(0:07 - 5:49) Most of you are aware by now of the collusion between Big Pharma, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the WEF, the WHO, the Chinese government and others to promote the COVID narrative and to produce billions of doses of a supposed COVID vaccine. At last count, if you believe the official numbers, over 5 billion people worldwide have been injected with these products. So far, hundreds of millions of people have suffered severe adverse reactions and as a conservative estimate, over 20 million have died. Birth rates around the world have dropped dramatically, while stillbirths have skyrocketed to levels never seen before. And undoubtedly, many hundreds of millions of young people have been sterilised and will never have children. What you might not know is that in addition to the other entities involved in this conscious attack upon humanity, the vaccine development and manufacturing industry is being heavily funded by the U.S. military-industrial complex. Tens of billions of dollars have been simply handed out by the U.S. Department of Defence to vaccine manufacturers and suppliers, while at the same time, they have activated a complex legal structure which has been building for decades to absolve all parties of responsibility for the harms caused and to hide those activities under layers of bureaucracy. Sasha Latypova is a former executive and lead researcher for companies that conducted clinical trials of pharmaceutical products. She has uncovered absolute proof positive that the entire vaccine manufacturing complex is not only heavily funded by the Department of Defence, but in actuality is controlled by them. Laws do not apply. Clinical trials were not performed. Manufacturing practise guidelines were completely ignored. Contracts to supply the injections to other countries stipulate that they are not allowed to subject them to independent testing. Here with the proof and the links where you can confirm all of this for yourself is Sasha Latypova. Further information beyond what we will cover today in this in-depth interview can be found on her substack at sashaladapova.substack.com. Ms. Latypova, welcome to the show. What you're about to see and what you're about to find out is going to take things to a whole new level in your understanding of what's going on behind the scenes, behind this entire COVID narrative. Sasha, please. This is one of my presentations. I've been looking into this problem, the COVID situation, since almost the beginning. I first looked at VAERS data, did a lot of analysis and later on as the FOIA documents started becoming available, I started reading more of the FOIA information from different manufacturers and also now we have a lot of Department of Defence contracts became FOIA then available and posted online. Overall, this presentation is about summarising the intent behind the so-called COVID response, which in my opinion is intentional harm caused by a consortium or an enterprise. In fact, all sorts of governments are co-investors, including U.S. government, Canadian, Chinese, Israeli, Europeans, Australians, Singapore, practically all of them, all of the nations which are part of the WEF and all those global organisations and WHO. They are jointly running this operation with the U.S. leading it for a lot of items and obviously I have more access to the U.S. and more interest in it, so I'm looking at it from this perspective. It's definitely a joint venture and it's a joint enterprise of the governments against the people of the world against us. That's my summary, summarising how this is done, the legal framework in the U.S. And if I could just interject something, folks, don't discount what Sasha is about to tell us because she's talking about the U.S. This is actually something that's important on a global scale because remember, these pharmaceutical companies that are being funded by the U.S. government, as you're about to see, well, they're the ones that are producing these billions of doses that are being shipped around the world. So it's not just the U.S. that we're really talking about here. All we're talking about here is where's the money coming from? All of our community, we see it very clearly. We see that these products, these injections are toxic by design. This has been brought up many, many times before. A lot of scientific literature, historical, that I have reviewed and a lot of prominent scientists talked about it, that these products cannot possibly be safe. There are numerous mechanisms, over 20 different mechanisms of injury built right into the design of these products. So that's very important to understand. So far, we have a lot of outcomes data now over two years of various surveillance databases that all point to the same thing. There's horrific deaths and and so definitely there's no safety in these products. Obviously there's no efficacy there. There are many studies pointing this way, the mortality, the all cause mortality data shows it, but also we know that there's negative efficacy now. There are two recently, large studies were published, one from Kaiser Permanente, which is a California healthcare provider and insurer of their 120,000, I believe, employees that they forced mandated to vaccinate. So Cleveland Clinic did the same. They published data on their employees that they also forced vaccinated. (5:50 - 7:41) And they have demonstrated that the more injections you get, the more COVID you get. These injections amongst other things and other types of injury, they also cause people to get more so-called COVID illness, which is still not quite clear what that is, but in my opinion, it's more like a collapse of the immune system and breakdown and destruction of the own cells. And then you also, because your immune system is so destroyed, you pick up all sorts of infections, opportunistic infections that are around. What my focus was at the beginning was on manufacturing aspects of these products. And I concluded, and it was very easy to actually demonstrate that there is no good manufacturing practise compliance