The Leaked Pfizer Contract(s) Is An Eye-Opener

ER Editor: We’re publishing a couple of takes on the so-called leaked Pfizer contract that first appeared months ago on an Albanian website. Kit Knightly of Off-Guardian takes a look at this particular contract in the first article; in the second, Mordecai Sones of America’s Frontline Doctors has gone much further with the help of an information security expert, Ehden Biber, who has tracked down Pfizer contracts from other countries. The question of authenticity persists, but expert eyes like Dr. Mike Yeadon‘s tend to view it as probably real.

Here we have legal evidence of corporations being above the nation state, with our bought-off ‘elected representatives’ being the weak link.

‘The state must defend Pfizer’

The second article highlights further how Israel – it’s PEOPLE – have been used and abused in various ways over the ‘vaccines’. Why?


Covid Vaccines: The “LEAKED” Pfizer Contract Troubling without being groundbreaking, the leaked document confirms a lot of what we already knew. But is it real?


An allegedly leaked vaccine supply contract between Pfizer and the government of Albania has sent some shockwaves through social media over the last few days.

It doesn’t contain any really groundbreaking information but, if it’s genuine, it certainly confirms the worst suspicions many of us had about the terms of the vaccine supply agreements.

The document was first published by the Albanian independent media outlet back in January, but came to prominence in the Anglosphere three days ago, when Twitter user Ehden posted a long thread breaking down its contents. His account has since been “limited” (we’ve all been there), but you can read his blog here.

In the interests of open discussion, and without endorsing its authenticity, we present the whole document below. We recommend anyone interested download it, just in case it disappears from the net, as potentially embarrassing documents tend to do.

So, is the document genuine?

That’s hard to say. It certainly wouldn’t be unprecedented for it to be a “honey trap” leak. A document that makes outlandish claims, which many in the alternate media run with, only for it to be debunked and discredit all those who reported it. It happens. It’s why you should always approach any “leak” with supreme caution.

But one argument for the contract’s authenticity is its lack of any “huge groundbreaking admission” that would be the hallmark of a fake leak.

Since it was posted by Ehden, other “contracts” have leaked, which contain similar language and clauses. But, as these aren’t 100% proven genuine either, it would be wrong to use them to corroborate each other.

Stronger evidence can be found on the website of the Israeli Ministry of Health, where they have a (heavily redacted) copy of their “REAL-WORLD EPIDEMIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE COLLABORATION AGREEMENT” with Pfizer (we downloaded a copy of that too, just in case.)

These two documents do have some strong similarities.

Under “definitions,” for example, both use the same word-for-word phrasing for the definitions of “product” and “affiliate(s)”. “Intellectual Property” is very similar too, as is a lot of the language under “Term and Termination”.

That is evidence that the document could be real…OR it’s evidence that good sources of Pfizer’s boilerplate legal contracts are available on the internet, as a useful resource for fakers. It cuts both ways.

There’s circumstantial evidence for the document’s authenticity, of course. The fact the Twitter account discussing it was “limited” almost immediately, for example. The fact it has been on the internet for nearly seven months and hasn’t been the subject of a single official denial by either party OR a “fact check” from one of those famous “independent fact-checkers”. These are all points in its favour.

As yet, it’s hard to be certain either way. But let’s say, for the sake of argument, that it’s real. What does it say?

A lot of the talk so far has been about the awful financial terms, but that’s not at all unusual in state contracts with private firms. The government agrees to terrible terms for the taxpayer, whilst accepting a back-hander here or there or a cushy job in the future. It’s the way the world works.

No, really, in the fifty-two pages, there are two key paragraphs that people should focus on.

First, under section 5.5 “Purchaser Agreements” [our emphasis]:

Purchaser acknowledges that the Vaccine and materials related to the Vaccine, and their components and constituent materials are being rapidly developed due to the emergency circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and will continue to be studied after provision of the Vaccine to Purchaser under this Agreement. Purchaser further acknowledges that the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known. Further, to the extent applicable, Purchaser acknowledges that the Product shall not be serialized.

