Daily Archives: December 18, 2025

Nick Rockefeller Vaccine Lawsuit

Posted on by
Reply

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE [INSERT DISTRICT]

BRUNO JUKIC, Individually and as Parent and Natural Guardian of LUKA JUKIC, a minor, Plaintiff,

v.

NICK ROCKEFELLER, et al. Defendants.

Case No.: _

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff, BRUNO JUKIC, appearing pro se, brings this action against Defendant NICK ROCKEFELLER for damages arising from the neurological injury of his son, LUKA JUKIC, and alleges as follows:

I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action based on diversity of citizenship and federal questions regarding public health safety standards.

Venue is proper in this district as the injuries complained of occurred within this jurisdiction.

II. PARTIES
Plaintiff Bruno Jukic is a resident of [Insert State/City] and is the father of Luka Jukic.

Defendant Nick Rockefeller is identified as a representative of interests involved in global health policy and pharmaceutical influence.

III. STATEMENT OF FACTS
Medical Injury: Plaintiff alleges that Luka Jukic was administered vaccines containing mercury (Thimerosal/Quicksilver), which directly resulted in a diagnosis of autism and subsequent loss of verbal capacity.

Scientific & Literary Basis: Plaintiff cites the documentary Vaxxed (produced by Del Bigtree and championed by Robert De Niro) as evidence of a cover-up regarding the link between vaccines and autism.

Institutional Intent: Plaintiff references the work Murder by Injection by Eustace Mullins, alleging a long-standing conspiracy within the medical-industrial complex to weaken the population through mandatory injections.

IV. CAUSES OF ACTION
COUNT I: Strict Liability (Failure to Warn) 8. The Defendants promoted medical products without disclosing the neurotoxic risks of mercury derivatives.

COUNT II: Violation of Human Rights & Biblical Enigma 9. Plaintiff asserts that the mass vaccination program is an attempt to influence or “crack” biological codes related to Biblical prophecy, infringing upon the religious and bodily autonomy of the Jukic family.

COUNT III: Creation of Vulnerable Victims (Negligence) 10. Plaintiff alleges that by rendering children non-verbal through neurological injury, the Defendants have intentionally created a class of “helpless victims.” 11. Plaintiff cites the Casa Pia scandal in Portugal and the Madeleine McCann disappearance as evidence of a global climate where vulnerable or autistic children are targeted by predatory networks because they lack the verbal capacity to report abuse to authorities.

V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants for:

Compensatory damages for Luka Jukic’s medical care and lifelong support;

Punitive damages for willful negligence;

A formal investigation into the intersection of pharmaceutical policy and child safety.

Dated: December 18, 2025 Signed: ______________ Bruno Jukic, Plaintiff

What do you think of this post?
  • Awesome (0)
  • Interesting (0)
  • Useful (0)
  • Boring (0)
  • Sucks (0)

Hell’s Angels Lawsuit Against Mick Jagger

Posted on by
Reply

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE [INSERT DISTRICT]

THE HELLS ANGELS MOTORCYCLE CLUB, Plaintiff,

v.

SIR MICHAEL PHILIP JAGGER, SECRET INTELLIGENCE SERVICE (MI6), AND DOES 1-20, Defendants.

Case No: _________ COMPLAINT FOR: CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT MURDER, RELIGIOUS EXPLOITATION, AND VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS

I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

  1. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter based on the diverse citizenship of the parties and the claims arising under international law and civil rights statutes.
  2. Venue is proper as the underlying events related to the “Satanic sacrifice” and the actions of the “Agent Provocateurs” occurred within this jurisdiction.

II. PARTIES

  1. Plaintiff: The Hells Angels Motorcycle Club (HAMC), an organization targeted for infiltration and manipulation.
  2. Defendant Mick Jagger: An individual who, Plaintiff alleges, suffers from messianic delusions and has claimed the identity of “Lucifer the Lightbringer” as referenced in Revelation 12 and 14.
  3. Defendant MI6: The British Secret Intelligence Service, alleged to have facilitated these actions through undercover operatives.

III. STATEMENT OF FACTS

  1. The Messianic Claims: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Jagger claimed to be the master of the Hells Angels, equating the club to the “one-third of the ANGELS of heaven” cast down in the Book of Revelation.
  2. The Altamont Incident: Plaintiff alleges that the death of a Black man at the Altamont Free Concert was not an accident or a matter of security, but a pre-meditated “Satanic sacrifice” orchestrated by Jagger and MI6 agents.
  3. Infiltration: Plaintiff alleges that MI6 used agent provocateurs to manipulate members of the HAMC into participating in or taking the blame for this event to further Jagger’s “Luciferian” delusions.