for these products. They're not manufactured as pharmaceuticals. They don't follow any quality rules. They violate all sorts of laws that exist in the U.S. and exist worldwide about manufacturing of pharmaceuticals and also import expert. So every single thing is wrong and broken. And nobody seems like nobody from the authorities seems to be paying attention to it or enforcing any of these good manufacturing practise laws. We also know that there is malignant policy worldwide from all the governments that are participating in this. And there's obviously lies, a lot of lies, fear-mongering together with mainstream media sources. Obviously they're co-conspirators and they're covering up injuries and deaths. They're gaslighting the public. They persecute anybody who is dissent or journalists, especially doctors, if they're dissenting or if they're speaking up or giving exemptions or prescribing the early treatments that actually do work, then they get prosecuted by the government. (7:41 - 8:39) And that's particularly clear in Canada. There's very flagrant cases, but also in the U.S., there's so many doctors that have been prosecuted for trying to treat their patients and trying to be a good doctor. And also, of course, all of this in collusion with media, hugely perverse financing of all of the above. So again, in the U.S., U.S. government simply prints money, trillions of it, and gives it to all of their co-conspirators, which is the media, the academic institutions, hospitals, especially, you know, hospital systems, schools and employers. The employers are getting money from the government. Also, you know, just these grants to institute mandates, to wear masks, to do all this ridiculous stuff. The schools, again, they get funding from the government, large amounts of funding from the government. And the condition is children must be masked, children must be vaccinated. You know, so that's the perverse funding that is getting distributed everywhere. (8:40 - 12:01) So and at that point, you know, people are always asking, so this is all horrible and why nobody's taking any action, why there is no action by regulators or by the courts. And so the next part is, you know, I'm going to explain the legal structure and how this is implemented in law in the United States. This is based on the research of my colleague Catherine Watt, and she's a paralegal and a journalist, and she's done extremely extensive investigation of U.S. legal history and put together, I would say, an encyclopaedia of law on this matter. I advise everyone to subscribe to her sub stock. It's called Bailiwick News. And there you can read all this in detail. And she has a lot of very helpful documents for for lawyers, especially, or anybody who is interested in this. There's a lot of stuff and it goes back. I mean, she traced it back to the Civil War. But the most recent, let's say, set of laws that were put in place that are being used here first is the in the U.S. is its emergency use authorisation. So this was introduced in 97 under Clinton administration. And this was a piece of law that allowed FDA to authorise products that were otherwise not approved or a use over, you know, unapproved use of an approved medication or an entirely new medication for what they call emergency use. And at that time, it's normally these things. I mean, typically how they introduce these things that they said, oh, it's a very limited. It's only for certain cases. It's only when there are key criteria for there's like four criteria that have to be met to enable this. But one of the key criteria is that there are no alternative treatments. This is something that my viewers know, but some will not. The reason why medications like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine were discredited is because under that emergency use authorisation, they cannot give emergency use approval to a vaccine if a safe and effective treatment already exists. And so they had to discredit these very effective, very cheap treatments so that they could use the emergency use authorisation to push through the vaccines. That was the explanation why there was such an incredible campaign of smearing and suppression of these otherwise pretty safe, you know, with long history, very, very well known products that everybody knew how to use and, you know, cheap and available and actually they work. So that was one. The second piece of legislation that's used here, it's called Other Transaction Authority. The most, you know, recent implementation of it for these purposes was in 2015. However, the practise goes back to even the 60s in the US. They originally allowed, so Other Transaction Authority means other than, it's a carve out. There are normally regulated ways of contracting for the government and they are regulated and accountable. And you have to, you know, you have to designate whatever you're doing needs to be designated into one of these categories that says, you know, it's a procurement, it's a grant, it's a research collaboration, it's something, something, and then certain regulatory requirements apply. Now they, in their brilliance, obviously the US government since the 60s were saying, well, you know, sometimes we want to do other, which is unregulated. And then the first Other was for NASA in the 60s, but then it obviously expanded. (12:01 - 16:28) And now all, well, 11 federal government agencies use it. And Department of Defence is particularly fond of this method of contracting because under Other, you don't have to follow any regulations. You don't, you're not accountable. You can do whatever you like. And that's why they're doing it. That enables Department of Defence to order undisclosed military prototypes from private industry that is otherwise regulated and not follow any regulations. But all COVID countermeasures, which includes vaccines, therapeutics, masks, swabs, tests, even staffing, and many other things have been contracted using this Other transaction Authority, meaning secret, unregulated, we don't have to follow any regulations. And all of this