A letter to the United Nations Association of NZ: Your September National Conference agenda breaches your UNANZ constitution

On Monday 7 August 2023 I wrote to the United Nations Association of New Zealand (UNANZ) with some concerns about their agenda and keynote speaker at their upcoming National Conference 28 September 2023, given the apparent inconsistencies between the UNANZ constitution and some of the policies pursued by Sir Ashley Bloomfield as Director General of Health for the Labour Government and the matter of countering disinformation. 

My reasons for writing UNANZ is because they and their constitution are about upholding the UN Charter, Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the various covenants agreed and made international law through UN General Assemblies then ratified by the various UN members including New Zealand. 

Any individual paying attention would comprehend that the NZ Government has breached international law with their COVID-19 Response; lockdowns, restrictions of movement, mandates, including forcing mass vaccination of the population with experimental toxic mutagenic mRNA products, through the employment of economic blackmail, such as loss of employment (huge breach of human rights). 

The following is the text of the email I sent the UNANZ President and National Council. 

To date I have had no acknowledgement or response. 

-----

Dear UNANZ President and National Council,

I note the United Nations Association of New Zealand National Conference in September has a few matters on its agenda:

https://www.unanz.org.nz/learn/news-and-events/advancing-the-2030-agenda-national-conference/ 

Highlights include a keynote address by Dr Sir Ashley Bloomfield KNZM. Sir Ashley Bloomfield trained in medicine at the University of Auckland and specialised in public health medicine. He has 25 years’ experience in public policy and health leadership, including at the World Health Organization in Geneva. Sir Ashley was New Zealand’s Director-General of Health from June 2018 to July 2022 and led the country’s health response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Panel discussion speakers include Member of Parliament Ibrahim Omer, Ambassador Carolyn Schwalger, New Zealand's Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York, Mary Wareham, Advocacy Director of the Arms Division of Human Rights Watch, and Sophie Handford, Paekākāriki–Raumati Ward Councillor at the Kāpiti Coast District Council.

Panel discussions will cover a range of topics, including The Climate Challenge, Reforming the United Nations and Countering disinformation and rebuilding trust in institutions.

With respect to this statement; Countering disinformation and rebuilding trust in institutions, and Sir Ashley Bloomfield's COVID-19 address we have the ground of a serious controversy. 

Before I go into the specifics of my critique, it also is necessary to point to the UNANZ Constitution's objectives which state in Article 2;

2. OBJECTIVES 

2.1 The principal objective for which the Association is established within New Zealand is to be a peoples' movement for the United Nations, through which the principles of the UN Charter can be shared widely and its vision realised. 

To advance this Objective the Association proposes to engage in such charitable activities as: 

(a) To co-ordinate, initiate and support activities which relate to aims and purposes of the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Sustainable Development Goals. 

(b) To promote research, information, education and general public knowledge about the treaties, conventions and resolutions agreed in the UN General Assembly by the governments of the world and furthermore provide the Government of New Zealand with information as to the evaluation of UN policies and actions by the New Zealand public. To promote how the UN system works and to provide general knowledge of the history behind the UN to the New Zealand public. To promote the role or the contribution that the UN makes towards peace and prosperity.  

Some folk require reminding about the International Bill of Human Rights which is a restatement of a nation's ratification of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights 1948, and  the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) 1966, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) 1966, all of which NZ has ratified ICESCR and ICCPR in 1978.

NZ has ratified Article 4 and 7 of the ICCPR:

Article 4

1 . In time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation and the existence of which is officially proclaimed, the States Parties to the present Covenant may take measures derogating from their obligations under the present Covenant to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with their other obligations under international law and do not involve discrimination solely on the ground of race, colour, sex, language, religion or social origin.

2. No derogation from articles 6, 7, 8 (paragraphs I and 2), 11, 15, 16 and 18 may be made under this provision.

3. Any State Party to the present Covenant availing itself of the right of derogation shall immediately inform the other States Parties to the present Covenant, through the intermediary of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, of the provisions from which it has derogated and of the reasons by which it was actuated. A further communication shall be made, through the same intermediary, on the date on which it terminates such derogation.

Article 7

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.

Additionally the Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by the American Association for the International Commission of Jurists, April 1985 are engaged. The Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions in the ICCPR make clear the non-derogation of certain articles even in times of public emergency. The test of proportionality is set at a high level.

There are more covenants and treaties from international law that apply. 

NZ's Bill of Rights 1990 (BORA) is an attempt to legislate the rights and freedoms articulated in the ICCPR. 

NZ's COVID-19 Response measures and COVID-19 vaccination with experimental gene therapy products; offered, proselytised, coerced and mandated upon the NZ population, abrogated all of the principles and law that UNANZ states as their objectives in their constitution. 

However, any who point out the FACT that the official narrative about COVID-19 is unhinged and unlawful, is labelled as one who promotes extreme white supremacist misinformation, disinformation and malinformation. That being the case I am so labelled. However, I know that I am correct in my interpretation and that the accusers including from the disinformation project are the unhinged disinformation proponents as they are regurgitating the NZ Government's talking points on the COVID-19 phenomena. 

I initiated a petition to the House: https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/petitions/document/PET_117877/petition-of-greg-rzesniowiecki-amend-section-5-and-add Extracts from my evidence paper February 2022 follow:

 

Petition of Greg Rzesniowiecki: Amend Section 5 and add a new section 5A to the NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990 

Introduction and summary
● The petitioner addresses New Zealand and international law as it relates to NZ's Bill of Rights Act 1990 and any justification for derogation from the rights provided in sections 8,9 10 and 11 under the heading; “Life and security of the person.”
● Law is both written and unwritten. Written law provides sufficient explanation to assert that there is no justification to derogate from the right to life and security of the person in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
● The paper gives some consideration to recent High Court and the Court of Appeal judgements with respect to COVID-19 matters and the respective Judges' interpretation of the law.
● The Court of Appeal decision in the Andrew Borrowdale vs the Director General of Health case clearly upholds the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) article 4 non-derogation against certain rights; “Certain rights may not be derogated. The rights in the ICCPR that are treated as being sacrosanct include the rights to life, religion, and freedom from torture and slavery...
For completeness, we record the rights contained in the NZBORA include the right in s 8 not to be deprived of life.”
● The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (UDBHR) articles 1-6 uphold certain rights including article 6 the right to free and full consent in the following contexts;

• “Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information” and;

• “Scientific research should only be carried out with the prior, free, express and informed consent of the person concerned” and;

• “In no case should a collective community agreement or the consent of a community leader or other authority substitute for an individual’s informed consent”.

● The petitioner addresses the question; “Is the COVID-19 Vaccine rollout an experiment?” FACTS support the conclusion that it is experimental.
● The petitioner addresses the question; “Is the COVID-19 Vaccine rollout promoting a “safe and effective” treatment? FACTS support the conclusion that it is NOT SAFE nor is it effective at preventing infection or transmission.
● The petitioner finds it disturbing, the FACT of the serious risks of the COVID-19 Vaccines, whilst known to the NZ Government, were not provided to the citizens.
● The petitioner is also dismayed, that the Government's duty to care, for COVID-19 patients was compromised, through a refusal to facilitate early treatment, with cheap generic, and off-label drugs (including anti-viral and anti-inflammatory medicines), with known safety profiles, which have been used to great effect in other jurisdictions.
● The Petitioner finds that the NZ Government COVID-19 Vaccine rollout and the Orders and Legislation forcing people to be “Vaccinated” engages each of BORA sections 8,9,10 and 11. This is contrary to the spirit of BORA and the Law
articulated in the non-derogation articles in ICCPR and UDBHR.
● The petitioner finds that the NZ Government COVID-19 Vaccine rollout as constituted is unlawful. Were the existing LAW applied properly, this proposed amendment to section 5 BORA would be redundant.

