FINALLY A GOVERNMENT ( SOUTH AFRICA ) CONTRACT WITH PFIZER FOR THE JABS HAS BEEN PUBLISHED
From Jeff Childers
A few weeks ago on August 17th, after more than a year of painful litigation, the South African high court forced its government to release the original 2021 jab contracts. So the public can now view the full scope of maladroit, malignant, and mendacious government misfeasance in a fully-disclosed, unredacted Pfizer “Manufacturing and Supply” agreements.
The newly-disclosed contract between Pfizer and the Republic of South Africa is dated March 30th, 2021 — four months after the jab rollout started in America. Both the South African government and Pfizer hysterically opposed releasing the contract. A heroic South African citizens group spent over a year and who knows how much money forcing its release; meanwhile the government and Pfizer used TAXPAYER money to slow it down and try to stop it.
Spoiler: only someone in John Fetterman’s condition would have signed this contract.
The agreement defines “Purchaser” as the government of the Republic of South Africa. Under Section 5.5 (“Purchaser Acknowledgement”), clearly spelled out in black and white, Pfizer admitted it had no idea what the jabs might do or might not do in the long run, or whether they would even work at all, shifting all the risk completely to the South African government.
In Section 5.5’s first sentence, Pfizer admitted it hadn’t even yet finished studying the vaccines’ “components and constituent materials.” Think about that. Turn that around in your mind and pitilessly examine it from every angle. Compare that admission to all the public messaging from the CDC and all its white-coated, grant-grabbing pretend doctors.
In English, Pfizer was saying, look, we’re not even sure what’s in these things.
And South Africa said, sure, that’s cool with us.
Not to belabor the point but, while in its confidential legal agreements Pfizer was saying they weren’t even sure what the shots included, what we were being publicly assured was that the shots were the most studied vaccines in history, not to mention the safest and most effective ones — ever. Ever, ever. Ninety-five percent effective. You remember.
Section 5.5’s second sentence is arguably even worse. It included two different disclaimers. The first disclaimer expressly says that South Africa AGREED that “the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known.”
“Not currently known.” In other words, Pfizer said we have no idea what it’s going to do to people, or whether it even works.
Haha! There it is, in black and white, three months after first responders and healthcare workers in the U.S. had all gotten the jabs and just before the “vaccinate or terminate” mandates started rolling out. Do you remember our vaunted public officials saying anything about unknown long-term effects? Did President Robert L. Peters ever say “the long-term effects and efficacy” were unknown? Did anyone in charge ever say that?
Nope. They said the reverse opposite.
The second disclaimer may be the most reprehensible of all. On behalf of its citizens, South Africa obsequiously agreed that “there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known.”
Oh. Thanks for letting us know.
That’s bad enough. But combine the two sentences together, and what you get is Pfizer saying they don’t know what’s in the jabs, what it’s going to do to people, and it might even kill them, for all Pfizer knew.
And South Africa said, Sounds great! How many can we get?
Needless to say, Section 5.5 is not a standard provision in a government contract for goods, even in an emergency. Normally, purchasing contracts contain guarantees of performance standards. Imagine the South African government were buying generators, or solar power stations, and the seller’s contract said “we don’t know whether these generators will work, and they might even explode and take down the power grid when plugged in.”
Who but a drooling moron would sign such a contract? And what lawyer would ever let his moronic client sign it?
It gets worse. Section 8 of the contract is titled “Indemnification.” It says that if Pfizer is ever sued by anyone — for any reason — because of the shots, then South Africa must pay for Pfizer’s complete defense, and then pay any judgment if Pfizer loses.
Since South Africa is, essentially, made up of its own citizens and their tax money, the contract basically says citizens have to pay for their own injuries.
You’re welcome, citizens!
And, since South Africa agreed the jabs might not work, and agreed Pfizer wasn’t guaranteeing the jabs wouldn’t hurt people, South Africa cannot ever claim it was fraudulently induced into the contract, or that Pfizer has provided a defective product.
So. Now we know why the governments are working so hard to deny the jabs are dangerous and gaslight the victims, for the simple reason they don’t want to have to pay for the massive claims. You couldn’t conceive a more diabolical agreement if you tried. All the incentives are completely backwards.
How on Earth could this happen? It happened through a dark, demonic combination of two anti-democratic factors: executive authority and government secrecy. Emergency executive authority meant that rank-and-file legislators were kept out of the loop. Had this contract been debated in South Africa’s congress, it never would have been approved.
Second, official secrecy — keeping the Pfizer agreement’s terms ‘confidential’ — allowed the executive health authorities to agree to anything, even something this bad, because they faced no public scrutiny or outcry. Citizens were forced to assume good faith, that the contract was carefully-negotiated and included normal buyer protections.
The citizens were 100% wrong, of course, but they had no way to know it. The critical terms of their mandated jabs were officially “confidential.”
How is that “informed consent?”
I would bet a year’s salary that every Pfizer contract in the world includes the same protective provisions. But one thing I am completely sure of is that government lawyers knew how bad the contracts were. A hundred percent. The Pfizer contract isn’t tricky or ambiguous, it’s painfully clear. Non-lawyers can read and understand it just fine. But health authorities obviously overrode their lawyers, which raises the most intriguing question of all: why?
If one person in the executive branch had the power to approve something like this, and it was always intended to remain deeply buried under all the other odious state secrets, then it would have been trivial to … incentivize … that one person to overcome their normal concerns.
In other words, I would bet my right hand somebody got paid.
Anyway, thanks to the South Africans, we are one more baby step closer to unraveling this hideous atrocity.
Link to the contract
https://healthjusticeinitiative.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/OCRPfizer-1_Redacted.pdf
Fraus Omnia Vitiat is a Latin phrase. It means ‘fraud vitiates everything.’ The phrase is seen used in relation to contract law.
Prove fraud – easily done with adequate investigatory power, and easily within government’s purview – string them up, and bankrupt them. This is not rocket science. They are not above the law even if they pretend they are.