is a prototype. Finally, when this becomes, you know, kind of like clicks into place is with this public health emergency announcement and PREP Act. So these two other pieces are extremely important. So public health emergency is basically, it's a law that they put in place. Trump invoked it basically in 2020, when they went along with WHO's pronouncement assertion, based on no data, based on 40 cases out of 8 billion people worldwide, that there is a global pandemic, you know, of a novel virus. These were just statements that WHO made. And WHO is not government, is not accountable to anybody, doesn't have any legal authority over everyone, yet, all of our governments went right along, right. So that's very, very interesting. So including Trump, who says, Oh, yeah, we have public health emergency, announces it, and then all of this legal cage slams on all of us. That's how it is. So then under public health emergency, what happens is a very, very important piece of law comes in play. And it's cited here, which says that use of emergency use authorised medical countermeasures, which DOD ordered through OTA contracting, once designated as such, by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, which he can do whenever he likes, under the public health emergency, they shall not be considered to constitute the clinical investigation. So that's extremely important. These countermeasures cannot be clinical investigational products or devices or drugs or whatever. So because these products are not pharmaceuticals, they're not pharmaceuticals, they're not drugs, they're not medical devices, they're not vaccines, they're other, they're these countermeasure, vaguely defined countermeasure prototypes. And I want to clarify what you're saying, Sasha. Under this legal structure they've created of this other category, it doesn't matter that they're called vaccines. It doesn't matter that they come from a pharmaceutical company. Under that category, they don't count as that. And therefore, they don't fall under anybody's purview to regulate them. Yep, exactly. You know, when they're saying, oh, you know, vaccine, safe and effective, they're using what's called, you know, nouns and adjectives instead of legally defined terms. So in pharmaceutical regulation, when you call something safe and effective, it's a legally defined term, you have to actually prove it. Yet we observe everyone there on TV and the regulators going and doing just that. Just to continue these countermeasures, okay, so how they're getting deployed. So if FDA doesn't approve them and doesn't put them on the market, who does? Well, turns out that in the US, it's up to the sole authority of the Health and Human Services Secretary, who is under Trump was Alex Azar. And currently it's Xavier Becerra. This is what the law says, again, so under this Public Health Emergency and Public Health Safety Act, the HHS, which is Health and Human Services Department in the US can decide whenever they like, with no criteria whatsoever, that there is a public health emergency, and then they can announce it themselves. And there is no way to unannounce it. And then HHS Secretary and his sole authority can decide based on the scientific data available, if available, so it doesn't have to be available. If he decides that they may be effective, then they go on the market, and then they get injected into every man, woman and child in the United States. There's no criteria for what may be effective. (16:28 - 17:38) It's entirely the opinion of the HHS Secretary. And so that leads me to another question, because we're talking here about the avoidance of any kind of legal liability under the way they've structured this. Would the HHS Secretary have liability? No, they're all protected. So again, this is by these illegal laws. None of this is constitutional, by the way. I don't agree that this is lawful. I think that everyone should pursue criminal responsibility, specifically these individuals, including Alex Azar, including Xavier Becerra, including Trump, including Biden, including all of them who have participated in this, should be held criminally liable, because all of these laws that I'm describing are illegal laws. These are the things that our neutered Congress authorised over years. They don't debate the laws. They don't read what they're signing. They get shoved thousands of pages of so-called acts and laws, which nobody has ever read, other than people who write those laws who are not Congress. And so over the years, they put this absolute nonsense that I'm citing here in place. (17:38 - 18:03) This is just explanation why no regulatory agency did anything to stop this, and no courts, by the way, either, because this also has a lot of preemption of judicial review. So all of this is judicially not reviewable, and they can continue committing these crimes. And there certainly isn't going to be any prosecution by government lawyers, because, as you pointed out in your Substack article related to this, government lawyers were defending Pfizer. (18:04 - 18:06) Oh, yes. We'll get to that. We'll get to that. (18:06 - 19:39) Right. So that's what we have. We have this dictatorship. I'm sure there's something similar in Canada. The public health officers here are essentially absolute dictators. So basically, that means that the vaccine development and approval is actually a fake performance art. It's just fakery to convince the public that there really is a health crisis, that really these are pharmaceuticals and they're manufactured by pharmaceutical companies, and therefore everyone should trust them and get injected. It explains this curious use of word demonstration in DoD contracts, which we find over and over and over again. That's exactly what DoD ordered from the pharmaceutical companies, a demonstration. So they're demonstrating something to the public to convince them to go and get injected. So like DoD contract for Pfizer was for $10 billion. It's a huge amount of money. Even for Pfizer, it's a huge amount of money. They're saying, OK, well, we are ordering