I sent the agreement between Pfizer and the Israeli Ministry of Health to a top corporate lawyer.

When he went through the ‘redacted’ agreement, he found a few clues that show that parts of this agreement were simply ‘dropped in’ for public consumption, and actually change the whole picture.

Let’s walk through what’s really going on here.


First of all, go HERE to read the version of the agreement between Pfizer and the Ministry of Health, that was released to the public, including Israel’s Helsinki Committee.

Next, go HERE to read a short story explaining how what Pfizer and the Ministry of Health / State of Israel is doing is conducting an illegal human experiment on the residents of Israel.


Next, is the legal opinion from the head lawyer I asked to review the agreement between Pfizer and the Ministry of Health.

I’m interspersing it with screenshots from the agreement itself, to make it easier to say what’s being said.

Also, please note that in the sections where the lawyer noted the problems, the text is a different style and a different font – another big giveaway that this text was ‘dropped in’ to alter the original agreement. At the end of all this, I’ll sum up the issues in plain English.




(the “Agreement”)


Background and Summary:

  • I am a corporate lawyer of more than 20 years’ experience. In that time, I have drafted and reviewed hundreds, perhaps thousands, of contracts similar to the Agreement.


  • I have reviewed the Agreement which has been made available to the public (the “Public Version”), and it is my considered view that this Public Version has been redacted (amended or changed) from the original version.

My reasoning is set out below.


Key Findings:

  1. The document is a very well drafted Collaboration Agreement. The language and clarity make it clear that top US attorneys have been used to create this document. There is very little likelihood that any issues identified below are simply the result of ‘poor drafting’ or ‘poor legal advice’.

      2. The purpose of the document is to agree the sharing of certain health data between Israel and Pfizer.

The details of the form and nature of that data should be a principal term, if not the principal term of this Agreement.

If personally identifiable data (defined in the Agreement as “Identifiable Health Information”) is not to be disclosed to Pfizer then one would expect to see a section in the main body of the Agreement setting this out clearly. There is no such section in the Agreement.

My conclusion is therefore that the relevant section does not appear, because it wasn’t required by the parties.


  1. The only section in the entire Agreement which addresses the key issue of whether or not Israel is passing “Identifiable Health Information” to Pfizer, is simply found ‘tagged-on’ to the end of section 5.2:


5. There is no reason whatsoever to ‘tag-on’ one of the most important terms of this document on the end of a paragraph which has minor relevance to this key point. The purpose of section 5 is to regulate confidentiality between the parties.

The key provision which identifies the nature and type of data which is being passed to Pfizer should be in its own separate section.

It is not relevant to include this term here in section 5. All the moreso, it is wholly inappropriate to simply add this key provision on to the tail-end of an existing clause which is in fact related to an entirely separate point (namely, whether or not the parties’ representatives are also obligated under confidentiality).


Notice how this text is a different font and size from the text in the first two paragraphs of Section 5. All this stuff was dropped in after the original agreement was signed, to fool the public.


  1. When I conducted a word-search (using CTRL-F) to find instances of the phrase “Identifiable Health Information” in the Agreement, I was surprised to see that the search function did not pick up the mention of this phrase in clause 5.2.

On closer inspection, one can clearly see that the ‘readable PDF’ ends in the middle of clause 5.2 – just before the beginning of this strange insertion. The rest of this page (page 6) and the following page (page 7) are not ‘readable PDF’.

Rather, they have been inserted anew, and are not part of the original text.


  1. The same replacement of readable-PDF text takes place on page 4. I believe this occurs here in order to hide a significant section of text which has been removed.

In clause 3, the given text reads, “Both parties acknowledge that the viability and success of the Project is dependent on the rate and scope of vaccinations in Israel”.

The next line is blocked out.

It would make sense that this next line would then place an obligation on Israel to ensure a certain percentage of the population is vaccinated within a given timeframe.

Clearly, if that is the case, then Israel has obligated itself legally to rollout the vaccine as quick as possible, regardless of other concerns which may arise.


  1. Smaller ‘tell-tale’ signs of post-completion redaction of the Agreement include:

  2. Clause 1.8 has a definition of ‘Project Data’ (the data being passed from Israel to Pfizer).

The wording here is very unusual.