And; the official Covid narrative involves belief in the following which a critical mind might view as disinformation or false (found on page 70)

;

1. COVID-19 is caused by a novel pathogenic coronavirus SARS-CoV-2.
2. COVID-19 pathogen is a zoonotic emergence (natural, rather than biolab creation of a synthetic chimera).
3. COVID-19 is both highly infectious and deadly.
4. COVID-19 positive diagnosis is measured by PCR test.
5. COVID-19 in early 2020 had no known cure amongst available medicines and therapeutics in the global medicine cabinet.
6. COVID-19 illness would overrun hospital ICU capacity causing a breakdown of the Health system.
7. COVID-19 is best kept out of NZ for as long as possible no matter the cost to other policy considerations; public health and mental wellbeing, economy, social spirit, trampling of rights and democratic practice, and which required NZ to seal the borders and adopt an elimination strategy.
8. COVID-19 in early 2020 could only be mediated through lockdown, social distancing and other non-pharmaceutical interventions.
9. COVID-19 would cause in NZ an estimated 30,000 (or more, from variance in the many models) thousands to die and countless thousands to become ill.

10.COVID-19 cure would arrive in a vaccine, being developed at Warp Speed.
11. COVID-19 Vaccines are both safe and effective.
12. COVID-19 Vaccines will be voluntary.
13. COVID-19 Vaccination would enable New Zealanders to regain their lost freedoms.

The promotion of a strategy that is anti disinformation without defining the controversial matters one slurs as disinformation and assert that is the grounds for the loss of trust in institutions is spurious where one fails to see that the lack of trust has been forsaken by those who inhabit the institutions in favour of a dogmatic narrative view that is found extremely lacking when held up to the enlightenment values of logic and the scientific method.

I note that the just announced National Security Strategy document published 4 August 2023 has the same ideological failing and as such can never hope to regain the trust of those people who can easily see through global government's including New Zealand's Government's lies and the mendaciousness of the institutions; Universities, NGOs, international bodies; WHO, UN and various philanthropic bodies who all proselytised the false narrative aimed at an agenda part of which was/is to inject the human population with novel toxic mutagenic products, see Moderna and Pfizer June 2020 filings for indications as to the novel nature of the technology platform:

Moderna's SEC filing for mid 2020:  https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1682852/000168285220000017/mrna-20200630.htm 

Pfizer's SEC filing for mid 2020:  https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/0000078003/000007800320000060/pfe-06282020x10q.htm 

These COVID-19 Vaccine products were developed on novel platforms based on lipid nanoparticle (LNP) delivery systems, themselves with a questionable safety profile. 

New Zealand's Government committed to vaccinating the population in their formal documentation published 15 April 2020; COVID-19 Health and Disability System Response Plan

https://www.health.govt.nz/publication/covid-19-health-and-disability-system-response-plan 

Latest stats from MoH has it that 4 million have had 2 shots, 1.7 million at least one booster and guess what official stats have 2.5 million being official COVID-19 cases. Given that many such as myself didn't report our infection, I imagine that the real number of New Zealanders who have contracted COVID-19 is well over 3 million.

The COVID-19 shots did nothing to stop COVID-19 infection or transmission and only had bad effects causing thousands of adverse events and deaths in many of the recipients. 

The COVID-19 measures have caused much economic, vandalism and personal and societal harm and injury. The NZ COVID-19 Response is a complete failure and ought not be repeated in the event of a future pandemic involving a respiratory pathogen. 

Your guest speaker Sir Ashley Bloomfield is co-chair of the International Health Regulations (IHR) amendments working group, and is actively pursuing a policy that would lock New Zealand into repetitions of the COVID-19 Response error in the event of a future pandemic involving a respiratory pathogen. 

The best thing UNANZ might do to assist to reestablish trust in institutions is to inform itself as to the facts of the matter and then act to put those many wrongs right, which would require the Government and institutions to acknowledge their profound error in perpetrating the COVID-19 Response in lockstep with Australia, UK, Canada and the US. 

Who initiated the pandemic? Dr Anthony Fauci's NIAID funding of coronavirus research in Wuhan China did that have something to do with the bug in the system? Go figure. 

I'm more than happy to provide further material for your consideration or engage in a dialogue including introducing you to people expert in the field, where you are interested in the truth of the matter.

Sincerely 

Ends. 

On Tuesday 5 September 2023 I wrote a follow up letter to (UNANZ) addressing it to their leadership, National Executive member and their National Council representatives. I searched for and found email addresses for most of the National Executive members and included those in the address line of the follow up email. (It must have gone through as I gained advice from my email provider that one of the addressees had my email address blocked)

That letter also failed to gain any response or acknowledgement. 

The following is a replication of that emailed correspondence. 

-----

Dear UNANZ Leaders, Executive and National Council,

UNA NZ National Executive

Karim Dickie, National President
James Bushell, Vice President
Gayathri Paranisamy, Immediate Past President
Vacant, National Executive Officer
Amelia Blamey, National Treasurer
Catherine Ashworth, Secretary
Nick Abel, National President, UN Youth New Zealand
Annie Wu, National Council Representative on the Executive
Patrick Metham, National Council Representative on the Executive
 
UNA NZ National Council

Abeer Youssef, Special Officer for Humanitarian Affairs
Alyn Ware, Special Officer for Peace and Security
Dulce Piacentini, Special Officer for Human Rights
John O'Brien, Special Officer for UN Renewal
Vacant, Special Officer for UN Agenda 2030, SDGs
Joy Dunsheath MNZM JP, WFUNA Executive Committee Member
Wajirani Adhihetty, Special Officer for Sustainable Economy and Innovation
Vacant, Special Officer for UN Education
Ishant Ghulyani, Special Officer for Global Health
Steven Arnold, President, Northern Region Branch
Dr Gray Southon, President, Tauranga Branch
Mano Manohoran, President, Waikato Group
Kate Smith, President, Whanganui Branch
Martine Udahemuka, President, Wellington Branch
Pauline McKay, President, Canterbury Branch
Monique Corson, President, Manawatu Branch
Patrick Metham, Ordinary Member of the National Council
Annie Wu, Ordinary Member of the National Council
Acacia Wall, Communications Officers
Events Officer Hope Lan 

My name is Greg Rzesniowiecki and I am an advocate for rule of law, freedom and human rights. 

I last wrote to your leadership 7 August 2023 with some concerns about your agenda and keynote speaker given the apparent inconsistencies between your constitution and some of the policies pursued by Sir Ashley Bloomfield as Director General of Health for the Labour Government (in coalition with NZ First)  2017-2020 and (alone) 2020-2023.

I found it surprising and unprofessional that your officers failed to even acknowledge the 7 August 2023 correspondence below in this thread. Was it referred to your National Council meeting for consideration?

My concern is that where you breach your constitutional objects you derogate from your constitutional purpose and as such are acting inappropriately.

Authoritative figures and institutions label data, knowledge and facts as disinformation, misinformation or malinformation for purposes of censorship. 

Your leadership apparently views with disdain my emailed opinion (forwarded 7 August email) as they didn't bother addressing or refuting the claims I made that you are in breach of your Objectives and the UN Charter, which you purport to uphold. 

Perhaps these facts have not previously been presented to your leadership and so they struggle to know what to do or offer in response - given your organisation has already booked Sir Ashley Bloomfield and set the agenda with reference to Disinformation etc. 

I suggest that you consider opening your conference to one who might provide a rebuttal of the alleged disinformation, one who might provide a balanced report on the costs and harms of the pandemic response and the medical solution characterised as the 'safe and effective' COVID-19 Vaccines, notwithstanding there was no long term safety data when the novel mRNA LNP injectable products were initially marketed. Since 2021 the evidence mounts indicating the deleterious effects; harms, injury, death and long term dysregulation of recipients' immune systems. 

For instance in my petition to the House to fix the Bill of Rights (which I reference in the 7 August correspondence to your leaders) I proposed a new section 5A to fix the problem of section 5 Justified Limits being used to unreasonably limit people's right to refuse medical interventions and experiments. Recall the NZ Bill of Rights is NZ's attempt to implement the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which you say you uphold.

Petition of Greg Rzesniowiecki: Amend Section 5 and add a new section 5A to the NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990 published November 2021 and sponsored to the House in December 2021 by ACT Party leader David Seymour.

https://petitions.parliament.nz/12be63a5-836a-4f47-be8b-945e5b0bb0c9

Here's a link to the evidence I tendered and screen capture of the papers, which includes the advice from the Ministry of Justice to the Petitions Committee. note the Ministry of Health did not offer any advice to counter my evidence in respect to the COVID-19 phenomena or the Government's Response:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/submissions-and-advice/all?custom=PET_117877 

My Petition read; That the House of Representatives amend Section 5 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 by inserting “and subject to section 5A”, and insert a new section 5A: “Unjustified limitations” to say “None of sections 4, 5, 6 provide any justified limits on rights and freedoms contained in sections 8, 9, 10 and 11”

Read the Bill of Rights here particularly sections 8, 9, 10 and 11:

https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0109/latest/whole.html#DLM225505

I provided two initial documents to the Petitions Committee and a request to present oral evidence in person. They didn't want to let me near them in person.