this large scale manufacturing demonstration. That's the scope of the contract. They're saying in a separate part that Pfizer will by themselves do clinical trials and approvals, which means that that's not ordered by the contract and cannot be demanded from them in fulfilment of this contract in exchange for this money. But just mention this as, well, voluntary activities someplace else, happening someplace else on Pfizer's own time and own interest. What Pfizer passed for a clinical trial was actually injecting people and then getting voluntary reports back to them from the doctors who were doing this as to what was happening. (19:40 - 20:40) And many of my viewers are aware of the very first release of the Pfizer trial documents that showed over 1,200 people had died. It's Pfizer essentially regulating themselves. Yes, exactly. That first report that they was FOIA'd out of them, but they didn't have it as early as middle of February of 2021. The report itself was issued like February 28th. So that means that they already had that data by then, so much of it, 1,200 deaths. Same with the good manufacturing practise compliance. It was never actually ordered. The contracts mention it, applies somehow. They're never in the actual scope of the deliverable, which again, if you are enforcing a contract for some reason, then you have to look at what did I order for what amount of money? And it's very clear that what was ordered for $10 billion was a demonstration. Everything else is just language words in the contract, but they don't have any enforceability, I would say. So GMP was not ordered because it's not possible for these things. (20:40 - 21:42) And legally, therefore, there were no clinical trials and there were no clinical trial subjects or investigators. So that's, again, it's a legal definition of if clinical trial is not possible, a clinical investigation is not possible for this class of things, such as countermeasures, then whoever was being injected with them under this pretence of a clinical trial cannot be deemed a clinical trial subject. Whoever was doing it cannot be deemed a clinical trial investigator. Right. And I just want to explain one thing on your slide here. CGMP stands for current good manufacturing practise. So what you're telling us is that because of all this legal trickery they pulled, none of the manufacturing processes for these injections were ever subjected to these standards. Exactly. Yeah. I have a very extensive evidence of that, including direct statements by the regulators that Pfizer and Moderna were not CGMP compliant. And in fact, they were formally recorded regulatory objections, which is like a showstopper. If you have a major objection from the regulator, you can't proceed until you resolve it. (21:43 - 22:50) So they record this major objection that Pfizer, Moderna, you're not GMP compliant. And then a few days later, globally, the product gets shipped. What was happening is the FDA and all global regulators were pretending to be regulating this product. Who was in charge of it? In the US, the body that was in charge of the COVID response was National Security Council, very surprisingly. So in fact, this was known sort of out in the open from the beginning, but it was very much misrepresented in the media as far as like what it was. So National Security Council is advisory body to the president of the United States, and they are forum for foreign policy and national security. And they do not have any representatives from health agencies on that council. The regulator in this, as you can see, it's mostly defence and intelligence. They put National Security Council in charge of COVID policy and that in itself is saying that the US government is treating this as an act of war. (22:51 - 23:36) So US government is treating COVID responses as a wartime thing, as some kind of a war going on. And they're telling to American public and everybody else that this is a health event. While they're saying that, the list of regular attendees you've got here, these are almost all military people. And as you pointed out, there's not a single health expert on that panel. Exactly. So if this is a health emergency, where's the health experts? Very few of them had any sort of health experience. So it was all military brass, no health, but they're telling us it's a virus. Oh, it's a virus. It's a flu. It's some kind of a disease and we have to do all these idiotic health things. Then this is actually like detail behind this. There is a document that's available online. (23:36 - 28:41) It's called pandemic crisis action plan adapted. National Security Council is in charge of the decisions of all decisions about COVID. And then there are a bunch of interagency stuff happening and HHS is obviously involved, but they're not even the lead federal agency. Again, very puzzling. The lead federal agency is FEMA, agency in charge of responding to things like hurricanes and earthquakes and things of that nature. For some reason, they get put in charge as a lead federal agency. So it's not even health and human services that is a lead federal agency and National Security Council. So it's just makes no sense. The only way this makes sense, and the only reason they put FEMA as a lead federal agency is because FEMA had never had any pandemic preparedness plan and were never expecting to manage pandemics. It wasn't in their mandate yet because they're responding to hurricanes. Also Trump used a Stafford Act to declare this emergency and the Stafford Act was never used before. And so this was done to just make FEMA as a figurehead. It's a perfect figurehead when you don't have any plans and you don't expect to do this particular thing. That means you don't know what you're doing. So make some extremely useful figurehead and then behind them, HHS can pull all the strings and manipulate all the information and do this performance theatre, pretending like they're regulating these products. Sasha, can I get you to back up one slide for just a moment? Folks, just in case you missed Sasha's comment on this, and