This definition is stated in the Agreement as

…any de-identified data provided by the MOH (Israel) to Pfizer…”.

The use of the word “de-identified” in this particular place is quite bizarre.

Firstly, its an uncommon and vague term, which has not been defined. And, secondly, the details of the nature of the “Project Data” deserve their own entire clause. It is unthinkable to simply squeeze the vague and undefined word “de-identifiable” in here as being a relevant part of the definition.


9. The third paragraph of clause 3 has a similar highly unusual expression which simply looks like it’s been conveniently ‘dropped-in’.

The wording used here is:

MOH (Israel) will share aggregate Project Data with Pfizer…

Again, the word “aggregate” stands out like a sore thumb. It has no purpose being here. There is no reasonable likelihood that a standard drafted agreement would use such a term here.

It has not been defined and would therefore simply lead to an obvious dispute if it were really inserted here.

It is also noticeable that there is a tell-tale extra space next to this word which has (perhaps) been left in error when it was ‘dropped in’.


10. Clause 6 (Indemnification and Limitation of Damages and Liability) has been entirely blocked out.

This is unusual.

This should be a standard ‘template’ section which has no sensitive information and no reason to block out. I am therefore surmising that this section actually states what is to happen if there is a data breach by Pfizer in respect of the Identifiable Health Information which has been passed to them.

If Pfizer are only receiving “de-identified” and “aggregate” data, then there would be no reason why this section would need to be blocked out.


11. Clause 10.6 has been largely blocked out, including the name of the clause.

This section is one of the standard ‘boiler plate’ terms which are included in almost all contracts.


There should, on the face of it, be no need to block this out (including even the name of the standard, boiler-plate clause!).

However, due to the fact that the last line has been left in, it is possible to understand what this clause said, and why it has been blocked out.

The remaining given text tells us that this clause covers the ability to make modifications to and to change the terms of the Agreement.

It is therefore very likely that the (blocked-out) name of this clause is “Changes to this Agreement” and the text which has been removed would have permitted either party (but certainly Israel) to amend the Agreement in a given circumstance.

One can surmise that such circumstances, perhaps, would including public criticism of its terms.

It is therefore quite likely this has been blocked out only to avoid the obvious implication that Israel has, as a result of public pressure, now amended the terms of this Agreement.


OK, ready for the plain English version of the legalese?

The main points are these:

  1. Large parts of this agreement between Pfizer and the Israeli Ministry of Health have been ‘dropped in’ after the original document was signed.

How do we know this?

There are two giveaway clues (apart from the obvious observation that these sections are the ones that are telling the public what private information the Israeli government has agreed to give to Pfizer; and also what ‘terms’ the State of Israel agreed to in terms of how many people they need to get vaccinated, within a particular timescale.)

i.    The font and text size for these ‘dropped in’ sections is different from that in the rest of the document.

ii.   These sections aren’t being recognised as part of the original document, when you use the ‘Control-F’ search function, and they also can’t be edited within the PDF.


2. The Ministry of Health has made an agreement with Pfizer with the following conditions:

In clause 3, the given text reads, “Both parties acknowledge that the viability and success of the Project is dependent on the rate and scope of vaccinations in Israel”.

The next line is blocked out.

It would make sense that this next line would then place an obligation on Israel to ensure a certain percentage of the population is vaccinated within a given timeframe.

Clearly, if that is the case, then Israel has obligated itself legally to rollout the vaccine as quick as possible, regardless of other concerns which may arise.


Go back and re-read that last paragraph.

Basically, the blacked out bit of the document sets out how many Israeli citizens need to be vaccinated (“scope”) and how quickly (“rate”), in order for the project to be ‘viable and successful’.

If this isn’t setting up a total conflict of interest, between the rights of you and me, and the ‘legal obligations’ of the MoH to Pfizer, then I’ll eat my hat.


If you take one point away from this post, this is it.

When an organisation is ‘under the gun’ to get as many people to do something within a specific time frame, they aren’t going to let anything derail that process.

Not questions about efficacity; not animal testing trials; not sensible pauses to evaluate reports of side effects in real time, not legal questions about whether people can and should be forced to participate….

