devices can infer attention and thoughts, and that DARPA’s N3D program aims for noninvasive neuromodulation with implantable electrodes read/write capabilities. It references 1980s–1990s discussions of RF energy as a potential nonlethal mind-control technology, and a 1993 Johns Hopkins conference listing low-frequency weapons as attractive options.

Pursuant to 28 USC seventeen forty six, I, Joseph Sanson, declare under penalty of perjury that the following statement is true to the best of my knowledge. I'm a psychotherapist with a bachelor's degree in psychology, a master's degree in clinical mental health counseling, and a PhD in psychology. I've been litigating here in Florida for over a year and a half to get the mRNA nanoparticle injections off the market because they're biological and technological weapons of mass destruction. In violation of Florida Statute 790.166, 18 USC 175 Chapter 10 Biological Weapons, as well as the Biological Weapons Convention, of course. I filed an affidavit in my case from Doctor. Francis Boyle, the law professor that wrote the Biological Weapons and Anti Terrorism Act of 1989. Doctor. Francis Boyle was arguably the world's leading legal authority on biological weapons. Doctor. Boyle clearly states in his affidavit that COVID injections and MRI nanoparticle injections are in violation of Florida Statute 790.166, Weapons of Mass Destruction, as well as 18 USC 175, Chapter 10, biological weapons. Keep in mind that the Biological Weapons and Anti Terrorism Act of 1989 was The US domestic implementation of the Biological Weapons Convention. I certify the authenticity of doctor Francis Boyle's affidavit as well as his intention to testify in this case that the COVID injections and and mRNA injections are biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction.

The speaker discusses the ideology of scientists who have questioned the origins of viruses like AIDS, hepatitis, and Ebola. They mention Dr. Duisburg from the University of California at Berkeley as one of these scientists. The speaker also mentions that the COVID vaccines contained varying percentages of bioweapon material, with the booster having the highest concentration. They note that over 13 billion COVID vaccines were administered to around 5 billion people, but not all individuals received the vaccines. The speaker suggests that the PCR swab was another method of inoculating people with nanotechnology, specifically Graphene Ferric Oxide. They mention facing pushback when trying to publish their research on this topic, but eventually succeeded. However, they were subsequently attacked.

The speaker alleges that a company chose a "least troublesome" witness they could easily win against, and that this choice was made the day before the witness was killed as part of a plan. The speaker claims there is enough data to assert the individual did not take his own life and that a larger plan was behind his death. The speaker states that culprits always make mistakes and that this information has been shared with the FBI. While the San Francisco FBI made no promises, there is hope that Kash Patel or the federal government will take interest and allocate resources to investigate. The speaker notes widespread support for the idea that the deceased did not commit suicide, citing reactions to PBD's podcast and other sources.

The COVID vaccines are deemed biological weapons by law professor Dr. Francis Boyle in a recent affidavit. The affidavit argues that the mRNA vaccines violate various laws, including those on biological weapons and treason. Cases of rapid onset cancers and deaths post-vaccination are highlighted, urging viewers to be prepared with emergency medical kits. The video emphasizes the importance of staying informed and ready to fight infections. The speaker encourages viewers to subscribe to their channels for more updates.

According to the speaker, including himself and Secretary Pompeo, the most likely origin of COVID-19 was a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. They claim that this is not just a possibility, but a probability and possibly a certainty. The FBI has been cultivating a crucial witness, Dr. Zhou Yousen, a close relative of a Chinese military scientist who worked at the institute. Dr. Zhou published a patent for a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, suggesting he started working on it no later than October 2019. However, he was found dead shortly after. While it is possible that he was killed by the People's Liberation Army for accidentally starting COVID-19, there is no evidence to support this claim. The Proximal Origins authors have been approached for comment.

What if the worst biological attack in our country's history wasn't carried out by the individuals who were caught, confessed, and executed? There are coincidences that make me question if someone else unleashed the virus and killed all those people. Would you want to know who it was, even if it was someone working for our government? That's my question. If our own government was responsible for the deaths of almost 100,000 people at St. Mary's and Three Waters.