I want to make sure I understood it. This is from an actual government document. This is the government's own essentially flowchart of who's in charge of all of this. So if anybody's got any doubt right now that everything that Ms. Ladapova is telling us is not some sort of weird conspiracy theory, well there's the government's flowchart right there telling you the structure they put in place. This is another very interesting work chart also available publicly. So this was from Operation Warp Speed. Remember when they announced all of this, then they said, oh we're going to have Operation Warp Speed that's going to develop safe and effective vaccines very quickly. What's very interesting, this is an org chart turned on the side, but you can see that the head of this operation is the Department of Defence. So Department of Defence is the chief operating officer of the entire Operation Warp Speed. HHS is working very closely with the military to help with logistics. That's how we were sold this story. Turns out, in fact, here the most senior person on the chart is the Department of Defence chief operating officer. HHS is a scientific advisor, whatever that means. Then we also see that the whole executive function on the top is National Security Council, DOD, and BARDA. BARDA is Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, kind of like DARPA of HHS. So all of these executive functions essentially are done by the U.S. government. All of these actors here are executive branch of U.S. government. They are performing all the functions related to development of the vaccines, which is the design of the clinical trials, design of the product, production, supply, distribution, manufacturing, infrastructure, security, personnel, information, public affairs, legislative affairs, which means they interact with Congress, Office of General Counsel, which is Department of Justice, lawyers, chief of staff. So all of the executive functions are government. Then the third layer down, we have people who are not in charge, but they are fulfilling the orders and they get tremendous amount of money. So they're very happy, which is pharma companies. So all of these pharma companies, now this to me looked very, very strange because I am familiar with pharmaceutical companies when they're developing some sort of a new product, they're extremely sensitive about all of these executive functions. And here in this structure, they were precluded from that. So the contracts that I read, they all specify that the pharmaceutical manufacturer will not have independent contact with FDA, that all correspondence will be copied to the Department of Defence and BARDA. And if they have any meetings with the FDA, then up to four BARDA representatives will go with them. So all of this is extremely tightly controlled by the government. And it's, again, as I said, the pharma companies, typically, if they're working on some product, they're very sensitive about that part. They need to do it themselves. Who's really manufacturing these products? Who's really responsible for development and manufacturing? And in the same presentation, from the same date, we have this information. So this was Operation Warp Speed and BARDA bragging about their vaccine manufacturing portfolio. And so on the right hand side, you see what they call vaccine supporting efforts. And these are the traditionally established, long time established, essentially defence contractors while they're private companies in the university. This is a very long standing Department of Defence contractor, notorious for never following any good manufacturing practises. (28:41 - 30:49) And also, they have exclusive contract for anthrax vaccine, which is also notorious for injuring about 200,000 service members and never complying with any regulations that's been used for COVID has been established in 2012 with them. Then there are these other ones, Ology, Texas A&M. So the ones that I circled, they're identified in these contracts as centres for manufacturing excellence, something like that. And in fact, this collection is just, it's very small. They used it in this presentation, but the consortia include hundreds of companies. Now on the left hand side, you can see what they call vaccines. So these are just brand names. These are big companies, big pharma companies that public would trust. So here on the left hand side, all of these blue boxes are labelled as demo. And on the right hand side, they all say manufacturing. So what in fact they're doing on the left hand side, those are the cover for the activity that's going on the right hand side and have been going for a long time. It's not possible to design a completely new product and manufacture billions of doses of it in the time that they were advertising to us, like six months. It's not possible. It's nonsense. It's a lie. You cannot do it. It has to be in place. And it wasn't in place. The Department of Enzimbardo, they just switched it on. They announced the pandemic, they switched it on and they told Pfizer, Moderna and Janssen, go procure it from these guys. We already established them. Here they're bragging again, how they made these so-called vaccines happen in six months by doing what? By printing money first. It turns out, you know, Moderna receives half a billion, Janssen gets half a billion, AstraZeneca gets a billion, Pfizer gets 10 billion, Regeneron, Mayo Clinic. They just throw a bunch of money at these companies and they order from them demonstrations. Just to recap, folks, what she was talking about earlier with these OTA demonstrations, where they've done these legal loopholes so that basically they don't have to follow any regulations for this. So they don't have to follow any regulations. Demo is fake. (30:49 - 31:33) By definition, they ordered fake performances from these companies. While their established network of manufacturers was cranking out whatever they're cranking out without any oversight, any regulation. And so the way they innovate is by breaking the law because they're the government and they're