IV. CAUSES OF ACTION

COUNT I: CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT MURDER Defendants Jagger and MI6 did knowingly and willfully conspire to arrange the death of a human being for the purposes of a ritual sacrifice.

COUNT II: INCITEMENT AND EXPLOITATION Defendant Jagger used his influence and “messianic delusions” to attempt to subvert the leadership of the HAMC, causing internal strife and legal jeopardy for its members.

V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court grant the following relief:

  • Criminal Referral: That the Court refer Defendant Jagger and his MI6 handlers for prosecution for the murder of the African man.
  • Incarceration: That Defendant Jagger and the identified MI6 agents be sentenced to one hundred (100) years in a high-security facility.
  • Internal Discipline: A judicial recommendation that any member of the HAMC found to have knowingly sided with Defendant Jagger in his “Luciferian” capacity serve one (1) day in jail as a symbolic purification and legal reprimand.
  • Damages: Punitive damages for the reputational harm caused to the Hells Angels.

Dated: December 18, 2025 Respectfully Submitted,

(Your Signature)

Important Considerations

  • Statute of Limitations: Most jurisdictions require a lawsuit for personal injury or wrongful death to be filed within 2–3 years of the event. To move forward, you would likely need to argue “fraudulent concealment” (that the MI6 involvement was hidden).
  • Sovereign Immunity: MI6, as a foreign government agency, generally has immunity from being sued in U.S. courts unless specific exceptions apply.
What do you think of this post?
  • Awesome (0)
  • Interesting (0)
  • Useful (0)
  • Boring (0)
  • Sucks (0)

James Bond Versus The Tate Brothers

Posted on by
3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE KING’S BENCH DIVISION CLAIM NO: TB-2025-007

BETWEEN:

(1) EMORY ANDREW TATE III (2) TRISTAN TATE (Claimants)

– AND –

COMMANDER JAMES BOND, CMG, RNVR (Acting Agent of MI6) (Defendant)

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

I. THE PARTIES

  1. The Claimants, Emory Andrew Tate III and Tristan Tate (the “Tate Brothers”), are British-American businessmen and public figures of African-American descent. They characterize themselves as self-made entrepreneurs who sought to achieve the “American Dream” and provide a “taste of the good life” to their followers.
  2. The Defendant, James Bond, is a Senior Intelligence Officer for the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6). The Claimants allege that the Defendant operates under the protection of “Crown Immunity” and is a high-ranking member of an “Arch-Masonry” cabal—a shadowy, untouchable elite that dictates global affairs.

II. THE ALLEGATIONS: THE “TRUE VILLAIN” NARRATIVE

  1. The Claimants contend that the Defendant, James Bond, is the primary architect and logistical supplier of the very international networks the Claimants are accused of managing.
  2. Specifically, the Claimants allege that MI6, under Bond’s direction, utilizes clandestine “honey pot” operations to destabilize foreign interests. The Claimants assert that they have been “framed” as a diversion to mask Bond’s role as the true supplier of the global underworld infrastructure.

III. THE RACIAL DEFENSE & SYSTEMIC BIAS

  1. The Claimants assert that their prosecution is a result of systemic institutional racism. They argue that as two successful men of African descent, they have been targeted by the “Old Boys’ Network” of the British Establishment.
  2. The Claimants maintain that while Bond—a white, “Arch-Mason” elite—is permitted to travel the globe with a “license to kill” and engage in unchecked hedonism, the Tate Brothers are vilified for seeking the same luxury.
  3. The Claimants argue:

“The system cannot tolerate two African brothers escaping the ‘Matrix’ and achieving a level of influence reserved for the Masonic elite. Bond is the protected face of the establishment; we are the scapegoats used to distract from his illicit activities.”

IV. THE “ARCH-MASON” CONSPIRACY

  1. The Claimants allege that Bond’s status as an “Untouchable Arch-Mason” grants him immunity from the law. They contend that the Defendant’s various “missions” are actually rituals of the elite used to consolidate power and suppress minority voices who threaten the status quo.
  2. They further allege that Bond’s “Girls”—often characterized as “Bond Girls” in popular culture—are actually victims of a state-sponsored supply chain managed by MI6 to compromise foreign diplomats.

V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

The Claimants seek:

  • Immediate Dismissal of all pending charges against them, citing “Establishment Entrapment.”
  • A Public Inquiry into the clandestine activities of the Defendant and his “Arch-Mason” affiliations.
  • Damages in the amount of £500,000,000 for defamation, loss of earnings, and racial profiling.

Statement of Truth

The Claimants believe that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true.

Signed: __________________________ Dated: December 18, 2025

What do you think of this post?
  • Awesome (0)
  • Interesting (0)
  • Useful (0)
  • Boring (0)
  • Sucks (0)