This is simply logically irrefutable. Chemicals that have existed for less than year, by definition, have unknown long-term effects. (Which, incidentally, is what we got banned from Twitter for saying yesterday).

Second, under section 8.1 “Indemnification by the Purchaser” [again, our emphasis]

Purchaser hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Pfizer, BioNTech, each of their Affiliates, contractors, sub-contractors, licensors, licensees, sub-licensees, distributors, contract manufacturers, services providers, clinical trial researchers, third parties to whom Pfizer or BioNTech or any of their respective Affiliates may directly or indirectly owe an indemnity based on the research, development, manufacture, distribution, commercialization or use of the Vaccine, and each of the officers, directors, employees and other agents and representatives, and the respective predecessors, successors and assigns of any of the foregoing (“Indemnitees”), from and against any and all suits, claims, actions, demands, losses, damages, liabilities, settlements, penalties, fines, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees and other expenses of an investigation or litigation), whether sounding in contract, tort, intellectual property, or any other theory, and whether legal, statutory, equitable or otherwise (collectively, “Losses”) arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the Vaccine, including but not limited to any stage of design, development, investigation, formulation, testing, clinical testing, manufacture, labeling, packaging, transport, storage, distribution, marketing, promotion, sale, purchase, licensing, donation, dispensing, prescribing, administration, provision, or use of the Vaccine.

Essentially Pfizer is totally protected from any legal liability in the event their vaccine actually does have any of those aforementioned “adverse effects that are not currently known”. A later paragraph even says that the government must pay Pfizer’s legal fees in the event they get sued.

And there’s no reason, at all, to think this would be just an Albania thing. Clearly, if they included it in this contract, they included it in every contract. In South Africa, for example, it is known Pfizer demanded sovereign assets as be used collateral for their legal indemnity.


To sum up, if the document is real, Pfizer’s vaccine distribution contracts:

  • Acknowledge their product may not work.
  • Admit it might have unknown harmful effects.
  • Recognises they are likely to be sued if that’s the case.
  • Ensures legal protection of their huge profits.

We knew all that already. But it’s always good to get it in writing.

Many thanks to the reader who forwarded this story to us on Telegram. With our Twitter account currently “limited”, it’s more important than ever we use these alternative channels of communication. You can follow our telegram channel here.



Information security expert reveals Pfizer COVID jab contracts: ‘There’s good reason Pfizer fought to hide the details’

The revealed contract of COVID jab manufacturer Pfizer, was described as being ‘worse than it seems.’

Featured Image

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 30, 2021 (America’s Frontline Doctors) – Unredacted contracts for the experimental biological agent known as the “COVID-19 vaccine” between the Pfizer corporation and various governments continue to be revealed.

Information security expert Ehden Biber told America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) Frontline News that the first document to recently emerge was discovered by Albanian newspaper  Biber then was able to locate the digitally-signed Brazilian contract, and at least two others, one with the European Commission, and the other with the Dominican Republic.

AFLDS Chief Science Officer Dr. Michael Yeadon responded to the revelations after perusing the Albania contract, saying it “looks genuine.” He continued: “I know the basic anatomy of these agreements and nothing is missing that I’d expect to be present, and I’ve seen no clues that suggests it’s fake.”

Yeadon noted what he found “the most stunning revelation,” citing the clause that stipulates “if there are any laws or regulations in your country under which Pfizer could be prosecuted, you agree to CHANGE THE LAW OR REGULATION to close that off.” (emphasis his)

In a Twitter thread that has since been removed except the first tweet in the thread, Biber explained the significance of the revealed agreements: “Because the cost of developing contracts is very high and time consuming (legal review cycles), Pfizer, like all corporations, develop a standardized agreement template and use these agreements with relatively minor adjustments in different countries.