We are mamash human guinea pigs in the biggest medical experiment since World War II.


3. If this was the real document that Pfizer agreed with the State of Israel, key terms should be much better defined.

For example, no-one knows what ‘de-identified’ personal data actually is.

What does that really mean?

Which bits are ‘de-identified?’ The name? The age? The personal history?

All this stuff would have been spelled out in detail in a real contract, that has millions and even billions of dollars riding on it.

In this fake, redacted doc, the term is left so vague as to be pointless.


Same thing with this:

MOH (Israel) will share aggregate Project Data with Pfizer…

In a REAL document, this term ‘aggregate Project Data’ would be identified in detail.

There would be paragraph after paragraph setting out what was included in ‘aggregate Project Data’, and what wasn’t.

This is how real contracts are drafted, because the more these details are ironed out in the contract, and every eventuality is covered, the less legal issues can blow up afterwards.


People, the Ministry of Health has released a different document to the public.

This is not the original document, even with all the ‘blacked out’ bits – which is another convenient way of getting the text to look like no significant deletions and additions occurred.

We need to take the blinkers off, and to stop agreeing to be guinea pigs in human medical trials.

Too many red lines are being crossed here, for this to be some innocent misunderstanding.

And of course, don’t forget this, from April 2019:


Notice that this interview was given by Moshe Bar Siman-Tov – that same guy who pushed us all into the first lock-down and mask-wearing coronafascism.


This has all been planned.

People in the Israeli government have sold us out to Pfizer for money.

The Ministry of Health is treating us all as labrats, in their big m-RNA, DNA-changing human experiment.

The Pfizer Vaccine experiment in Israel is illegal.

It’s against the Nuremburg Laws.

And I’m praying really, really hard that someone who can actually do something about this, legally, is going to take notice, and turn the tide around towards real public scrutiny and accountability about what is being done to the Israeli public, by who, and why.


You might also like this article:


10 replies
  1. Ana
    Ana says:

    Why do you assume that this agreement was made simply to receive money and not for more nefarious reasons? Based on your past posts, I would assume that’s a more likely possibility…

    Of course, it could “simply” be an “election ploy” for the PM to show that he figured out a way to get more vaccines than other countries and “quickly” open up the economy, etc etc etc…

    …but that sounds much more “derech hateva” than many other themes explored here over the past number of months…

    • Rivka Levy
      Rivka Levy says:

      Sorry, I don’t. I know Google Translate isn’t great, but it usually works better with ‘legal language’ in English, than with other forms, so it’s worth a try.

  2. Aron
    Aron says:

    Was there ever a hava mina that the real contracts are going to be made open to the public?

    Every vaccine is money. Every piece of private medical information is money. It’s really that simple. Don’t even have to dig any deeper than that to find billions and billions of $ motive.

    Put yourself in “their” shoes.. you control the media and the media can make anything real. Tons of people are stupid enough to buy the absurd illusion of security in the form of an experimental fake vaccine.

    “A sucker born every minute”

    My takeaway from all this is how low people actually sink when even the final vestiges of the corrupt light of the church are removed from them and they go back to hard avodah zarah.


    Hashem is bad for business, right? If I serve the Most High, I don’t have to “buy” anyones “solutions”..

    The secular West is over. It’s just another failed experiment. “They” want us to know it, too. None of this is “supposed” to survive. It was all built for the purpose of failing.. everyone knows man can’t live without worship..

  3. Hava
    Hava says:


    I’m sorry that I’m dragging you back here to this post with this comment. However…

    The MOH-Pfizer contract was linked to by other sites, including Tomer Devorah (in the comments section) through the Humans Are Free site.

    So I’m looking at the URL of the site where you located the contract, which is the same as the one Humans Are Free linked to, and found the homepage. Unless you have sussed out that govextra.gov.il is a legitimate part of the Israeli government’s website collection, I wonder who actually controls the site, and thus suspect anything stored there. I find it possible that someone else, even an individual having nothing to do with the government, controls the site, but who knows?

    Could this be where the govt hides things like the Pfizer contract? and more?

    curioser and curioser…


Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.