The discussion centers on a Dutch civil litigation in which Bill Gates, Albert Bourla, and Marc Rutemp (Marc Rutza) are named as individual defendants in cases linked to “Project COVID” and broad pandemic preparedness efforts years before the 2020 pandemic. Key facts asserted: - The defendants are plaintiffs in civil tort litigation filed in the Netherlands around 2023. Two cases exist: an older 2023 case and a second case involving additional plaintiffs. The Dutch approach allows individuals to be named as defendants in civil tort actions. - Gates and Bourla (and Rutza) have appeared as defendants; Gates attempted to avoid jurisdiction, but the Amsterdam court ruled that Gates and Bourla, as individuals, respond to the case. They have not appeared in court personally, but their lawyers appear on their behalf. - On March 9, an appeal hearing occurred in Amsterdam at the Court of Appeals, with extensive public attendance (about 60 journalists, podcasters, and plaintiffs). The hearing was described as explosive; a single attorney, Peter Stassen, presented a long argument as co-counsel had been imprisoned and disbarred, leaving one attorney on a tight budget. A video of the proceedings and a standout speech went viral. - The plaintiffs allege the defendants conspired to create “Project COVID” and a “pandemic preparedness racket” years prior to 2020. The core claim is that Gates, Bourla, Rutza, along with others, collaborated with private NGOs, the military, NATO, and DOD through a DARPA-linked pandemic program to identify pandemic potential viruses and to develop vaccines and therapeutics within sixty days, with funding from the DOD. - Evidence cited includes a 2017 AstraZeneca tape in which a key AstraZeneca executive states that DARPA approached them in 2017 to join a consortium to identify pandemic viruses and deliver vaccines within sixty days; the response was, “I thought it was science fiction.” The tape is part of an evidence package showing pre-2020 planning. - February 4, 2020 is highlighted as a crucial date: a telephone call from DARPA indicating COVID was declared a national security threat, followed by retroactive emergency declarations around March 2020. A February 4, 2020 conference was scheduled, with widespread communications among government, military, HHS, and CDC; the aim was to secure liability protection for pharmaceutical countermeasures during a declared emergency. - The defense includes the assertion that the public-private partnership extended to many companies (including 300 others) that joined the consortium, with U.S. and European regulatory synchronization through mutual recognition agreements. - The alleged motives are primarily framed as profits and control, with references to a long-standing history of military involvement in vaccine development and public health measures, including the PREP Act in the U.S. and parallel European countermeasures frameworks that waive liability and regulatory requirements during declared emergencies. The PREP Act’s role — especially in the U.S. — is discussed as shielding manufacturers from liability, with European frameworks described as allowing similar protections through contracts and synchronized countermeasures legislation. - Expert testimonies: five experts have provided evidence supporting foreknowledge and intentional deception by government health officials and the named defendants. Sasha Ladopova and Catherine Watt contributed written testimonies; Ladopova references foreknowledge by health regulators, and the broader regulatory harmonization across EMA and FDA. - Francis Boyle, a professor known for work on bioweapons law, testified that the vaccines/metas could be viewed as bioweapons; he died three weeks after agreeing to testify. - Injuries to plaintiffs: in the initial case, seven injured plaintiffs with one death; the second case added three more plaintiffs. Injuries cited include cardiovascular inflammation, autoimmune conditions, and cancer; plaintiffs contend their lives were destroyed by the countermeasures, while regulators and manufacturers allegedly denied injuries and deaths. What happens next: - An October 22 hearing in the lower court in Lewarden (The Netherlands) is planned, with a public in-person event and a press conference. - The appeal on the second case seeks to have expert witnesses heard under oath; the prior lower court denied this, and the higher court’s decision is anticipated (with expectations of denial, according to the interview). - The campaign invites public interest and financial support; the foundation in the Netherlands funds the case, and the English-language YouTube channel is available for updates and evidence. Contact points for following the case include Sasha Ladopova’s Substack and the Dutch foundation’s YouTube channel and materials.