above the law. Here we have them admitting that they're doing large scale commercial manufacturing before any safety is demonstrated for these products. That they shipped a huge number of doses, but even before they received the emergency use authorisation, they already pre-manufactured millions of doses. And even while they were being found in huge non-compliance during this EUA authorisation, two days later, they shipped them globally anyway. (31:33 - 33:53) They just make whatever brew and concoction of poison that they want. Then they run around and pretend there's this theatre going on that we're approving them. That has no relationship to what's being produced and shipped. At this particular meeting, this was recently in November, 2022, regulating these so-called countermeasures and vaccines. As I said, FDA doesn't regulate them, but I was wondering who does. Well, apparently these guys take credit and they're saying that they are regulating these products because here they did product acceptance for all COVID vaccine doses and for all therapeutic doses. They also say they increased industry and regulatory surveillance and they also do some sort of thing about good manufacturing practises. But I'm not aware of any act of Congress that said BARDA is a regulatory authority in the United States. So whatever they're doing, it's not for the purposes of regulating pharmaceuticals in the United States. It's something else. But they're claiming authority over these. And another thing, of course, is they're funnelling tremendous amount of money into these exercises. BARDA historically pretended like they're just helping this niche product for which there is no market. Well, it turns out that they're funnelling about $47.5 billion into the R&D, of which $33 billion goes to the vaccines. And the entire U.S. pharmaceutical industry spends only about $100 billion on R&D every year. So this is not quite a niche. And in fact, they took over the entire pharmaceutical industry, because if there is one buyer that buys 50 percent of R&D, I guarantee you that buyer controls the whole thing. They essentially took over private industries multiple in the United States and they merged with them. And so now we have a form of health-related fascism right now. All of this is done together, government and industry. And government prints money, takes over the industry and does this to all of us. And to clarify what Sasha is talking about when she uses the term fascism, because that's a word that gets misunderstood a lot. And in this particular case, she's using it absolutely correctly. And yes, while we all understand fashion is a form of autocratic dictatorship, a dictatorial government, but it's also a form of government in which the government controls private industry. (33:53 - 37:22) And that's exactly what we're seeing here. The government controlling the private industries. They control the private industry. They merged with it. They merged their interests with them such that they are now indistinguishable from each other. So large corporations and specifically large corporations, they actually want to eliminate small businesses. As you've seen, all their actions were against a small business and farmers and things of that nature. But they really into this large corporate merged with government so that they can establish this totalitarian control over society, which they did here through health. That's the main reason for the lockdowns, to destroy the small businesses. Not because they particularly care about the small business owners one way or the other, but because those small businesses are incredibly difficult to control. But large corporations, megacorporations, those can get in bed very closely with the government, as you're seeing right here, and all be part of that fascist structure. Here it is in detail. So again, on this website where all these contracts are posted now, you can see all of them. And I've circled so you can assure yourself this is just a screenshot, it's just the top part, you can scroll down and there's over 400 contracts on it. So you can assure yourself that they're all DOD. So every single company here, and this includes everything, as I said, it's not so here, for example, therapeutic and another therapeutic and diagnostics and blood, blood products and some, you know, some other symptoms and antibodies, but everything was contracted through the Department of Defence, all of them say DOD. And sometimes they have parallel contracts with HHS and BARDA, but all of them have DOD. That's where the $47.5 billion went into these contracts. And they were distributed. And in fact, I was told personally approved by Robert Kudleck to ensure that they went to the right people, you know, to the right corporations. And you'll get the link to if you're watching this interview on our website at ironworldreport.com, as always, you will find links to all of this directly underneath the interview so you can get to them easily. Sasha is showing you a screenshot here. And yes, she says this scrolls down for quite a long ways. All the major manufacturers are there, not just AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson and Johnson, Novavax, they're all there for billions and billions of dollars of government contracts. Yeah, exactly. So and as you can see at the top, it says Advanced Technology International, ATI, right? So they are like a manager of all of these contracts. So DOD doesn't even manage them directly. They manage them through the manager. So here's the manager ATI. ATI is a here's their website. They are a long established manager of various consortia of defence contractors, managed consortia of manufacturers that make, you know, machine guns, weapons, Navy carriers, helicopters, engines, you know, everything, the metal works, whatever, whatever Department of Defence needs. They are also advertise themselves as a specialist in these OTA contracts, right? So all of those contracts were OTA. These guys are specialists in OTA. So you can see how much the volume of money that gets pumped through