“These agreements are confidential, but luckily one country did not protect the contract document well enough, so I managed to get a hold of a copy.

“As you are about to see, there is a good reason why Pfizer was fighting to hide the details of these contracts.”

“First,” Biber continues, “let’s talk about the product: The agreement not only covers manufacturing of vaccines for COVID-19 and its mutations, but also for ‘any device, technology, or product used in the administration of or to enhance the use or effect of, such vaccine’.”

“If you were wondering why Ivermectin was suppressed, it is because the agreement that countries had with Pfizer does not allow them to escape their contract, which states that even if a drug will be found to treat COVID-19, the contract cannot be voided.”

“Supplying the product: ‘Pfizer shall have no liability for any failure to deliver doses in accordance with any estimated delivery dates… nor shall any such failure give Purchaser any right to cancel orders for any quantities of Product’.”

“‘Pfizer shall decide on necessary adjustments to the number of Contracted Doses and Delivery Schedule due to the Purchaser … based on principles to be determined by Pfizer … Purchaser shall be deemed to agree to any revision’.”

“Just to make it clear: ‘Purchaser hereby waives all rights and remedies that it may have at Law, in equity or otherwise, arising from or relating to:.. any failure by Pfizer to deliver the Contracted Doses in accordance with the Delivery Schedule’.”

“Once again: ‘Under no circumstances will Pfizer be subject to or liable for any late delivery penalties’,” noted Biber.

“You can’t return the product, no matter what,” he observed: “‘Pfizer will not, in any circumstances, accept any returns of Product (or any dose)…no Product returns may take place under any circumstances’.”

“Now for the BIG SECRET: $12 per dosage for about 250K units. Funny that this is the price for a small amount of dosages when Pfizer was charging the U.S. $19.50 per dose,” continued Biber.

“U.S. taxpayers got screwed by Pfizer, probably also Israel,” he suggested.

“About payment, the country has no right ‘to withhold, offset, recoup or debit any amounts owed to Pfizer, whether under this Agreement or otherwise, against any other amount owed (or to become due and owing) to it by Pfizer or a Pfizer Affiliate’.”

“Damaged goods: THE ONLY WAY to get a recall is if you can prove cGMP (Current Good Manufacturing Practice) fault,” explained Biber.

“‘For clarity, Purchaser shall not be entitled to reject any Product based on service complaints unless a Product does not materially conform to Specifications or cGMP’.”

“This agreement is above any local law of the state:

“Long-term effects and efficacy: ‘Purchaser acknowledges…the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known’.”

“Termination for cause: There are clauses about termination possibility, but in fact, as you saw so far, the buyer has almost nothing that can be considered a material breach, while Pfizer can easily do so if they don’t get their money or if they deem so,” added Biber.

“You must pay Pfizer for the dosages you ordered, no matter how much you consumed, regardless if Pfizer got it approved (it was a pre-EU approval) or if they delivered the Contracted Doses in accordance with any estimated delivery dates set forth herein,” he explained.

“‘Purchaser hereby agrees to indemnify, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS Pfizer, BioNTech (and) their Affiliates…from and against any and all suits, claims, actions, demands, losses, damages, liabilities, settlements, penalties, fines, costs and expenses…’”

“The state must defend Pfizer,” noted Biber: “ ‘(Pfizer) shall notify Purchaser of Losses for which it is seeking indemnification… Upon such notification, Purchaser shall promptly assume conduct and control of the defense of such Indemnified Claims on behalf of (Pfizer)’ ”:

“However, ‘Pfizer shall have the right to assume control of such defense… and Purchaser shall pay all Losses, including, without limitation, the reasonable attorneys’ fees and other expenses incurred’.”

“Pfizer is making sure the country will pay for everything: ‘Costs and expenses, including… fees and disbursements of counsel, incurred by the Indemnitee(s) in connection with any Indemnified Claim shall be reimbursed on a quarterly basis by Purchaser’ ”:

“Liability: ‘This shall not include, nor constitute, product liability insurance to cover any third party/patients claims and such general liability insurance shall be without prejudice to Purchaser’s indemnification obligation as set out in this Agreement’.”

