Thank you Cranmer. The facts you present are very disturbing to our entire legal process. Expert witnesses must declare that they will abide by the High Court Rules for Expert Witnesses, which states their 'overriding duty' is to 'assist the court impartially'. It beggars belief how two Crown employees (Town and Bloomfield) who have been instrumental in recommending and implementing a mandate could then be recognised as non-partisan and impartial Expert Witnesses by the Court! The information you have uncovered in the way they have misrepresented and cherry-picked data is a clear demonstration that they were advocating for the Crown, not the Court.
Clearly, Hipkins, Bloomfield and Town lied and lied by omission regarding our health, our lives and livelihoods.
The fact that the far - left teachers Union failed to support their workforce demonstrates that they are simply a compliant vessel of a corrupt regime.
Heads should roll - but they won’t, confirming, yet again what an appalling , politically bankrupt government we are forced to endure until October.
Thank you once again Cranmer. It is important to acknowledge the role you have played in bringing to light the unwillingness of Medsafe to authorise the Pfizer product under any conditions, emergency or otherwise. Without your research the apparent duplicity of Bloomfield and Hipkins would likely have remained hidden.
The last three years have reminded us, should we have needed reminding, politicians are willing to lie shamelessly to promote their self-interest and to support their ‘narrative’. What the last three years have revealed is State funded bureaucrats can also be economical with the truth for reasons that are not as obvious.
The net result of their actions is a complete loss of trust in these institutions, which will be the lasting legacy of this Government.
Once again I join the heartfelt chorus of thanks. Your incisive legal mind cuts through the obfuscation and lies - pray you don't metaphorically suffer the fate of your namesake!
Thank you Cranmer for all your hard work and meticulous research, we hope that the October elections will bring the urgently needed culling of the governing frauds.
If anyone can tell me show you build an RNA vaxxine from various DNA sequences which added together make up a virus by consensus. > I'll build a bronze statue of you. All we know is that the bioweapon had spike protein and HIV sequences and other things attached to what is assumed to be the corona virus base. . It is a bioweapon, and the deveiopment of the bioweapon over fifteen years can be shown by the registerd patents and journal papers which can be followed through. There isn't a judge in New Zealand capable and willing of following this disturbing false flag history
Hi Cranmer. I subscribed so I can message you but I've also sent you an email. Please would you mind helping me by sending the URL links for the Medsafe quotes and the statements from Mr Town? (it might be a pdf). My email is amanda.m.vickers@gmail.com. Thank you! I am after those with respect to the vx safety particularly.
If my understanding is correct the Medicines Assessment Advisory Committee is anonymous and as such we do not know who is on this committee and their relevant expertise.
The fact that Medsafe would not approve this biological product and have differed to a shadowy anonymous committee is disturbing. What information or insights did the MAAC have that allowed them to declare this product "safe & effective" that Medsafe did not? I would suggest that they did not have any additional information which means that the decision was not made on a technical basis but on a political basis. This in turn makes me question the potential conflicts of interest of this anonymous committee.
This murky clandestine process would be less egregious if the product was not mandated, but is ethically bankrupt when forcing people to be injected with this.
From early in the roll out I became concerned about the very narrow scope of review this product received. There appeared to be no consideration to the evolutionary biological impact of generating a strong immune response to a single and highly mutable antigen. This was a very novel approach to vaccination, and if there is one given in novel biological interventions it is that there will be unintended consequences.
We now have a situation where immune imprinting (Original Antigenic Sin) would appear to be preventing a robust immune response being developed to the more conserved proteins of the virus. Predictably this means endless waves of COVID in highly vaccinated countries and all of the associated problems that come with this.
We can only conclude that this whole situation has been a case study in the devastating impact of ignorance, arrogance and hubris in our "expert" class on a global scale.
Whilst the membership of MAAC is not publicly known they are a group of eminent medical professionals who are qualified to make these judgments. Medsafe supplied MAAC with a memo and a bundle of the evaluation documents, and they met for 6 hours on the morning of 2 Feb 2021 to make their determination.
The problem is, MAAC never declared the product "safe & effective". They just recommended 'provisional consent' which under section 23 only requires the minister to be "of the opinion that it is desirable". A much lower bar to reach!