this contracting method of OTA, which is unaccountable and unregulatable. Okay, ATI. Why is a company who, as Sasha pointed out, their job is to assist with government contracts that are focused on weapons? So why would they be involved in this? Well, because these injections are not vaccines. (37:22 - 38:07) They're a bioweapon. And therefore the natural company to be handling this is ATI. Absolutely. They are bioweapons because why would you need to hide all this information and make it so secret and so untraceable through this OTA method, jumping through all these other hoops to hide all this information if they were legitimate pharmaceuticals? You know, none of our regular drugs get funded this way. There is no need to have military participating in drug development unless it's a dual use biological weapon. For drug development, we have extremely experienced, high quality, very knowledgeable, very capable, huge industry that can do it. (38:07 - 38:53) And they can do it under regulations. So the only reason to hire all of these guys through this mechanism is just to hide stuff. And when you're hiding stuff and it's Department of Defence that's hiding stuff, well, you know what they're hiding. That's the story. And they're clearly hiding the bioweapon manufacturing in these contracts because they have a huge degree of micromanagement. They're very tight. So the Department of Defence dictates everything, how things are going to be done. But they're very light in terms of the scope. Definition of the scope is very vague, poorly defined. And so it says things like prototypes and demonstrations and countermeasures. So all of those words are very poorly defined. So you can hide anything you want under them. (38:53 - 48:46) They have to use DOD established infrastructure because there's no way to fulfil them in time. The PREP Act is important one. You know, I've mentioned it at the beginning, but the PREP Act completely absolves everyone participating in this from any liability. And that goes for manufacturers. It goes for also for any subcontractors that they have, you know, materials suppliers or delivery or fill finish or, you know, even the vaccinators, everyone along the supply chain is completely absolved and treated as a government employee, regardless of where they work. So they're covered by the governments. Also, this product, this bioweapon in the vial is owned by the Department of Defence throughout from the manufacturer to distribution to administration until it gets injected in the person, its property of the Department of Defence. Pharmaceuticals, they don't follow this kind of a protected chain and they're not property of Department of Defence. In fact, pharmaceuticals, what happens is once it's manufactured, it's sold to a distributor, a distributor who is also regulated by good distribution practises and accountable and licenced. They take possession of it. So they have liability for anything that goes wrong and gets adulterated or mislabeled or lost or anything. Again, why are we not using this traceable, transparent, regulated chain and why are we going to this black box? If not to just hide the bioweapon in it, right? I have some examples of foreign contracts. First of all, they waive all the importation regulations, any good manufacturing practise or distribution practise related things. They also even remove national sovereignty because they prohibit the foreign government from changing the laws in their country that impact liability, which is nonsense. So obviously it's not, it's really a merger of Pfizer with Department of Defence that is able to do that because Pfizer by themselves don't have enforcement power like this. And also the contract specifically prohibit independent vial testing. So the governments who are importing them cannot do any testing. So Trudeau, for example, he purchased 100 million doses last year in 2022. He's purchased 95 million for 2023. And so those purchases come along with a clause that says the Canadian government or health authorities aren't allowed to test these products. Yep. Basically it says like if something is found deficient with the product when it's imported, so that's a basis for termination of the contract, but you're not allowed to test. Yeah. So that's basically, that was kind of conclusion of my presentation. As we had discussed via email prior to the interview, there's a few points on one of your most recent Substack articles and link to Sasha's Substack will be beneath this interview as well. And there's just a few points there I would like you to touch on because I felt that they were extremely significant. So I was looking at the Securities and Exchange Commission contracts for BioNTech specifically, and I found these several contracts that I kind of put in a timeline. Initially, you know, this looks very, very obvious, right? So first in 2018, Pfizer and BioNTech structured research collaboration R&D alliance. As part of that alliance, Pfizer invested equity money. So they became a shareholder in BioNTech. And then subsequent to that in August of 2019, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation invested into them, also became a shareholder. Then, you know, just months after, so this is August, 2019. So just a few months later, this global pandemic is announced, March 11, 2020. And then after that, on March 16, so just a couple of days after, and by the way, these contracts, you cannot negotiate them in a matter of days. It doesn't happen. It takes about, I would say for a scope of the contract like this, it would take a year, you know, so it cannot be that, oh, we just announced pandemic and four days later, Fosun decides to do this deal. No, they already, it was already in progress. They were all orchestrating it. So Fosun is a pharmaceutical large pharma company from China. It's controlled by CCP. They're chairman of Fosun conglomerate. So Fosun is part of a huge Chinese conglomerate that owns all kinds of companies. And chairman of that conglomerate is a high ranking CCP member. And in China, any large company is