The Petitions Committee invited advice from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ).

MoJ provided advice to the Petitions Committee July 2021:

https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/53SCPET_EVI_117877_PET2895/abd48fdb561608dcea6862d0488f4c50d80af664

Which said in part; Most of the rights cited in the petition either cannot be justifiably limited, or would be very difficult to justifiably limit, as described in the next section.

 MoJ said in respect to s 11 (the right to refuse medication); Section 11 protects the ability of individuals to decline to have medical treatment, safeguarding individual autonomy and dignity. There are a number of circumstances in which section 11 can be justifiably limited; for example, medical treatment of children, cases where a power of attorney is activated, or where persons need emergency medical treatment and are unconscious. Rule 7(4) of the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights permits treatment without consent in circumstances such as these.

The Ministry of Justice advice did nothing to negate my proposed amendment to BORA, and in respect to the critique they did offer I propose a solution, see below.

In August 2021 I provided the Petitions Committee with a response to the MoJ paper and adjustment to s 11 to accommodate their specific concerns. From page 7 of my paper.

https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/53SCPET_EVI_117877_PET3069/458fc077305f6da86df6993e039629631107fda3

Without prejudice, MoJ's advice provides for limited derogations and only for specific circumstances where a person, not a class of persons, might be unable to provide their consent freely; eg: children and persons unable to make decisions for themselves.

If the examples provided in the MoJ advice are the sum total of the NZ Government and Parliament's concern in relation to the absolutism of the proposed BORA amendment, I imagine a suitable qualifying addendum might be added to section 11 similar to the caveat in Sec 8; that is, the right not to be deprived of life except in accordance with fundamental justice.

Without prejudice, section 11 might state; Everyone has the right to refuse to undergo any medical treatment; the caveat being; informed consent might be provided for children by their guardians, and for persons unable to make decisions for themselves by lawfully enacted means. 

This elaborates the individual and specific nature of any derogation. The petitioner looks favourably upon any similar textual solution.

I would have thought that an organisation UNANZ who purports to uphold the UN Charter and human rights would welcome ideas to stop government overreach and breaches of human rights rather than placing the despots who imposed unlawful mandates upon the NZ population onto a pedestal. 

You will never rebuild trust in institutions if you fail to address the root cause and problem, the institutions breached their public trust and need to redeem themselves through proper inquiry and remedy. The UNANZ appears to be complicit in breaching the letter and spirit of the law that you assert you uphold. The plain English reading of the ICCPR article 7 which cannot be derogated even in times of emergency is;

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.

Most sincerely

Greg Rzesniowiecki

Ends. 

-----

I will update this post where I gain any response from folk at the UNANZ. 

NZ Freedom Parties: unite for freedom, or divide for futility

 

The plethora of freedom parties contesting the 2023 general election is troubling especially where they are competing for the votes of the freedom movement.

There are a likely limited number of votes to spread amongst the many parties whose policy platform freedom voters might consider. 

I have been participating in the Voters United initiative which have fielded six (6) straw polls seeking respondents' preferred party. Voters United continue to act to unite freedom voters. 

But what of the competing freedom parties?

I'm not advocating for any one party, rather for common sense and political wisdom amongst the freedom parties - sufficient to join in an unified entity, potentially either the Freedoms NZ umbrella or the Democratic Alliance umbrella, both legitimately available as they are registered with the NZ Electoral Commission. If not these, through any other entity that might be considered legitimate by the NZ Electoral Commission. 

There is not much time for a miracle to happen.

Recently I wrote the freedom parties in the following terms. I did not address it to NZ First. 

If you support the sentiment, or it seems like common sense to you, perhaps forward it to the party you support (or all of them), to the candidates, branches, boards and party leaders to indicate that you want the freedom parties to unite to give the freedom movement a solid opportunity to be represented in the Parliament. 

To cross the five (5) percent threshold will require more than 130,000 votes, and would mean at least six (6) Representatives in the House (in the letter I mention 145,000 votes, but any votes for parties that do not cross the threshold are effectively discounted in the MMP party list allocation process).

Text of the letter.. 

Monday 14 August 2023

Greg Rzesniowiecki

gregfullmoon013@gmail.com

To: New Zealand Freedom Parties 

contesting the 2023 general election

By email:

To:    Democracy NZ,  Democratic Alliance,  Leighton Baker Party,  New Conservative Party,  New Nation Party,  New Zeal Party,  NZ Loyal,  Outdoors and Freedom Party,  Vision

Subject: Unite for freedom, or divide for futility

Dear NZ Freedom Parties,

Preamble

My name is Greg Rzesniowiecki and I reside on the Kapiti Coast. Some of you may know of me and my involvement in NZ politics over the past decade, however, this isn't about me, it is about the freedom loving people of New Zealand and those who purport to represent these people's views.

We all disdain what the NZ Government has done to the nation we love under the guise of the COVID-19 Response.

Voters United – unite the voters if the parties won't unite

Voters United have done a fair bit of researching, thinking and acting in providing the freedom loving proportion of the New Zealand electorate with a platform to draw attention to the need to unify for the purpose of reestablishing freedom and human rights as the underpinnings of the New Zealand society and democracy.

Voters United principles¹ are consistent with the views expressed by most freedom lovers and freedom parties and/or parties that support a free and democratic New Zealand.

How are freedom loving New Zealanders going to attain these principles?

We all appreciate that it is the majority in Parliament that passes legislation to make the laws that govern the population. Judging from the number of freedom parties contesting the 2023 election it is reasonable to say these comprehend the need to gain parliamentary representation in order to have any real effect on legislation made in the House.

The MMP electoral system requires a party or individual to win an electoral seat, or a party to gain five (5) percent of the Party Vote cast at the election to gain representation in the House. The likely combined party vote in the 2023 general election will be in the order of 2.8-2.9 million votes. Five percent is ~145,000 votes.

Based on current polling the following parties either will, or are highly likely to gain representation in the House; National, Labour, ACT, NZ Green, Te Pati Maori and possibly NZ First.

All other smaller parties who are contesting the election with the exception of TOP (The Opportunities Party) are polling no more than one (1) percent in mainstream polls.

NZ's Parliament provides for 120 Representatives and five (5) percent or more, would enable at least six (6) Representatives, where a party crossed the threshold.

With Parliamentary Representation comes a number of benefits.²

A party with six (6) Representatives would be entitled to six (6) offices in the Parliament precinct and six (6) regional electoral offices, staffed and resourced from the Parliamentary budget.

Additionally, a Parliamentary Party would gain representation on select committees. Allocations for oral questions and speaking rights in the various debates are made on the basis of a party's representation in the House.³

Parliamentary resources would be available, such as access to the Parliamentary library. Parliament Representatives' staff are fully funded. These are able to conduct research and assist administratively, both in respect to work related to Parliament business and constituent or electoral matters. Informal advantages include that the press gallery journalists and news media are always more interested in what elected parties are doing and are more likely to report on policies, bills and press releases when the party has representation in the House.

A freedom focused political coalition or umbrella party with at least six (6) Representatives with proper focus, intent and expertise would be an incredible force for freedom and human rights.

The disparate parties ought put aside their various differences and in some way combine to present a unified, coherent and representative political force for the Freedom Movement to endorse and vote for in two months time.

It ought not matter which freedom politician is placed one through six (1-6) on the umbrella party list, as either all six get elected or none do.

If you do not combine, you will not be elected. In such circumstances, voting for you will be wasted votes.

Where the freedom parties do not unite and combine, you are doomed to ignominy and derision for the missed opportunity.

This 2023 general election, with the COVID-19 Response as background, provides a once in a lifetime opportunity to address the principles outlined by Voters United and your various party platforms.

A credible political force might attract more voters in subsequent general elections as the electorate acknowledges their principled stand and the effective workings of an 'umbrella party'.

