February 14. 2016

The Federal Government of New Zealand interrogated, arrested, imprisoned and deported (Feb.14, 2015) a Christian person who is absolutely innocent of any crime or misconduct. The false charges by the Federal Government of New Zealand against the absolutely innocent Christian is based on utter lies – satanically contrived by the churches of New Zealand; lies which were maliciously fabricated, publicly disseminated (cyber bullying), and officially reported to New Zealand Police - by the lying pastors of the churches of New Zealand. Among the many public lies invented by New Zealand’s satanic pastors of churches, one churchianity lie was officially accused against the innocent Christian also by the Federal Government of New Zealand: “threatening attendees and being generally disruptive”.

(http://nzchristiannetwork.org.nz/warning-re-person-travelling-nz/)

(http://www.kyrkor.be/New-Zealand-Christian-Network.pdf)

(http://www.kyrkor.be/New-Zealand-Christian-Network-of-persecution-by-pastors.htm)

(http://www.kyrkor.be/Devilish-Churches-in-Auckland-New-Zealand.htm)

(http://www.kyrkor.be/St-Johns-Bucklands-Beach-Church-New-Zealand.htm)

(http://www.kyrkor.be/Blockhouse-Bay-Baptist-Church-Auckland-NZ.htm)

(http://www.kyrkor.be/Howick-Baptist-Church-New-Zealand.pdf)

(http://www.kyrkor.be/Wellington-City-Council-New-Zealand.htm)

Letters 1: ---------------

To: New Zealand Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet

To: New Zealand Minister of Justice Amy Adams

To: New Zealand Minister of Foreign Affairs Murray McCully

To: Deputy Chief Executive for Immigration New Zealand

To: New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs

To: New Zealand Independent Police Conduct Authority

To: New Zealand Police Minister Michael Woodhouse

To: New Zealand Embassy & Mission to the European Union

To: New Zealand Office of the Ombudsman

To: New Zealand Controller and Auditor-General

The Government of New Zealand’s national expulsion (deportation Feb.14, 2015) of an innocent person, based on utter lies; lies which were maliciously invented, sustained, publicly disseminated and officially reported by the pastors of the churches of New Zealand.

(http://www.kyrkor.be/New-Zealand-Christian-Network.pdf)

(http://www.kyrkor.be/New-Zealand-Christian-Network-of-persecution-by-pastors.htm)

(http://www.kyrkor.be/Devilish-Churches-in-Auckland-New-Zealand.htm)

(http://www.kyrkor.be/St-Johns-Bucklands-Beach-Church-New-Zealand.htm)

(http://www.kyrkor.be/Blockhouse-Bay-Baptist-Church-Auckland-NZ.htm)

(http://www.kyrkor.be/Howick-Baptist-Church-New-Zealand.pdf)

On Saturday February 14, 2015, the New Zealand Immigration authority interrogated, imprisoned and deported an innocent person upon his arrival at Auckland International Airport.

On Friday February 13, 2015, I had flown from Adelaide, Australia towards Wellington, New Zealand, with a connecting flight via Auckland, NZ. Upon my arrival at Auckland International Airport, the New Zealand Immigration authority officers took me aside from the passport control counter, escorted me to a room, and thoroughly interrogated me during the following ten hours; from 6:30pm until 4:30am. In conjunction with the NZ Immigration ten-hour interrogation in their custody, NZ Immigration officers fingerprinted my hands, refused to provide a meal of food, and finally handed me over to custody of the New Zealand Police.

Question 1: Is the New Zealand Immigration authority’s refusal to provide a meal of food during a ten-hour interrogation in their custody compliant with New Zealand regulations?