Speaker 0 presents the statement of Joseph Sanson, based on the sworn statement of the late professor doctor Francis Boyle, described as the greatest authority in bioweapons legislation and the author of it. Boyle is asserted to have concluded that the COVID-19 mRNA injection is a bioweapon, and that he knew this “like no other” before his death, which occurred shortly after he declared willingness to testify under oath in court. The core of Boyle’s argument, as presented, is that the COVID-19 mRNA injections contain derivatives of illegal military gene function research, and therefore qualify by definition as a military biological weapon system—a bioweapon. This bioweapon is said to consist of two integrated components: a pathogenic load and a delivery mechanism. It is asserted that the pathogenic load results from illegal gene or function research. Boyle is described as referring to an article in Nature Medicine, with a link included in the plea note. If opened, the article is claimed to warn that true scientists believe an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus, and that what is called the “new normal” are not scientists but faith fanatics. The 2015 Nature Medicine article is summarized as reporting that, based on findings, researchers synthetically created an infectious fully SHC014 recombinant virus with robust viral replication in vitro and in vivo, a SARS-like coronavirus with a spike protein optimized for human infection. The article is attributed to researchers including those affiliated with UNC Chapel Hill and the Wuhan Institute of Virology, implying that the spike protein and pathogenic payload were the result of illegal gain-of-function research. The spike protein mRNA is described as providing instructions to human cells to produce this pathogenic spike protein, emphasized as not being a natural spike protein but an illegally developed, synthetically made pathogen optimized for human infection. The delivery system is identified as nanolipid particles (NLPs) that encapsulate the mRNA payload and deliver it into cells. The rhetoric labels these as fat globules, and Boyle is said to declare that this is actually a nanotechnology-enhanced delivery platform. This technology is described as being paid for, developed, financed, and conceived by the Pentagon and its research institute DARPA, with the claim that the virus was aerosolized and engineered with nanotechnology from the beginning, indicating a long-term program for advanced delivery systems. The claim is made that this technology has been used in the COVID-19 injections, with the NLP delivery system described as the result of a specific teacher-sponsored program for nanotechnological biological weapons. The presentation by Samsung is cited for further legal implications, and it is argued that Gates and Borla qualify as suspects of crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

The speaker discusses gain-of-function research, claiming that the purpose of taking a wild virus and making it more pathogenic is to develop a vaccine for those enhanced viruses, and that the real rationale is to develop bioweapons and then a defense to those bioweapons. They assert that Anthony Fauci received a 68% raise by the military because of these new military responsibilities and continued the work through 2014. The speaker states that in 2014 three of the bugs escaped in high-profile incidents from three different U.S. labs, describing these as really deadly bugs that escaped or were found in unsafe circumstances. They claim that 300 scientists sent a letter to President Obama asking him to shut down Fauci’s gain-of-function research, arguing that it was highly likely to start a global pandemic with this dangerous research. According to the speaker, Obama issued a moratorium and shut down 18 of Fauci’s worst projects, but ultimately did not fully shut them down. Instead, the research was moved offshore to avoid White House scrutiny and the Cambridge Working Group, a group of scientists, as well as other officials. The speaker alleges that the major offshore location for this research included a Chinese lab run by the Chinese military, specifically naming the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China, as part of the moved research, with other work relocated to Ukraine and the former Soviet state of Georgia.