“There is no limit to the liability of the country in case of ‘the indemnity given by it under Section 8 (Indemnification)’ or if the Purchaser failed to pay Pfizer:

“The Purchaser waives any right for immunity, it give up any law that might cap the obligation to pay damages to Pfizer. Comment: The court in New York has the capacity to hold international assets of a country if the country failed the contract.”

As for the “Condition to supply,” Biber noted: “Purchaser must provide Pfizer protection from liability for claims and all Losses, must implement it via statutory or regulatory requirements, and the sufficiency of such efforts shall be in Pfizer’s sole discretion.”

“Confidentiality, part 1: ‘Each Recipient shall safeguard the confidential and proprietary nature of the Disclosing Party’s Confidential Information with at least the same degree of care as it holds its own confidential or proprietary information of like kind’”:

“Confidentiality, part 2: ‘Recipient shall disclose Confidential Information only to such of its Representatives who have a need to know such Confidential Information to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement’”:

“Confidentiality, part 3: The contract must be kept confidential for 10 years. Why 30 years in Israel?” questioned Biber.

“‘The provisions of this Section 10 (Confidential Information) shall survive the termination or expiration of the this Agreement for a period of ten (10) years’”:

“Arbitration and governing laws: Arbitration must be done in New York, in according to Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce, governed by the laws of the State of New York, USA:

“If a specific ministry was assigned to safeguard the contract, they must continue to so: ‘…attempted assignment of rights or delegation or subcontracting of duties without the required prior written consent of the other Parties shall be void and ineffective’.”

Biber explained how he came across the contract and thus revelaed it to the world. “I first stumbled upon a document, called KONTRATEN-E-PLOTE which translates to ‘read the full contract’. Only later I discovered it was an Albanian website that has published it on January 2021. They deserve ALL the credit for the leakage of the document, and journalists around the world deserves the shame for not discovering and reporting it.”

“Countries might claim they negotiated a better deal,” he added. “But based on the evidence we have received from South America, it seems this contract is real, and that it’s similar to what was used worldwide.”

“‘One Health Ministry official, Yaron Niv, said in a separate Kan interview that each dose cost Israel $62.’ Netanyahu is indeed a magician – he got Israel to pay 5 times more than Albania and made people worship him for this BAD deal.”

“This contract is actually worse than it seems,” observed Biber.

“Current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP) is regulated by the FDA. cGMP will tell you NOTHING about mRNA, because we never had cGMP of mRNA vaccine, so you cannot prove cGMP malpractice.”

“Addendum: Former president of Pfizer in Brazil and CEO for Latin America testified to the Brazilian committee that Pfizer demanded the same condition for vaccine purchase from all countries:

“Former president of Pfizer in Brazil and CEO for Latin America Carlos Murillo today said in testimony to the COVID CPI that the clauses proposed by the pharmaceutical company for the offer of vaccines to Brazil are not ‘preeminent’, as stated by the former minister of Eduardo Pazuello Health.

“According to Murillo, Pfizer demanded from all countries the same conditions for the purchase of vaccines against COVID-19. In addition, he said that claims that the drug maker would have demanded state assets such as embassies and military bases as collateral are not correct. ‘It’s distorted information,’ he declared.”

Biber concluded: “To those who think it is a fake: My university law professor said laws are like computer code. They use legal functions, and variables, and processes. I worked in Big Pharma, I reviewed many contracts in my career, and this document seems to me as real as can be.”

“I wrote this on the 13th of July:

‘Israel has turned into a pharmaceutical Banana Republic, where the priorities of a multinational supersedes the priorities of its citizens. It is no longer the Jewish motherland, it is Pfizerland.”

Reprinted with permission from America’s Frontline Doctors


Published to The Liberty Beacon from


The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)


Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.


Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.