In custody of the New Zealand Immigration authority, the NZ Immigration officer presented an ultimatum: either I must to cooperate with their audio- and video- recorded interview, or otherwise, the NZ Immigration authority would deny a citizenship-qualified visitor visa entry to New Zealand. Upon my request, an explicit agreement was reached between the New Zealand Immigration officer and I, that I would cooperate with their intended interview on the condition that New Zealand Immigration would provide to me a personal copy of their audio/video recorded interview. The Immigration officer explicitly agreed that a copy would be provided to me at the conclusion of the interview. Later, after the explicit promise of provision of a copy of the video recorded interview, and after the technical recording devices had been set up in the interview room, the same Immigration officer retracted from the explicit promise of provision of a personal copy of the recorded interview, and instead promised to provide an address to a New Zealand authority to whom I could apply for a copy of the recorded interview. Neither after the recorded interrogation, nor after the decision to deport, nor after the NZ Police incarceration in their prison cell, nor after the uniformed and armed parade to the deportation flight to Australia, was ever any address provided to whom I could apply to attain a personal copy of the NZ interrogation.

Questions 2: Which authority in New Zealand is keeping the recorded NZ Immigration interview, and how is a personal copy of the NZ interview attained? Which authority in New Zealand keeps a copy of the New Zealand Immigration officer’s false summary of the interview, and how is a copy of that New Zealand Immigration authority’s synoptic lies obtained?

During the New Zealand Immigration authority’s 10-hour custody in their interview room, the Immigration officer requested to see a copy of my Australian visa. I handed over the printed Australian visa paper to the New Zealand Immigration officer, but the New Zealand Immigration officer never returned that printed Australian visa. My passport, however, was returned to me in an open envelope by the cabin crew inside the assigned deportation aircraft after I had been allocated a seat by the crew.

Question 3: Why did New Zealand Immigration retain my printed Australian visa? Is New Zealand Immigration authorised to confiscate Australian visa documentation?

After New Zealand Immigration had interrogated me and made a decision to deport, New Zealand Immigration handed me over into the custody of the New Zealand Police, who arrested me, stripped me of my personal belongings, refused to provide me the right to speak with a lawyer although I repeatedly requested to the NZ Police officers to allow me to speak with a lawyer, placed me into the backseat of a police car, drove me to a crowded “Counties Manukau Police Station” prison, removed my glasses, shoes and watch, and placed me into one of the prison cells of that Manukau Prison.

Question 4: Do non-New Zealand citizens under the custody of either New Zealand Immigration or the custody of New Zealand Police, have no legal rights? Under the custody of either New Zealand Immigration or the custody of New Zealand Police, do non-New Zealand citizens have no legal right to speak with a lawyer?

Prior to the Police officers at Auckland International Airport transporting me to Manukau Prison, the police officers asked me if I take any medications. I replied that I am necessitated by doctor’s prescription to take sleeping medication in order to fall asleep. At the conclusion of the Immigration interrogation at 4:30am, when Immigration handed me over to the custody of NZ Police, I had not had a moment of sleep for 25½ hours. I stated to the NZ Police that I was sleep-deprived and hungry, and asked if I would be given opportunity to sleep inside their prison. The NZ Police replied that I may place one of my prescribed sleeping tablets into a zip-lock bag, which the Police officers would hand over to the prison guards. However, at my transfer to the offensive police thugs at the Manukau Prison, the NZ Police refused to allow me to have a meal of food and refused to allow me to take the prescribed sleeping medication tablet.

Question 5: Is there no law in New Zealand which regulate prisoner treatment in relation to dietary nourishment, medication, and opportunity for sleep in conjunction with interrogation, detainment and imprisonment?

After several hours of imprisonment inside this Auckland prison cell, where other prisoners were recurrently screaming and shouting wildly into the corridors, a prison guard finally opened the door and ordered that I accompany the NZ Police back towards Auckland International Airport. A securely specialised prisoner-vehicle transported me to the airport, and the NZ Police escorted me into a secure room of the airport. A New Zealand Immigration officer together with a uniformed and armed New Zealand Police officer then paraded me towards the airport gate where a flight was destined towards Melbourne, Australia. Along the officer-escorted public walk towards the departure gate, the NZ Immigration officer declared to me in response to my question why I had been denied my right to speak with a lawyer: “You are not a New Zealand citizen, and therefore you have no rights in this country.”

Questions 6: Did the NZ Immigration officer speak in agreement with New Zealand law? Do citizens of other nationalities have no legal rights in New Zealand? Is it accurate that I had no legal right to speak with a lawyer while under the custody of the NZ Police? Did I also have no legal right to consult with a lawyer while under the custody of NZ Immigration?