Consider the opportunity presented where an 'umbrella party' gains the five (5) percent threshold alongside the resurgent NZ First party, who appear to be picking up a number of the freedom movement policies and voters.

It is evident that NZ First is attracting “freedom votes” as the realisation dawns on freedom voters that there is no credible umbrella party that is likely to attain the five (5) percent threshold as of mid August 2023. Several hundred thousand votes divided between a dozen small freedom parties is not good number crunching.

I know from anecdotal testimony that some freedom voters think that NZ First is the only party espousing freedom policies likely to cross the five (5) percent threshold.

NZ First is now polling consistently at or just above five (5) percent, a trend likely to increase as we near the election.

If it forms in the next couple of weeks, an umbrella party might keep NZ First honest also!

Where this opportunity to gain Freedom Movement representation in the House is missed, through disunity and division of political capital, those who populate the leaderships of the various freedom parties will have done a great disservice to the Freedom Movement and the principles, we the freedom voters, have united around and stand for.

The February 2022 Parliament occupation and freedom village proved that there is incredible support from the people of New Zealand for freedom and human rights.

Only a coherent and coordinated approach to the 2023 general election will enable that larger potential to be realised as a political bloc with power to effect legislative change; that is, to ensure NZ is a free and democratic nation that upholds human rights.

I implore you to use an umbrella entity to maximise freedom party Parliamentary representation. As I comprehend it, the Democratic Alliance is nearly registered, and is available for this purpose. Freedom Parties have at best three (3) weeks to make necessary arrangements for a unified political entity, whatever that might be.

NZ’s democratic future rests in your hands.

Yours most sincerely,

Greg Rzesniowiecki

About the author;

Some of you may know of me and my involvement in NZ politics over the past decade; initially opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) which was reformed as the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and my general anti-war, anti-imperialism political views.

More recently you might be aware of my absolute scepticism of the COVID-19 phenomena, the Authoritarian Response and opposition to counter measures employed by Government and authorities from early 2020 to present.^{4 5 6 7}

Irrespective of the impact this correspondence has on the freedom parties, I will continue my efforts opposing the COVID-19 Response and any similar set of policies being implemented in a WHO Pandemic treaty or amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR).

1  Voters United principles: https://votersunited.nz/principles/

2  Parliament Website, Speaker’s Directions 2020: https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/parliamentary-rules/directions-determinations/speaker-s-directions-2020/ The Speaker makes Directions, under section 23 of the Members of Parliament (Remuneration and Services) Act 2013, to provide services and support funding for members of Parliament and parliamentary parties.

3  Parliamentary Practice in New Zealand, Chapter 8 Parties and Government: https://www.parliament.nz/en/visit-and-learn/how-parliament-works/parliamentary-practice-in-new-zealand/chapter-8-parties-and-government/

4  Petition of Greg Rzesniowiecki: Undertake a public inquiry into the national COVID-19 response https://petitions.parliament.nz/f8ae8f54-0771-452e-bde5-9a2db6b0dcb9 my evidence, reasons and proposed terms of reference are available at this link: https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/submissions-and-advice/document/53SCPET_EVI_127123_PET3720/greg-rzesniowiecki and the pdf document: https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/53SCPET_EVI_127123_PET3720/6e60557c834c954265a56b2f9c8ba2884c06bfba

5  Amend Section 5 and add a new section 5A to the NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990, submissions and advice provided to the Committee: https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/submissions-and-advice/all?custom=PET_117877

6  Petition of Greg Rzesniowiecki: Hold a referendum before signing the proposed WHO pandemic treaty: https://petitions.parliament.nz/2bc56985-22b1-48bf-a44c-667122be4b6e and Petition of Greg Rzesniowiecki: Hold a referendum before amending International Health Regulations: https://petitions.parliament.nz/a7fd3096-51ad-484f-bd2e-c2938c0edcdc

7  My interview with RCR host Paul Brennan on his breakfast show broadcast Thursday 3 August 2023: https://realitycheck.radio/greg-rzesniowiecki-on-his-petitions-submissions-oias-letters-protesting-for-our-human-rights-freedoms-during-the-covid-response/

Ends. 

Thus far the response from the freedom parties is underwhelming or non existent.

It might be that it is all too late and no miracle is available. 

I sincerely hope wisdom might prevail and the power of the freedom movement is maximised through the fullest possible Parliamentary Representation.

Politics is about power, whereas futility is the lot of the powerless.

Sections 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the NZ Bill of Rights

In peace, freedom and full human rights. 

How to Fix the Bill of Rights to stop medical mandates

With the growth industry of freedom parties and the recent meltdown in the Democracy NZ Party, I thought it timely to remind folk of a potential solution to the problem of Section 5 Justified Limits of the Bill of Rights 1990 (BORA) to effectively (and safely) stop any future medical mandates. 

The importance of doing this is further necessary as New Zealand's Government and the other 193 nation states party to the World Health Organisation (WHO) are negotiating toward endorsing a Pandemic Treaty and amendments to the International Health Regulations 2005 (IHR). Much has been said about what is in the drafts and the intent of these instruments. One thing is for sure, the desire of WHO and the various governments including NZ is to double down on the COVID-19 Pandemic Response. 

As such we must act to inoculate NZ and our population from mass global overreach and mendacious stupidity. 

With that as the ground we are working with, I dust off my proposal to fix the Bill of Rights. I'll do a further post on the Pandemic Treaty and amendments to the International Health Regulations 2005 in the near term, as I have taken an active interest in these from 2021. 

Here's how to fix the Bill of Rights so it protects the life and security of the person. 

Petition of Greg Rzesniowiecki: Amend Section 5 and add a new section 5A to the NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990 published November 2021 and sponsored to the House in December 2021 by ACT Party leader David Seymour. 

https://petitions.parliament.nz/12be63a5-836a-4f47-be8b-945e5b0bb0c9 

Here's a link to the evidence I tendered and screen capture of the papers, which includes the advice from the Ministry of Justice to the Petitions Committee. note the Ministry of Health did not offer any advice to counter my evidence in respect to the COVID-19 phenomena or the Government's Response: 

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/submissions-and-advice/all?custom=PET_117877

A number of Freedom parties have made claims about entrenching BORA and or making it supreme law. 

There is a problem with entrenchment of the Law or getting rid of Section 5 in the sense that, "which rights are entrenched?" Section 5 is about justified limitations. Recall we all support, "do no harm." 

If there were no justified limitations on freedoms you’d get some absurd and dangerous results: for example, “freedom of movement” would mean that we couldn’t jail murderers, “freedom of expression” would mean that there could be no offence of possessing child pornography. So we need to comprehend justified limits! 

The solution needs to be nuanced and effective. 

The solution I proposed was simply to make supreme law or entrench those sections that protect the life and security of the person sections 8, 9, 10 and 11, which would stop any future mandates if we gained a majority in the House to make it so! 

Matt King has known about this since it was promoted in 2021, so has Bishop Tamaki and Sue Grey and more. I'm not sure about Leighton Baker, (but he follows me on facebook so must have a clue). 

These all know the problem of entrenchment versus fixing section 5 "Justified Limits." I promoted the Petition to the House in 2021. 

My Petition read; That the House of Representatives amend Section 5 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 by inserting “and subject to section 5A”, and insert a new section 5A: “Unjustified limitations” to say “None of sections 4, 5, 6 provide any justified limits on rights and freedoms contained in sections 8, 9, 10 and 11” 

Read the Bill of Rights here particularly sections 8, 9, 10 and 11:

https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0109/latest/whole.html#DLM225505 

I provided two initial documents to the Petitions Committee and a request to present oral evidence in person. They didn't want to let me near them in person. 

The Petitions Committee invited advice from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). 

MoJ provided advice to the Petitions Committee in respect to my petition to fix S 5 of BORA in July 2021: 

https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/53SCPET_EVI_117877_PET2895/abd48fdb561608dcea6862d0488f4c50d80af664 

Which said in part; Most of the rights cited in the petition either cannot be justifiably limited, or would be very difficult to justifiably limit, as described in the next section. 

 MoJ said in respect to s 11 (the right to refuse medication); Section 11 protects the ability of individuals to decline to have medical treatment, safeguarding individual autonomy and dignity. There are a number of circumstances in which section 11 can be justifiably limited; for example, medical treatment of children, cases where a power of attorney is activated, or where persons need emergency medical treatment and are unconscious. Rule 7(4) of the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights permits treatment without consent in circumstances such as these. 