Speaker 0 discusses Dr. Francis Boyle as a highly distinguished human rights lawyer who worked at the highest levels of global treaties and advocacy, and who wrote the bioweapons treaty governing the United States. Boyle is described as having intimate knowledge of what a bioweapon is, what it does, and what it looks like. Early in the COVID-19 period, Boyle is said to have stated that COVID and the vaccine are bioweapons, echoing similar points made by others about their similar structures and common origins. The speaker notes Boyle warned the world that this is a bioweapon and cites Boyle’s status as a powerful voice on the matter. The speaker recalls an interview conducted in 2023 or 2024 with Boyle, describing him as deeply knowledgeable and brave, and asserts that the interview should have been front-page news. The speaker quotes Boyle as saying publicly that the virus and the vaccine are bioweapons and that their goal is to depopulate, disable, and kill. The speaker paraphrases Boyle’s words to emphasize that the aim is to disrupt reproduction and to disable and to kill, asserting that Boyle’s statements connected these outcomes to the design of the bioweapons. Boyle died in January, described as dying suddenly while being in good health and active in his early seventies. The speaker notes Sasha Ladopova’s claim that there is a problem with Boyle’s death, while avoiding speculation about the specifics, and states that Boyle was intended to be one of five witnesses slated to testify in a Netherlands trial against Pfizer, Albert Bourla, and Bill Gates regarding depopulation, disabling, and murdering people with the injection. Sasha Ladopova is reported as expressing concern about Boyle’s death and its timing, though the speaker declines to elaborate further, citing respect for the family’s privacy and avoiding baseless speculation. The transcript adds that the lawyer who would lead the prosecution in the same Netherlands context was arrested and detained under severe circumstances, highlighting a dramatic intervention that the speaker says does not align with the rule of law and due process in the Netherlands. The speaker closes by noting Boyle’s exceptional character and expressing a sense of great loss. Speaker 1 then warns listeners to be cautious about trusting Sasha Ladopova and Naomi Wolf, advising that if something is hard to swallow, one should pay attention, stating that these two individuals should be questioned at one's own peril. The speaker asserts personal familiarity with both women and urges listeners to recognize potential risks in accepting their reporting.

As someone with extensive experience in biopharma research, including working at Pfizer and running my own biotech company, I have analyzed the design of these vaccines. Based on my expertise, I have identified three key factors that suggest these vaccines were intentionally created to cause harm and even death. This challenges the notion that any harm caused was accidental.

Speaker 0 argues that parasites have become a problem because they have been weaponized. They reference a Nobel Prize-winning finding showing that a certain parasite could produce stomach cancer in rats, and that a different parasite produced this effect in Japan. They note these results only worked in animals that ate a high-sugar diet or were vaccinated, not in healthy animals. They then connect this to twentieth-century American policy: vaccination began with troops during World War I and continued in the military, then expanded to schoolchildren after World War II. The speaker predicts that vaccines at school would eventually affect broader segments of the population, not just children, and claims that vaccines have the effect of making people more susceptible to parasites, including those that cause cancer, not just toxoplasmosis. Regarding diet, the speaker mentions the food pyramid of the twentieth century, pointing out that the bottom consisted of carbohydrates, implying a link to susceptibility. The speaker then discusses bioweapons policy: in 1971, Nixon declared an end to the United States bioweapons offensive program and signed a treaty (they mention a 1978 figure, implying a multinational agreement). They claim that, despite this treaty, the Soviet Union and others violated it, and that perhaps everyone violated it. They assert that, at the same time the treaty was signed, Fort Detrick was converted from a bioweapons lab to be part of the National Cancer Institute. They compare this to Nazi Germany, stating that they hid bioweapons under cancer research, and claim that the United States did something similar. The transcription ends with emphatic agreement.

Multiple top microbiologists died under suspicious circumstances over a decade before the 2020 pandemic. Professor Wiley, an expert in human immune response and viruses like HIV and Ebola, was found dead in the Mississippi River after investigating dangerous viruses. Other renowned researchers specializing in infectious diseases and biological agents also died. Some were stabbed in car trunks, while others crashed their cars due to missing brake fluid. These scientists were connected to government projects related to bioterrorism, flu pandemics, or anthrax. A total of forty microbiologists were lost in less than four years, revealing connections to weapons research.

There's a hero we don't talk about enough, Jay Bart Classen, an MD and PhD who worked at NIAID alongside Dr. Anthony Fauci in the 1980s and is still at NIH. Classen wrote a peer-reviewed paper, published in Cy Vision, a biomedicine publication, alleging that the Mossad, using US assets, created COVID-19 as a bioweapon for genocide. He names specific Mossad agents and mentions Bill Gates, detailing his observations. I even spoke with Classen, who confirmed his findings, stating he has provided the best information he could. He urged us to spread the word. So, we're letting people know about this peer-reviewed research.