During the ten-hour NZ Immigration interrogation, the interviewing NZ Immigration officer explained the reason for their detainment with the New Zealand Immigration officers. The interviewing NZ Immigration officer explained that NZ Police had flagged in the computer system to NZ Immigration that Torsten Nenzen should be declined entry into New Zealand. According to the NZ Immigration officers, the NZ Police had been informed by the pastors of the churches of New Zealand that Torsten Nenzen should be stopped, because: (1) Torsten Nenzen had been "threatening members of their churches", and (2) because of Torsten Nenzen’s "general disruptive behaviour". These two citations are exactly what I read on the Immigration officer’s computer screen in the interview room, and is what the NZ Immigration officer confirmed by reading it aloud to me.

Question 7: How can I obtain a copy of the New Zealand Police allegations against me?

These two New Zealand Government exact citations are utter lies invented by the pastors of the churches in New Zealand, and these are the two official reasons that the NZ Government detained, interrogated, arrested, imprisoned and deported me from New Zealand.

Question 8: Does neither the New Zealand Police nor the New Zealand Government have a legal obligation to investigate, attain facts/evidence and align with reality, or are the words of pastors of churches the absolute and indisputable authority for NZ Police and the New Zealand Government? Has the falsely accused no legal right of legal defence against the fabricated lies by New Zealand’s pastors?

The sheer evil of the pastors of the churches of New Zealand was already known, and the evidence to the satanic conduct of the pastors of the New Zealand churches had already been exposed.

(http://www.kyrkor.be/New-Zealand-Christian-Network.pdf,   http://www.kyrkor.be/New-Zealand-Christian-Network-of-persecution-by-pastors.htm,   http://www.kyrkor.be/Devilish-Churches-in-Auckland-New-Zealand.htm,   http://www.kyrkor.be/Blockhouse-Bay-Baptist-Church-Auckland-NZ.htm,   http://www.kyrkor.be/St-Johns-Bucklands-Beach-Church-New-Zealand.htm,   http://www.kyrkor.be/Howick-Baptist-Church-New-Zealand.pdf)

Satan, through the utter lies invented by the pastors of the New Zealand churches, caused the NZ Government to deport Torsten Nenzen from New Zealand, and caused the NZ Government to in effect indefinitely ban Torsten Nenzen from any future entry into New Zealand.

All the pastors of New Zealand and their New Zealand Christian Network (http://nzchristiannetwork.org.nz/2014/02/20/warning-re-person-travelling-nz/), who lied to the New Zealand Police and subsequently to the Government of New Zealand, that Torsten Nenzen should be denied entry into New Zealand because he would have been "threatening members of their churches", and because he would constitute "general disruptive behaviour", represent satan through these fabricated lies.

The cyberstalking of utter lies which the churches of New Zealand are engaging against their innocent victim (http://www.kyrkor.be/New-Zealand-Christian-Network.pdf) is not only unethical and an expression of satan, but this continuous evil of the New Zealand churches should also be an offence by law.

Questions 9: Is there a specific cyberbullying law in New Zealand that is applicable for prosecution of these cyberstalking New Zealand churches? Does the ‘New Zealand Harassment Act 1997’ protect people against the cyberstalking churches?

(http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1997/0092/latest/whole.html)

New Zealand Immigration authority would be interpreted to also have indefinitely banned me from entering New Zealand in future. New Zealand Immigration authority stated that I would be required to attend an interview at a New Zealand Embassy for any subsequent visa application. A carrier of a passport from Sweden is normally granted a 3-month tourist visa upon arrival in NZ.

Questions 10: Why has New Zealand imposed a requirement against me to attend an interview at a New Zealand Embassy if I ever had wanted to visit New Zealand again? Am I actually banned indefinitely by the New Zealand Government from entry into New Zealand? Why am I a persona non grata by the New Zealand Government?