The Ministry of Justice advice did nothing to negate my proposed amendment to BORA, and in respect to the critique they did offer I propose a solution, see below. 

In August 2021 I provided the Petitions Committee with a response to the MoJ paper and adjustment to s 11 to accommodate their specific concerns. From page 7 of my paper. 

https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/53SCPET_EVI_117877_PET3069/458fc077305f6da86df6993e039629631107fda3 

Without prejudice, MoJ's advice provides for limited derogations and only for specific circumstances where a person, not a class of persons, might be unable to provide their consent freely; eg: children and persons unable to make decisions for themselves. 

If the examples provided in the MoJ advice are the sum total of the NZ Government and Parliament's concern in relation to the absolutism of the proposed BORA amendment, I imagine a suitable qualifying addendum might be added to section 11 similar to the caveat in Sec 8; that is, the right not to be deprived of life except in accordance with fundamental justice. 

Without prejudice, section 11 might state; Everyone has the right to refuse to undergo any medical treatment; the caveat being; informed consent might be provided for children by their guardians, and for persons unable to make decisions for themselves by lawfully enacted means. This elaborates the individual and specific nature of any derogation. The petitioner looks favourably upon any similar textual solution. Ends.

All this requires reading and study, the links are here. 

If we want to fix BORA this is a potential effective solution. 

Then ask why the freedom parties cannot comprehend the fix? 

When I proposed this solution in the petition I concentrated on Sections 8, 9, 10 and 11. It may be that we could also fix other aspects of BORA in similar fashion to stop any discrimination based on digital IDs or health passports. 

However, if we fix BORA to protect the life and security of the person, the rest of the NWO impositions would probably fail as they undermine the working of this proposed fix. 

The key message herein is this proposed amendment to BORA would effectively entrench freedom from medical mandate. 

I hope this assists the conversation about how to ensure no more health mandates.

COVID-19 Evidence To NZ Regional Councils and Territorial Authorities Annual Plan consultations – April 2022

This post is a replication of my paper in regard to COVID-19 evidence and facts for local government. I emailed it on 12 April to all 78 Regional Councils and Territorial Authorities on the occasion of their annual plan consultation process with their constituents. 

I've placed 6 recommendations before them in paragraphs 72, 82, and 91 of the paper as well as append my paper to the NZ Parliament Petitions Committee in respect to the petition in my name to amend section 5 of the Bill of Rights Act 1990 (BORA). 

Recommendation 1:  Council studies the evidence contained in the paper to the Petitions Committee and this paper and consider recommending to local Parliamentary Representatives and the NZ Parliament that they accept the petition and enact the suggested amendment adding a new Section 5A to NZ BORA. 

Recommendation 2:  Council supports the initiation of an adequately resourced, public, transparent, jurisdictionally competent commission of inquiry into the COVID-19 pandemic and the NZ Government COVID-19 Response be undertaken with terms of reference that ensures there are no limits to its power to gain disclosure, including to the NZ - Pfizer contracts for supply of Comirnaty. 

Recommendation 3:  Council oppose NZ's participation in any WHO pandemic treaty which causes NZ's Government to act arbitrarily, undemocratically, unscientifically, unethically or derogate from common rights including the rights and freedoms provided in NZ's Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Recommendation 4:  Council conveys its support for the propositions to the NZ Parliamentarians paying particular attention to the MPs who service your city, district or region.

Recommendation 5:  Any Council continuing COVID-19 Measures ought cease forthwith.

Recommendation 6:  Council considers promoting these materials to its constituency so as to ensure more New Zealanders are informed in respect to the facts and science of the Covid phenomena.

I had been working on it and the petition to amend Section 5 of BORA for a while and felt the need to forward this to Councils before the window for public input closes. 

I've kept it focused on the Covid matter and vaccine mandates, preferring not to expand it to three waters and more issues that Councils are already facing. 

One hopes that freedom lovers in the various council districts, cities and regions pick the recommendations up and lobby their councils to support these reasonable suggestions.

-----

  

Open Letter To all Regional Councils and Territorial Authorities on the occasion of your Annual Plan consultation – April 2022

Dear Chair, Mayor, Councillor, CEOs and Officers in council administrations,

Subject: Truth, Freedom, Rights and Responsibilities in the age of COVID-19

I write on behalf of those who might agree with the following statement;

“We have experienced something despicable with the COVID-19 Response Measures and Vaccine Mandates”

1. Please consider this paper and associated recommendations in your 2022 Annual and or Long Term Planning process.

2. By way of introduction, I, Greg Rzesniowiecki have previously written to all regional councils and territorial authorities in 2014 and 2018 in relation to your Council's Annual and Long Term Plans identifying overarching problems and suggesting policy solutions.

Introduction

3. This formal correspondence brings matters to your Council's attention to enable proper consideration of the impact of high level criminality and its detrimental effect on the people and economy of New Zealand.

4. Covid phenomena has dominated NZ and global life and policy settings for two years. What is it really about?

5. The likely vector of emergence for the mysterious SARS-CoV-2 virus is that it's a product of the global bioweapons¹ programs and likely was deliberately released given the lockstep response managed internationally. The evidence for this case is circumstantial though well considered and offers a plausible hypothesis, whereas zoonotic emergence of the bug is well discarded with available knowledge. The pangolin association is a myth and part of the official disinformation to protect Dr Fauci and friends who provided significant funding to Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).

6. It is important that Council on behalf of their people have a full picture of the Covid matter. To operate under false assumptions or in absence of a factual view of the data about Covid and the COVID-19 Response is potentially a fatal or life threatening decision.

7. Factual material and information within this paper proves beyond all reasonable doubt that Pfizer's COVID-19 Comirnaty gene therapy product is neither safe nor effective.

8. Criminal action is perpetrated as a result of the NZ Government's COVID-19 Response enactments, lockdowns and policy, acquiescence to, or promoting a particular ideological agenda, similar to other nation's policies (often Western jurisdictions) in respect to COVID-19 which might be paraphrased; “COVID-19 elimination and lockdown directives will drive more New Zealanders to be vaccinated.” This despite the novel nature of the gene therapy mRNA product and its unknown safety profile. All care and no responsibility gone mad.

9. Who directed the NZ Government to follow the “get vaccinated or perish” policy, as opposed to, treat the ill and leave the well and healthy to get on with their lives?²

10. What is in the vaccines that it is so important to vaccinate every New Zealander down to a very young age?

11. If it was so good people would queue for it, not be whipped into taking the toxic sorcerer's brew.³

    Evil flourishes where good men do nothing – Edmund Burke

    It is easier to fool a man than to convince him he has been fooled – Mark Twain

On fooling the people with industrial precision

A. Brainwashing with Professor Joel Dimsdale

12. Professor Joel Dimsdale discusses his latest book “Dark Persuasion: A History of Brainwashing from Pavlov to Social Media” in the linked video, which traces the evolution of brainwashing from its beginnings in torture and religious conversion into the age of neuroscience and social media. Dimsdale is distinguished professor emeritus in the Department of Psychiatry at UC San Diego.

Screen capture about 6 mins into the video on what brainwashing involves

B. Mass formation with Professor Mattias Desmet

13. “Mattias Desmet on Our Grave Situation” youtube video published 3 December 2021. Mattias Desmet, Professor of Clinical Psychology, Ghent University in Belgium,⁴ talks with Peak Prosperity's Chris Martenson about his work that connects past historical episodes of what is called “Mass Formation” (for example Nazi Germany and periods of communist control under Lenin and Stalin in USSR) and current events. Desmet's thesis suggests that unless a few brave and courageous people are willing to stand up and say “I don’t agree!” history suggests that we will end up with a fully totalitarian outcome. Who is for that?

14. New Zealand's Councils might provide part of the necessary and courageous solution.

Vaccine harm is enormous and growing with every jab

15. Unfortunately it is plain the NZ Government knew of the looming vaccination carnage; that is the harm, injury and death that would flow from vaccinating New Zealanders through the Government's access to Pfizer's data made available through the requirements of Comirnaty's Provisional Approval 3 February 2021 in its Vaccinate NZ project.