Dr. McCulloch is asked to weigh in. Speaker 1 responds that he has presented at FDA advisory meetings and advised companies for decades on regulatory science. He states that when a product definitely results in death, and there are thousands of peer-reviewed papers on this, the COVID vaccines in some people sadly result in death—some on the very first day they take the shot. He argues that this must be a black box warning on the product immediately. He says he checked the package inserts for the currently available products, noting that the ones Senator Blumenthal wants to pursue, and what the Governor still wants to pursue, and what the FDA still wants administered, do not have the word “death” in the package insert. He asserts that Americans are not fairly informed. Speaker 0 asks whether Speaker 1 doubts that the COVID injection caused some deaths, and asks for his view on the numbers listed on VAERS (thirty-seven thousand, six hundred seven, per the prompt) and whether he has any science to back up his opinion. Speaker 1 replies that the best data are autopsies. He references the largest autopsy series published to date and notes that he is the senior author. He says they examined deaths after vaccination, had an adjudication committee and methods of arbitration to decide whether the vaccine caused death, and that in these autopsy cases, seventy-three point nine percent of individuals, it was determined that the vaccine was the cause of death. He mentions Holsher and colleagues, who are right behind him. Speaker 0 reiterates the FDA’s own laws, asking that this be included in the package insert, correct? Speaker 1 confirms, noting that in 2021 Dr. Carol Tocetta, working with the Daily Cloud, wrote about Peters’ marks in 2023 and asked, “where’s the black box warning? Where is it?”

Ralph Barrick's collaboration with Ecohealth Alliance raises concerns about the transfer of advanced biotechnology to a lab controlled by the CCP, known for its interest in using bioweapons against the US. The involvement of Dr. Anthony Fauci and the CDC in bioweapons defense, tied to the Department of Defense (DoD), is a topic that remains unaddressed. Despite facing increased censorship and attacks for discussing this issue, the speaker vows to continue speaking out. While the speaker suspects a flawed intelligence operation, they lack evidence to support this claim at present.

Fauci allegedly funded bioweapons research in Wuhan indirectly through EcoHealth, a U.S. based nonprofit. Direct funding to China was supposedly avoided by using this intermediary. The speaker claims the term "gain of function" is a propaganda term. The speaker suggests "death maximization" is a more accurate description of gain of function research. The speaker implies that framing the research as "death maximization" would reveal the true nature of the work.

Just 2 weeks ago, Professor Francis Boyle issued an affidavit stating that mRNA COVID vaccines are bioweapons. He claims Croatians have unknowingly delivered weapons of mass destruction to their people. Boyle, a respected lawyer who drafted bioweapons laws in 1989, urges action to investigate. Failure to do so is the people's own fault.