My intended secondary objective for visiting Wellington, New Zealand, for three weeks beginning Feb.13 2015, was to share information on sidewalks in Wellington about the Biblically described person Jesus Christ. In advance of my flight from Australia towards Wellington, New Zealand, I had formally inquired with the Wellington City Council regarding their view of the legalities of street evangelism in Wellington. As a background information to this enquiry to Wellington City Council 2015 can be mentioned, among other cities, a previous enquiry to Auckland City Council 2014. One year earlier in Feb. 2014 while I visited Auckland, New Zealand, for five weeks, the Auckland City Council in email correspondence prohibited any distribution of religious literature in Auckland. In 2014 in Auckland, I therefore consulted a lawyer who confirmed that Auckland City Council was acting in breach of the NZ Bill of Rights. Hence, I contacted the Auckland Mayor and his legal team with my legal objection to the explicit prohibition of Christian literature distribution. Auckland City Council, shortly thereafter, then reversed their previous decision of a categorical ban against Christian literature distribution, and instead acknowledged in writing my legal right to distribute Christian information in public in Auckland. On the contrary to Auckland City Council 2014 who maturely chose to change their unlawful decision and adapted their city policies to reflect the NZ law, the Wellington City Council 2015 chose to persist their breach of NZ law. Wellington City Council decided that Christians who want to individually distribute Christian literature in public (or to individually converse with members of the public about Christianity), must apply to the Wellington City Council for a permit. Once the Wellington City Council and the Mayor of Wellington was confronted with the ‘New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990’, the Mayor of Wellington and the City Council simply ceased to communicate further, after that Wellington City Council had declared:

“The bill of rights has no bearing on the process we follow to authorise activities within the road reserve.”

Wellington City Council and the Mayor of Wellington not only contravened the New Zealand national law (the NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990) and contravened its international agreements of the UN (United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights), but Wellington City Council and their Mayor of Wellington also simply declined to carry out their obligations as public servants by their refusal to further communicate and to answer relevant questions; questions relating to the legality of the Wellington City Council decision in requiring of individual Christians to apply to the City Council for a permit in order for Christians to share information about Christianity on public property.

The complete dialogue with Wellington City Council and the Mayor of Wellington is disclosed here: http://www.kyrkor.be/Wellington-City-Council-New-Zealand.htm

New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990: http://www.kyrkor.be/New-Zealand-Bill-of-Rights-Act-1990.pdf

Universal Declaration of Human Rights: http://www.kyrkor.be/Universal-Declaration-of-Human-Rights.pdf

Question 11: Has the Wellington City Council and the Mayor of Wellington violated the NZ Bill of Rights Act in their requirement that individual Christians must apply to obtain a permit to individually offer Christian literature in public and to individually speak with members of the public about Christianity?

Although government authorities and city councils of New Zealand ignore their Bill of Rights Act 1990 and other laws, at least New Zealand has a Bill of Rights within their legislation. Australia has none.

Shame upon all the lying, persecuting and devilish pastors of the churches of New Zealand.

Shame upon the Wellington City Council for its disregard for religious freedoms and its violation of universal human rights.

Shame upon the Government of New Zealand for detaining, maltreating, arresting, imprisoning and deporting an innocent visitor to New Zealand as a consequence of the utter lies of the devilish pastors of the churches of New Zealand.

Best regards

Torsten Nenzén

Email:  torsten@nenzen.net

Mobile:  +46 707 77 77 54

Skype:  blessisrael

Letter 2: ---------------

To:  New Zealand Government

Hello,

The yet unanswered questions of the letter sent to New Zealand’s Federal Government representatives on April 14, 2015: http://www.kyrkor.be/New-Zealand-Federal-Governments-satanic-church-lies.htm

The New Zealand Immigration officer, Martha Tuli, as evidenced by the audio recording inside the interrogation room, deliberately distorted the Border Interrogation Report Statement.

The New Zealand Immigration manager of Intelligence Service, Amanda Mehrtens, shamefully distorted and cowardly evaded to answer the relevant questions asked. From the audio recording of the New Zealand Government interrogation, the lies by NZ immigration officer Martha Tuli is evident. All evidences from the audio recording during the New Zealand Government interrogation, and all evidences of the satanic pastors of churches in New Zealand (http://www.kyrkor.be/Devilish-Churches-in-Auckland-New-Zealand.htm) prove that New Zealand Government is dishonest, cowardly, corrupt and in part malicious. The Government of New Zealand has been deceived by the intentional lies of the satanic pastors of New Zealand’s churches.