16. The NZ Government knew that significant numbers of New Zealanders would be killed and injured for the sole reason of accepting injection with the Pfizer mRNA lipid serum product.

17. The conspiracy is breathtakingly large where one acknowledges similar policies being enacted with similar contracts for mRNA vaccines in other people's nations to experiment on them.

18. When insufficient took up the mRNA injectable, the NZ Government mandated employees in chosen sectors of the economy both public and private to be jabbed or face economic ruin through termination of employment, plus driving businesses, employers and Councils to mandate their staff and limit public access to buildings and assets.

19. Post vaccination adverse reactions in NZ have already killed over 400 (confirmed on citizens database) and the number potentially killed is double that in suspected cases requiring further investigation - work is being done to clarify the circumstances of these deaths post jab.

20. Excess mortality in 2021 was 2000 deaths. The only change between 2020 and 2021 was 80% of New Zealand's adult population being vaccinated with Pfizer's mRNA gene therapy product.

21. It is reasonable to posit the post vaccination cull at over 1000 people and possibly more of the 2021 excess mortality (what other cause is there – there was no influenza in 2021 and NZ stats assure us that suicides were running at the typical ~600 per annum). If it is unreasonable to entertain such a hypothesis from this data, then it is important to at least investigate the Vaccine's toxic effects to determine the cause of an unusually high number of deaths in 2021.

22. Medsafe safety data on Pfizer's Comirnaty product declares that up to 28 February 2022 a total of 10,621,074 doses of Comirnaty have been administered and 58,135 AEFIs (adverse events following injection) were reported. In the same period a total of 156 deaths were reported to CARM after the administration of the Comirnaty vaccine.

23. Reporting of adverse events leading to injury or death is not mandatory, which means CARM is not an accurate signal of the harm, but its alarm light ought be glowing red with the injuries registered to date.

24. Since 17 January 2022 NZ's Government offered COVID-19 vaccination to 476,000 children between ages 5-11. Consent for children is legally determined by the guardian. That is perverse given children do not suffer much from Covid-19 symptoms, however, they will bear considerable risk of long term injury or death from Covid-19 vaccination.

Case to NZ Police

25. I wrote to the NZ Police through the agency of a specific detective officer in October 2021 offering a report; “Case to NZ Police” (attached as Appendix B). It outlined the Covid vaccine carnage; death, injury and destruction perpetrated to then ~270 deaths and 1000 serious injuries temporally associated with Vaccination. The report identified evidence of breaches of the Crimes Act including culpable homicide in the case of those killed.

26. The answer from the police officer was that operations management would not be pursuing any investigation into the COVID-19 Vaccination matter and further suggested that the charge wasn't culpable homicide and a charge of genocide was more likely appropriate. Further it was suggested that if one wished to pursue the matter it ought be referred to an international tribunal or court – which means the ICC International Criminal Court.⁵

27. Given the potential routes to a just solution are most likely in our own hands – it is critical that we the people of New Zealand look to our own laws, constitution and our own people power for that just solution. (See recommendations paragraphs 72, 82 and 91)

Nano structures in the Vaccines

28. Nano structures appear or grow in the Pfizer mRNA lipid emulsion product extracted directly from vials of Comirnaty – there are at least two known ingredients that are secret, however, there may be extra elements, and any synergies or processes resulting from interaction with a Vaccination host or more stimuli; electro magnetic radiation, heat; that are withheld from public knowledge or yet to emerge.

29. No one that I know of gave consent to be vaccinated with graphene oxide or similar substances seen in the mRNA vaccine vials. Graphene oxide is not regulated for human use as a medical intervention. Where these substances and structures were a known outcome of the Pfizer mRNA product and their inclusion in the Vaccine isn't disclosed to vaccine recipients, then it is prima facie a crime.⁶

30. No one from authority is forthcoming with any explanation in respect to the nano-scale structures despite repeated reports to NZ Ministry of Health officials, Government Ministers and NZ Police. There appears to be a conspiracy to deny and/or downplay any and all reports of deleterious elements or adverse effects associated with the COVID-19 vaccination products.

31. Already many hundreds if not thousands of New Zealanders have expired as a result of the COVID-19 Vaccination, and tens of thousands have suffered harm, injury, some might be long lasting or terminal conditions brought on by myocarditis, extreme clotting - thrombosis or strokes. Get a stroke or myocarditis as a result of a vaccination against a flu like illness? As of January 2022, the reported incidence of local and systemic side effects from mRNA was 27% in the general public – in NZ that would be about 1 million people suffering some side effect.

32. Toxins accumulate toxic effects - the more shots the more potential/real long term detrimental effects. Oncologists are noticing the onset of previously dormant cancers. The Pfizer product distorts the immune system, including components that fight off cancer, to lower the resistance a vaccinated individual's body would ordinarily use to counter foreign intrusion or toxins. This may be a design element to allow the mRNA lipid minimal resistance in its path and effect in a recipient's body. Potentially permanent switches to miss a flu like illness.

33. Long term immune system decline is forecast. There is the need to study vaccination recipients for more problematic symptoms and conditions yet to manifest that might not appear in similar numbers in the unvaccinated proportion of the New Zealand and global population.

34. We Covid sceptics⁷ are learning more as we study the Covid phenomena and the ground of its emergence. Some of this publicly available information is dismissed as misinformation and or disinformation. It is noteworthy that the ones hurling the misinformation slurs prefer not to discuss or debate the content and merits of that which they denigrate. The phenomena arises from the same mentality that use the pejorative 'conspiracy theory' slur to deny facts without discussing the matter.⁸

35. From Pfizer's documentation discovered through US FOIA action against the FDA we now know that the Pfizer product has literally thousands of adverse potential reactions as these are already observed in recipients or projected to arise.

36. From what is known about the mRNA products begs the question; “how anyone can give proper informed consent to the Comirnaty injectable product and boosters,” as clearly none were properly informed of the harmful and fatal potentials arising from the full dynamics of all the ingredients and their interface with individual human cell tissues in vital organs like brains, hearts and gonads in those who are Vaccinated.

Variation in Pfizer mRNA vaccine batches

37. The lethality of batches or lots of Pfizer and Moderna (and others) COVID-19 vaccination products varied, indicating malfeasance, or where unintended then criminal negligence. NZ does not check the contents of the vials other than maintain and audit their chain of custody and the associated documentation.

Pfizer Comirnaty is not safe - nor is it effective

38. All scientific evidence shows that whether a person has taken one, two, three or zero mRNA shots makes no difference to whether they can catch SARSCoV2 nor whether they can infect others with it. Recent Lancet articles prove this conclusively. Additionally data from the current epidemic in NZ point to the lack of efficacy of being vaccinated. Add to its ineffectiveness, the carnage and harm its deployment has caused, for a perspective about the lengths NZ's Government has gone to promote an unsafe novel product.

39. Manufacturers of the mRNA injection have never claimed that it stops infection or transmission of SARS-CoV-2. In fact, it was never designed to do it, or tested for it.

40. The number of people needed to vaccinate (NNTV) to prevent one infection is extremely large and astronomical to prevent one COVID-19 death.

41. COVID-19 morbidity is about that of a serious influenza season and is treatable using relatively cheap generic drugs. Early treatment of any serious symptoms of COVID-19 infection using all available remedies and therapeutics is superior to the NZ Government determination to vaccinate everyone.

42. Natural immunity is superior to any COVID-19 vaccine induced immunity.

43. People who accept the COVID-19 vaccine are as likely to become infected with the disease and transmit it. Vaccination drives variant selection to evade vaccines.

44. So far and according to the NZ Government's statistics with COVID-19 daily infections of thousands per day since late February, MoH data as of 6 April (link is archive of 5-4-2022 data) has a total of 741987 people have become infected including 82,682 active cases and 426 (or 456 - count with broader parameters) died with COVID-19 (and often more confounding medical conditions).

COVID-19 is no more deadly than influenza

45. About 400 to 450 people die as a result of respiratory infections and associated distress upon their preexisting conditions in influenza seasons and these generally fall in that winter and associated flu/cold season, an annual cull of the vulnerable and susceptible observed in statistics and from a study of human excess mortality. More die during a serious influenza season such as 2019. Each year 600 die by suicide.