Dr. Joseph Sanson, a Florida psychotherapist and licensed mental health counselor who litigates pro se, contends that the COVID-19 mRNA injections are biological and technological weapons of mass destruction and argues Florida should stop facilitating these injections and related products. He frames his effort as part of a broader effort to stop what he calls a bioweapon program tied to the pandemic. Background and filings - Sanson began in May 2021, working about 18 months to pass a band of jab resolution at the county level declaring mRNA COVID injections to be biological and technological weapons of mass destruction and urging action by the governor and attorney general. He claims that he got these resolutions passed in about 10 Florida counties, in Idaho, and in Arizona, and that they influenced the Florida Surgeon General to call for a halt to injections in early 2024. - He notes that the Florida Department of Health has said these mRNA injections are unsafe for humans and a potential threat to the human genome. - On 04/01/2023, while advancing these resolutions, Sanson says he suffered congestive heart failure and later underwent a triple bypass on 04/10/2023. He says he tried to rely on unvaccinated blood for surgery and consulted Dr. Francis Boyle, who helped endorse his band-and-jab resolution. Boyle is described as the author of the U.S. domestic implementation legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention; Boyle died about two months after Sanson filed his December 2024 case, which Sanson says prejudiced his case. - Sanson’s first mandamus filing claimed the governor and attorney general were violating Florida statute 797.166 (as he asserts). The court found the writ of mandamus improper (ministerial duty limit) and he lost the appeal. Second case and remedies sought - On 12/01/2024 Sanson filed a second case seeking an injunction and declaratory relief, arguing that his April 2023 medical events and exposures were the result of involuntary environmental exposure through shedding of the technology in the injections. - He characterizes his hospital stay, the decision to obtain unvaccinated blood, and Boyle’s involvement as part of this exposure theory. He says the case includes an 80-page complaint with 50–64 pages of affidavits, including nine affidavits up front and two more recently. - One key affidavit is from Francis Boyle, whose affidavit is described as not only expert legal opinion but legislative intent, given Boyle’s role in crafting the U.S. domestic implementation legislation for the biological weapons conventions. - The World Council for Health in Florida endorsed Sanson’s bill, and a 2025 paper titled COVID-19 Harms and Damages (COVID-19 harms and damages, non-exhaustive conclusion) is cited as stating that both the virus and the vaccine violated the Biological Weapons Convention; the paper has 11 coauthors, including doctors Villa, Zivjic, McCullough, and Maverkakis. Evidence and theory of harm - Sanson cites studies and affidavits suggesting shedding of the mRNA technology, transmission to unvaccinated individuals (including women), and possible environmental exposure from intimate contact or proximity. He references an Israeli study showing transmission of mRNA components to unvaccinated women and notes reports of menstrual-cycle interference and other immune effects. - He argues that involuntary environmental exposure through shedding constitutes a dangerous threat warranting injunctive relief under Florida Health Freedom Act and Civil Rights Act, as well as constitutional protections. He contends the Florida Surgeon General’s statements and the 2025 paper support these positions. - He also argues that the vaccines are illegal gain-of-function products, with derivatives of the spike protein present in injections, demonstrating specific intent; he cites Boyle’s arguments on gain-of-function, dual-use technology, and knowingness. He invokes malice of forethought (reckless disregard for human life) and informed consent issues, arguing there was zero informed consent for a bioweapon. Legal strategy and procedural posture - Sanson says his strongest immediate legal avenue is the Health Freedom Act, along with Civil Rights Act and constitutional provisions, rather than relying on the Weapons of Mass Destruction statute alone, which he dropped in an amended complaint. He argues the illness and exposure could violate civil and constitutional rights and that discovery is needed to develop evidence. - He claims the defense has not adequately addressed the merits, focusing on procedural arguments. He asserts there are procedural errors and seeks a new judge and evidentiary development, including testimony from multiple experts (Villa, Zeviets, Mihalchia) and the Surgeon General Ladapo under oath. - He has sought to reassign the case to a different judge due to perceived bias and past rulings; he notes the prior judge’s decision in a related whistleblower case against the Surgeon General. The Netherlands case and cross-border dimension - Sanson is involved as a witness in the Netherlands case against Bill Gates and Albert Borla of Pfizer, coordinated by Sasha Ladopova. The Netherlands appellate court limited live testimony, but Sanson has provided written statements and affidavits. A trial hearing in The Netherlands was set for October 22 in the cited case. Next steps - Sanson is pursuing an oral-argument motion for live, livestreamed proceedings; a decision is pending, potentially in September. He hopes for evidentiary development and more cases to challenge the PREP Act and related immunities. - He emphasizes public engagement and urges others to seek cases in other states or countries to push discovery and accountability. Overall, Sanson presents a narrative linking the mRNA vaccines to environmental shedding and alleged bioweapon characteristics, backed by affidavits, peer papers, and testimonies, and seeks injunctive relief in Florida and collaborative proceedings in Europe to halt the use and distribution of the injections.

Speaker 1 states that documents were signed to end federal funding and private corporation control of gain of function studies, which he claims the US military and intelligence agencies began in 1947. He says that by 1969, the CIA claimed they could kill the entire US population for 29¢ a person. According to Speaker 1, President Nixon ended this research and persuaded over 80 countries to sign the bioweapons charter in 1973, but US federal officials who violate it cannot be prosecuted. Speaker 1 claims that gain of function research relaunched a bioweapons arms race and that in 2014, three bugs escaped from US labs, leading President Obama to declare a moratorium that moved research offshore to the Wuhan Lab. He asserts that China, Russia, Iran, and other countries are developing devastating weapons using AI and CRISPR technologies. He says that gain-of-function research has never produced anything good, and commends President Trump for ending US bioweapons research.