Thank you Cranmer. The facts you present are very disturbing to our entire legal process. Expert witnesses must declare that they will abide by the High Court Rules for Expert Witnesses, which states their 'overriding duty' is to 'assist the court impartially'. It beggars belief how two Crown employees (Town and Bloomfield) who have been instrumental in recommending and implementing a mandate could then be recognised as non-partisan and impartial Expert Witnesses by the Court! The information you have uncovered in the way they have misrepresented and cherry-picked data is a clear demonstration that they were advocating for the Crown, not the Court.
Clearly, Hipkins, Bloomfield and Town lied and lied by omission regarding our health, our lives and livelihoods.
The fact that the far - left teachers Union failed to support their workforce demonstrates that they are simply a compliant vessel of a corrupt regime.
Heads should roll - but they won’t, confirming, yet again what an appalling , politically bankrupt government we are forced to endure until October.
Thank you once again Cranmer. It is important to acknowledge the role you have played in bringing to light the unwillingness of Medsafe to authorise the Pfizer product under any conditions, emergency or otherwise. Without your research the apparent duplicity of Bloomfield and Hipkins would likely have remained hidden.
The last three years have reminded us, should we have needed reminding, politicians are willing to lie shamelessly to promote their self-interest and to support their ‘narrative’. What the last three years have revealed is State funded bureaucrats can also be economical with the truth for reasons that are not as obvious.
The net result of their actions is a complete loss of trust in these institutions, which will be the lasting legacy of this Government.
Once again I join the heartfelt chorus of thanks. Your incisive legal mind cuts through the obfuscation and lies - pray you don't metaphorically suffer the fate of your namesake!
Thank you Cranmer for all your hard work and meticulous research, we hope that the October elections will bring the urgently needed culling of the governing frauds.
That’s impressive research, Cranmer. I will be watching with interest. I hope to see the same actions taken over in Australia.
If anyone can tell me show you build an RNA vaxxine from various DNA sequences which added together make up a virus by consensus. > I'll build a bronze statue of you. All we know is that the bioweapon had spike protein and HIV sequences and other things attached to what is assumed to be the corona virus base. . It is a bioweapon, and the deveiopment of the bioweapon over fifteen years can be shown by the registerd patents and journal papers which can be followed through. There isn't a judge in New Zealand capable and willing of following this disturbing false flag history
Hi Cranmer. I subscribed so I can message you but I've also sent you an email. Please would you mind helping me by sending the URL links for the Medsafe quotes and the statements from Mr Town? (it might be a pdf). My email is amanda.m.vickers@gmail.com. Thank you! I am after those with respect to the vx safety particularly.
Thanks for your message. I’ll email you shortly.
If my understanding is correct the Medicines Assessment Advisory Committee is anonymous and as such we do not know who is on this committee and their relevant expertise.
The fact that Medsafe would not approve this biological product and have differed to a shadowy anonymous committee is disturbing. What information or insights did the MAAC have that allowed them to declare this product "safe & effective" that Medsafe did not? I would suggest that they did not have any additional information which means that the decision was not made on a technical basis but on a political basis. This in turn makes me question the potential conflicts of interest of this anonymous committee.
This murky clandestine process would be less egregious if the product was not mandated, but is ethically bankrupt when forcing people to be injected with this.
From early in the roll out I became concerned about the very narrow scope of review this product received. There appeared to be no consideration to the evolutionary biological impact of generating a strong immune response to a single and highly mutable antigen. This was a very novel approach to vaccination, and if there is one given in novel biological interventions it is that there will be unintended consequences.
We now have a situation where immune imprinting (Original Antigenic Sin) would appear to be preventing a robust immune response being developed to the more conserved proteins of the virus. Predictably this means endless waves of COVID in highly vaccinated countries and all of the associated problems that come with this.
We can only conclude that this whole situation has been a case study in the devastating impact of ignorance, arrogance and hubris in our "expert" class on a global scale.
Whilst the membership of MAAC is not publicly known they are a group of eminent medical professionals who are qualified to make these judgments. Medsafe supplied MAAC with a memo and a bundle of the evaluation documents, and they met for 6 hours on the morning of 2 Feb 2021 to make their determination.
The problem is, MAAC never declared the product "safe & effective". They just recommended 'provisional consent' which under section 23 only requires the minister to be "of the opinion that it is desirable". A much lower bar to reach!