46. NZ spent tens of billions running from the Covid pandemic, delayed for two years to Vaccinate the willing, coerced and those forced or blackmailed (loss of job) to take the clotshot, with a product that doesn't protect against infection.

47. Has NZ's COVID-19 Response aided in reducing mental health problems, or, has it exacerbated mental health and anxiety problems in the population – these are some of New Zealand's most vulnerable people. Pushing the precariat into destitution through Covid economic vandalism for two years is not economically nor morally smart.

48. The leading causes of death in 2019 were cancer, ischaemic heart diseases and cerebrovascular diseases (with 110.5, 47.0 and 21.5 deaths per 100,000 population respectively).

49. Applying the same statistical proportions to those who “died from or with Covid-19” in NZ since the pandemic's commencement in 2020, would reveal that less than ten (10) per 100,000 of the population died from/with Covid-19 to date. A death rate of 10 per 100,000 would translate to a few more than 500 deaths for New Zealand's population of 5 million. NZ's 2022 Omicron epidemic might close at 600 deaths (similar to influenza season) before NZ moves to the winter influenza season. That will be one to watch.

50. Suicide statistics are over 12 per 100,000! Cure that also – in curing suicide we would necessarily ease a lot of pain and create a more egalitarian social system, where economics and commerce would align with real human needs. See my recommendations to your 2018 Annual Plan process.

COVID-19 Response measures are social and economic vandalism

51. Many people who were in sound social and economic positions have had their livelihood stripped or severely throttled. Recall the increase in dairy farmer suicides as they had their price of milk product recession mid last decade. I imagine a similar cull is underway in light of vandalism done to the general economy from official COVID-19 Measures particularly Auckland mixed business, retail, hospitality with thousands closing.

52. NZ was once noted for its friendliness and warm welcome, whereas, the COVID-19 Response has divided the nation from the world, divided the nation, divided people in its streets and families – great job if one's object is to tear society apart with fear

The basis for policy ought be evidence and data not hearsay and ideology

53. Why did some Councils adopt discriminatory policies against constituents on the unscientific basis presented by the government’s Traffic Light system for supposed control of a inconsequential disease in NZ?

54. With the so-called Omicron epidemic the NZ Government is lowering restrictions despite record case numbers. What possible logic was there in restricting New Zealanders when there was no COVID-19 in the community, except to coerce them to be vaccinated?

55. Did the many NZ councils and territorial authorities that applied or continue to apply a medical apartheid system upon their constituents through arbitrary action, such as; “no jab no access” consider their human rights obligations in law?

56. Medical apartheid was imposed without recourse to any democratic process, or consideration of basic human rights as outlined in the NZ Bill of Rights 1990 (BORA) or the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) to which NZ has acceded.

57. The CCPR articles 4 and 7 need to be comprehended in the current Covid-19 matter;

Article 4 part 2. No derogation from articles 6, 7, 8 (paragraphs I and 2), 11, 15, 16 and 18 may be made under this provision.

Article 6 part 1. Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.

Article 7 No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.

58. We offer facts based on evidence and data. Why did normally intelligent people and councillors or council administrations take draconian measures to deny citizens the right to access council facilities to which they are entitled - many being ratepayers?

59. Are those vaccinated and harmed as a result of the mandated medical intervention to seek redress from Council and or other mandating authorities, businesses and employers? Where an authority injures a person as a condition of work, surely they are liable for the harm caused? Where it is death is it a culpable homicide – manslaughter.

60. Councils breach their fiduciary contract with ratepayers where they deny individuals access, particularly on such spurious grounds.

Greg Rzesniowiecki and previous forays into long term plans

61. Greg has previously written to all regional councils and territorial authorities in 2014 and 2018 in relation to Councils Annual and Long Term Plans;

2014

62. In 2014, I wrote on behalf of the Renewables, a Motueka based Climate Action group, who held an active interest in New Zealand's ability to mitigate Climate Change. The Renewables 2014 correspondence focussed on the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) Free Trade Agreement negotiations.

63. As a result of our efforts people in a variety of NZ Councils' constituencies mobilised and lobbied their councils to adopt the TPP Policy Solution, twelve (12) councils from the smallest in South Wairarapa to the largest Auckland who initiated the policy.

64. With the lack of transparency and secrecy in respect to the contract for the supply of the Pfizer gene therapy injectable product it is difficult to determine whether the Pfizer COVID-19 Comirnaty product is supplied by Pfizer NZ, or a foreign Pfizer corporation – to ascertain whether the contract is subject to the CPTPP framework treaty and legislation.

65. Nevertheless, we know from other contracts with Albania and more nations that contract disputes shall be governed by the Laws of the State of New York, USA and 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.

2018

66. In 2018 I wrote Councils with some proposals about governance and wise policy setting to ensure certain adverse areas of politics and hegemony under imperial decree or direction were to be avoided or countered through use of the “rule of law” as an instrument to establish just outcomes. Alas those proposed policies did not see any serious light of day, though their general adoption might have led to better outcomes in the recent period.

Where available elegant policy solutions to problems are not adopted that non adoption might be unjust and against the “common rights” of individuals and their societies.

Observations, Conclusions and Recommendations

Amend Sec 5 of the NZ Bill of Rights to make the “Life and security of the person” sacred!

67. I am increasingly of the opinion that the only authority that can counter corruption is enforceable rule of law at a local, national and international level. However, the institutions are themselves corrupt.

68. The highest law making body in the land is the NZ Parliament comprising the 120 Representatives and the Commander in Chief, NZ's Governor General. Might they listen?

69. I have an active petition before the NZ Parliament's Petitions Committee seeking an amendment to protect and make sacred our rights and freedoms in sections 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights 1990 (BORA) under the heading “Life and security of the person.”

70. The petition was sponsored by ACT leader David Seymour and read in the House 14 December 2021.

71. I provided the Petitions Committee with a substantial paper Evidence paper and report on proposal to amend NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990 to Petitions Select Committee 1 February 2022 setting out my comprehension of the law and the evidence in respect to the COVID-19 pandemic and the science which demonstrates the unlawful nature of the NZ Government's official response. (A pdf copy of the paper is attached at Appendix A)

72. I strongly recommend that Council makes some resources available to study the Sec 5A petition paper and its implications for NZ and its citizens. Many of the statements I make in this paper to Councils rest on evidence discussed in that more complete expose.

Recommendation 1: Council studies the evidence contained in the paper to the Petitions Committee and this paper and consider recommending to local Parliamentary Representatives and the NZ Parliament that they accept the petition and enact the suggested amendment adding a new Section 5A to NZ BORA.

A public inquiry into the COVID-19 matter is imperative

73. Earlier in this paper I reference science which studied the Pfizer mRNA product extracted directly from a Comirnaty vial under microscopy. The observed nanoscale structures form after exposure to a trigger such as heating, radio frequency radiation or an interaction with the microscope slide surface or other substance. The structures form as the lipids presumably holding the mRNA come out of suspension in the serum in response to heating or stimulation (body heat from being injected into a warm living body).

74. The nanoscale structures grow in geometric forms with apparent right angle connections and continue to grow where conditions allow it. Informed speculation is that the main composition of the structures is the controversial compound molecule graphene oxide. Where Pfizer and others include graphene oxide in their products for vaccination of our people and fail to inform the recipients of the intervention a crime is committed. The people of NZ and the planet need to determine who is ultimately liable. In NZ the question is whether Pfizer or the NZ Government or both in collusion are liable for the crime, so conspiracy to injure and kill.

75. The scale of the undertaking by the perpetrators is extreme with billions of people injected repeatedly with the sorcerer's brew.

76. How did it come to this? We better find out properly with a transparent inquiry.

77. It is imperative that an adequately resourced, public, transparent, jurisdictionally competent commission of inquiry into the COVID-19 pandemic and official response is undertaken with terms of reference that ensures there are no limits to its power to gain disclosure, including to the NZ - Pfizer contracts for supply of Comirnaty.

78. A Royal Commission might be appropriate provided the terms of reference are broad enough to allow a full investigation including facilitating public disclosure of all actions of NZ's Government, Ministries, public servants, mainstream media, selected academics, local and foreign corporations and any other parties who had a bearing on the direction of the COVID-19 pandemic, its origins and any undisclosed agendas at work favouring one course of action over others.