controlled by CCP. Definitely now we have a collaboration, a joint venture between BioNTech, Pfizer, CCP, Fosun, and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Pfizer upped their equity investment after Fosun, like a day after Fosun structures this deal. So again, all of this was going on simultaneously. And then a month later or two months later, DOD gives them a contract for $10 billion. Again, a contract for $10 billion, you cannot negotiate in a matter of days or even months. DOD essentially awarded $10 billion to a venture in which CCP is a investor and Bill and Melinda Gates is investor and Pfizer is investor and BioNTech. And to explain why you can't negotiate these sorts of things in days, folks, remember this is all a legal process. So you've got all this documentation has to be drawn up by lawyers. It has to be reviewed by the lawyers on the other side. It's going to go through multiple revisions before both parties are going to agree to that, sign that contract. So, you know, Sasha is absolutely right. You can't do this in a matter of days. This is going to take months at the very least, and probably much longer than that. So all of these things, as she's saying, were already in place. So what you're seeing here, and this, once again, you can go to her sub stack and you can review this and you can read her comments on it. What you're seeing here is that these big pharma companies, the Chinese government, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the U.S. DOD, they were all collaborating on this. And they were doing it before the supposed pandemic was announced. So up until 2020, they were a tiny company with just a handful of employees, which is normal. I've worked with a bunch of small pharmas, there's core staff, and then they, you know, because they're research-based, they're just in research, they don't have any products on the market yet. So they're just doing experiments. And that's what BioNTech supposedly was doing, that they had this new technology and they were trying to develop it, but they had no products in even late phase clinical trials. And if you don't have products in development and in human trials, none of it is very expensive. It may take a long time, but I can't see. So they raised about $1.7 billion in nine rounds. But all that time, I was like, well, what was this money for? You know, if you're running some cell cultures and maybe some animal trials, that's not expensive. And they didn't have a lot of staff and they didn't have any big manufacturing facilities for it, if you don't have any products. And the investors include hugely international crowd, big funds. As far as I can tell, these funds probably have government entities in them. Global government consortium pouring money into BioNTech. Moderna was the same thing. They raised $5 billion. Again, not having any products, not having anything. Consortia between BioNTech and Moderna and probably some others of governments pouring money into them over time, creating this glomerate. And then they just turned on this whole operation. And just as a reminder, folks, if you remember from my introduction of Ms. Ladapova, this is an area where she has a great deal of experience. She ran companies that did clinical testing, clinical trials. So when she tells you that the amounts of money we're looking at here go well beyond anything that would have been required for early clinical trials of some experimental product, she knows exactly what she's talking about. She's an expert in that area. So we have to be asking the question, what were these billions of dollars for? Because it certainly wasn't for that. Big bad pharma doing bad things and for money. So it's all pharma committing this crime. Government just lets them. If this happens here, then this will happen again and again and again. We're not addressing the root cause. And the government is driving this. And it's not just our government. It's ours and yours and Chinese and Australians and everybody's driving it against us, people of the world. So don't tell me it was profit motive only. Sure, there's a lot of profits involved. And sure, there's a lot of people who are interested in profits and doing it for profits. But that's not the only motive. And it's not the most important one, because they're actually killing their profits by killing their customers. Otherwise, they could have shipped placebo. It was all legal. They wouldn't be breaking any laws. It's just as demonstration as everybody else is doing demonstration. And if they were shipping, if they shipped placebo, nobody would be hurt. And there would be many, many more customers for them. I would say, oh, these are dangerous products. We would say, no, they look good. COVID would have gone away very quickly because it always like all these epidemics or whatever, they just self extinguish. Yes. And I have to say, Sasha, that this is one of the most lucid and concise pieces of logic I have ever had the pleasure to read. When I hit that statement, which is towards the end of your sub stack, I thought, wow, it can't possibly be any clearer. If you still think that this whole thing is being driven by big pharma greed, then simply take a look at that statement by Sasha that makes it extremely clear that if that's what it was about, they would have gone about it in a completely different way. Yeah, absolutely. Sasha, thank you so much for this information. I think this is one of the most significant interviews I've done. I know that you've done other interviews on this. I appreciate you taking the time to share this with our Canadian audience so they can see this information as well. So they can get this kind of in-depth introduction to it from you to understand just how deep all of this goes and how, as you said, yes, it's all of these gigantic organisations, including governments that are colluding to destroy us, to kill us and imprison us and enslave us. It's not about profit. It's not incompetence. It's intentional. And they've been planning it for a long time and they know exactly what they're doing.