Apart from all deliberate distortions, untruths, absence of factual justice, and intentional evasion of provision of proper answers to the questions which I previously addressed on April 14, 2015 to the Federal Government of New Zealand, the Federal Government of New Zealand has yet to provide any factual support for the New Zealand Government decision to incarcerate and later deport my person.

I request:  that Government of New Zealand truthfully and properly answer all the questions I addressed to the Government of New Zealand on April 14, 2015. (http://www.kyrkor.be/New-Zealand-Federal-Governments-satanic-church-lies.htm)

I also request:  that Government of New Zealand provide factual support and explain the beneath New Zealand Government absolute lies (A, B, C) against my person:

New Zealand Government false accusation A:

“Open source information indicates that you have been expelled from numerous churches here in New Zealand and possibly in other countries around the world. In addition to this, information received from another government agency is that during your last visit here to New Zealand you had been attending church services and threatening attendees and being generally disruptive.”

According to New Zealand Government, the government agency referred to in this government accusation is the New Zealand Police.

Question A1: When, where, how and whom have I threatened an attendee of any church?

Question A2: When, where, and how have I been perceived as generally disruptive? Specifically, what is the New Zealand Government accusation?

New Zealand Government false accusation B:

“Ministers alert each other to his attendance at their churches because he adopts the same approach with every church he visits.”

Question B1: What specifically is this ambiguous “same approach” which the New Zealand Government accuses me of?

Question B2: Why are the ministers of New Zealand’s churches alerting each other?

New Zealand Government false accusation C:

“Mr Nenzen is travelling to various English speaking countries for the sole purpose of finding a woman to marry so he can emigrate to that country. His pattern is to attend a church and asks to join young singles groups for the sole purpose of meeting a young Christian woman so he can emigrate to that country.”

Never have I in any circumstance expressed to anyone ever, that my sole purpose in visiting any country on earth, would be to find a Christian woman to marry. I have stated that I have two objectives when I travel, and that my first objective is to find a Christian woman of God’s appointment for marriage.

Never have I in any circumstance expressed to anyone ever, that my purpose of marriage would be to emigrate. I have always stated that I will move to whichever place on earth my wife is. The referred public text in the bi-monthly report (http://www.kyrkor.be/Inhumane_Swedish_Pastors.pdf) regarding my only option of emigration/naturalisation through marriage is contextually stated as “As a Bible-believing evangelical Christian man, Christian marriage is in principle impossible for me within Sweden.” There are only three possible explanations for the New Zealand Government deliberate omission of context and for its misrepresentation of my public statement; low intelligence, malice, or a combination of these two.

Question C1: What is the factual basis for the false accusation “sole purpose”?

Question C2: What is the factual basis for the false accusation “so he can emigrate to that country”?

The yet unanswered letter sent to New Zealand’s Federal Government representatives on April 14, 2015:  http://www.kyrkor.be/New-Zealand-Federal-Governments-satanic-church-lies.htm

Information regarding the New Zealand Government and the intentionally dishonest and satanic pastors of churches of New Zealand: 

1.       http://nzchristiannetwork.org.nz/warning-re-person-travelling-nz/

2.       http://www.kyrkor.be/New-Zealand-Christian-Network.pdf

3.       http://www.kyrkor.be/New-Zealand-Christian-Network-of-persecution-by-pastors.htm

4.       http://www.kyrkor.be/Devilish-Churches-in-Auckland-New-Zealand.htm

5.       http://www.kyrkor.be/St-Johns-Bucklands-Beach-Church-New-Zealand.htm

6.       http://www.kyrkor.be/Blockhouse-Bay-Baptist-Church-Auckland-NZ.htm

7.       http://www.kyrkor.be/Howick-Baptist-Church-New-Zealand.pdf

8.       http://www.kyrkor.be/Wellington-City-Council-New-Zealand.htm

Regards,

Torsten Nenzén

Email: torsten@nenzen.net

Mobile: +46 707 77 77 54

Skype: blessisrael