79. Any COVID-19 public inquiry must fully assess the adequacy of the safety processes for the release of novel or new medicines and consider the pharmacovigilance measures employed to capture any concerning safety signals in respect to the Pfizer and other COVID-19 vaccinations and any new therapeutics advanced as COVID-19 cures.

80. The COVID-19 public inquiry must undertake its own independent analysis of the Pfizer and more COVID-19 injectable products to determine the full contents of a range of vials from diverse batch lots. The diverse selection is required because of the already well known variance in the lethality of COVID-19 mRNA injectables including Pfizer's product amongst the varied lot and batches of vials.

81. The COVID-19 public inquiry must address how and why effective cheap generic antiviral remedies and therapies were banned and denied to symptomatic COVID-19 patients.

82. The COVID-19 public inquiry must address why the existing institutions; NZ Police, NZ Judiciary, NZ professional and academic bodies including statutory bodies such as NZ Medical Council and NZ Nurses Council were unable to resist being fooled or were willing accomplices in the Covid vaccinate the planet with mRNA product conspiracy.

Recommendation 2: Council supports the initiation of an adequately resourced, public, transparent, jurisdictionally competent commission of inquiry into the COVID-19 pandemic and the NZ Government COVID-19 Response be undertaken with terms of reference that ensures there are no limits to its power to gain disclosure, including to the NZ - Pfizer contracts for supply of Comirnaty.

WHO to get more power to declare pandemics under a new global pandemic treaty – what could go wrong?

83. New Zealand along with many other nations sponsored a resolution to the World Health Assembly (WHA) calling for the negotiation of a new pandemic treaty. The draft resolution went to the WHA November 2021 meeting where it passed.

84. New Zealand is already a party to the International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005 adopting them from 2007.

85. There has been much criticism of the WHO role and lead in the COVID-19 pandemic. A proper inquiry is needed to apprehend what has gone right amongst all the things that have gone wrong or were wrongly advised to nation parties to the WHO organisation. It is problematic to develop a new global pandemic treaty absent any comprehension about need, intent or agendas driving the new proposal, nor without knowing what went well and wrong and why with WHO's global COVID-19 Response including directions or advice to NZ Government.

86. If the NZ COVID-19 Response outcome is any guide, NZ and more nations might be better off not party to any treaty that binds NZ to particular actions without any democratic input from NZ's citizens and a proper and transparent discussion of the costs and benefits of any action. Censuring dissent is the path of would be dictators or dictarorial regimes whether totalitarian or populist.

87. Was it the NZ Government's intent in March 2020 to lockdown NZ and maintain an elimination strategy until a COVID-19 vaccine was available, without knowing either the efficacy or safety profile of the resultant vaccine? Or was the vaccine component of the NZ Government response developed afterward?

88. Given we know the vaccine is neither safe nor effective, (a thousand dead from adverse reactions and Omicron ripping through the vaccinated population) how does one score the NZ Government response? Is two years of fear driven elimination a good policy option? Delaying COVID-19 infection has served no useful purpose and at huge cost.

89. Is WHO a trustworthy organisation? Unless we study the Covid phenomena and WHO's role we cannot determine an answer and ought not place blind faith in its directions.

90. Will a WHO Pandemic Treaty provide more ability for the NZ democracy to work out a policy response to a future pandemic or will the treaty likely deliver an arbitrary, politicised, profit driven, mRNA vaccine centric, and potentially ill-fated outcome similar to the global COVID-19 Response.

91. Will a future WHO Pandemic Treaty also ban the use of other therapeutics and generic off label medicines with proven efficacy in dealing with and alleviating respiratory and viral infections? WHO compromised trials in regard to the efficacy of ivermectin during the pandemic. Why on earth would NZ agree to such chicanery other than to maximise big pharma profits?

Recommendation 3: Council oppose NZ's participation in any WHO pandemic treaty which causes NZ's Government to act arbitrarily, undemocratically, unscientifically, unethically or derogate from common rights including the rights and freedoms provided in NZ's Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Recommendation 4: Council conveys its support for the propositions to the NZ Parliamentarians paying particular attention to the MPs who service your city, district or region.

Recommendation 5: Any Council continuing COVID-19 Measures ought cease forthwith.

Recommendation 6: Council considers promoting these materials to its constituency so as to ensure more New Zealanders are informed in respect to the facts and science of the Covid phenomena.

Ends..

Appendix A 

Evidence paper and report on proposal to amend NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990 to Petitions Committee, February 2022 

(available for download at this NZDSOS link;  

https://nzdsos.com/2022/02/08/petition-to-parliament-to-amend-the-bill-of-rights-act/ or dropbox linked pdf:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kagv3gqgt4yajvp/Evidence%20paper%20Petition%20SC%20section%205A%20NZ%20BORA%201990_Final_4-2-22.pdf?dl=0 )

Appendix B 

Case to NZ Police October 2021 

(available for download at this dropbox linked pdf:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0ma37xwzu5vqa9x/Case%20to%20NZ%20Police%20%28final%29.pdf?dl=0 )

Footnotes from the paper

1  The link is to a video Covid Crimes – A Witness: Dr Richard Fleming; https://galleries.vidflow.co/awitness Dr Fleming provides context in this 54 minute video for the remainder of the content in this paper as well as explicitly identifying the evidence that the bug SARS-CoV-2 is a bioweapon and later in the interview that the mRNA vaccines are also products of bioweapons programs. Without coronavirus gain of function research done illegitimately the world would have escaped the Covid phenomena.

2  Parody - “I Bought Myself A Politician” - Mona Lisa Twins published August 2021 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QAKz_cxTlQ Serious take - long form journalism in the Columbia Journalism Review; “Journalism's Gatekeepers” 21 August 2020, by Tim Schwab about everyone's favourite computer programmer, turned philanthropist, turned vaccinologist – Bill Gates: https://www.cjr.org/criticism/gates-foundation-journalism-funding.php

3  US VAERS data in excess of 25,000 deaths temporally associated with the COVID-19 vaccinations as at 1 April 2022; https://openvaers.com/covid-data/mortality are similarly reflected in UK and European pharmacovigilance web based data platforms. Additionally NZ Medsafe CARM data as of 28 February 2022 has 156 reports of death and over 58,000 reports of adverse events many unresolved or likely terminal as a result of severe disability associated with myocarditis and more medical conditions; https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/COVID-19/safety-report-41.asp. Of note, it is well established in scientific literature that adverse events, injuries and death are under reported to pharmacovigilance systems.

4  Prof Mattias Desmet profile at Gent University Belgium: https://biblio.ugent.be/person/801001743835. Desmet has been interviewed by numerous people over the past year, as a web search would reveal: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Mattias+Desmet+Mass+Formation%22

5  Whereas expert opinion informs that international rule of law is corrupted by the hubris of the powerful nations who use aggression with impunity knowing that they are unlikely to be prosecuted by the ICC or any other tribunal: https://dezayasalfred.wordpress.com/2022/04/07/counterpunch-no-right-arises-from-a-wrong/

6  The implications of, and consequences from nano-structures in people's blood is horrific, nay evil, where it is intended by the manufacturers and those in the COVID-19 conspiracy loop, to inject the unknowing and trusting or credulous public with more than just mRNA and its lipid carrier.

7  Only Covid sceptics in the sense of scepticism about the received wisdom and official COVID-19 narrative promoted by NZ Government and authorities and more at a global level including the WHO and UN and more national authorities in foreign jurisdictions such as the US CDC, NIH, or FDA.

8  Not wanting to distract from Covid and its implications, it is important to apprehend that NZ academia is not the happy state of scientific inquiry and discovery one might expect. Academics themselves are indicating concern at loss of academic freedom: https://www.newsroom.co.nz/academics-divided-on-their-own-freedoms Also in September 2019 I wrote almost 700 NZ academics forwarding an essay of my discoveries in respect to the 9/11 event – pointing to the false flag and inside job nature of that crime from the perspective of the available public information only to recieive not one response other than “out of the office” type automatic returns. The 9/11 essay for your spare time reading which none have refuted or rebutted: https://values-compasspointsinaposttruthworld.blogspot.com/2019/09/nz-academy-911-militarism-climate-will_11.html If Empire can lie the world into war based on the 9/11 crime lie, then it can lie the world into accepting experimental mRNA gene therapy products for profit and whatever other agendas – none benign.