Seeking Alpha

LookingConfident's  Instablog

Send Message
Longstanding investor in Looksmart (and a 70 yr old ex-tradesman), who has a passionate interest in the problems of newspapers along with their success in all their monetisation attempts made, on the web. For the "times are indeed, a changin", I feel. [17th of Aug, 2011 - Print media... More
View LookingConfident's Instablogs on:
  • The "Fiction Of Law" Is Dead. - It Now Has No "Crown", Backing It.

    Attention all "Policy enforcers" - Please be advised...

    That since September 1, 2013, all the Magistrates/Judges answering to the state, all involved lawyers, police, government officials, and those posing as government officials, any and all officers of corporate franchises including all local councils - all men and women who are involved with or, who are clearly all coercing "Juridical Persons" (that's us - as living beneficiaries of the superior & lawful, 'Live Birth' Trust), are all committing a crime.

    Because what you are all doing, is now unlawful.

    In a previous blog-post I mentioned another Facebook reaction:

    The Jesuit Pope/Vatican admits in the latest Motu Proprio that there are de facto Vatican representatives who administrate entities called "Juridical Persons" that are listed on a Vatican Registry?

    Hello.. Did we just see a tacit admission of the Birth Registry of the Strawman /Juridical Person Trust at the Vatican?" >

    "the Birth Registry" .... "the Vatican"??

    A qualified interpretation of this Law (for all concerned) is as follows:

    [That] "From September 1, 2013, all the judges, lawyers, police, government officials, and those posing as government officials, and all officers of all the corporate franchises and entities organized under the auspices of the UNITED STATES [corporation] and all its state franchises become fully, personally and commercially liable for their any actions and omissions against the living beneficiaries of the public trusts"

    From Facebook:

    Yikhai Wong asked a great question, in our Facebook group...

    "Before learning about lawful rights, I've current arranged payment plans with the Fines unit in SA: $2100 worth of fines Civic compliance Victoria : $900 worth of fines.

    Any way to void these contracts? It's due $100 every month to these two unlawful corporations on 15th monthly and it's overdue now."

    My reply came, as follows:

    Why not stay in honour and approach them, yourself?

    Firstly, write a 'soft' initial letter asking for a senior man or, women in both organisations to contact you back (in a reply from them), telling them that the purpose for your contact being - that you are wishing to establish a 'person to person' dialogue, relating to the matter.

    Add a note, that you are basically wanting to clear the matter up completely.

    When you get that NAME, then write and ask them the question?

    Tell them that in recent times you have become aware of information that now has you (Harry/Harriet Smith - name him/her) holding full commercial liability for what can clearly be proven to be, an unlawful arrangement.

    And that you feel strongly that it lacks any "power" whatsoever, at Law.

    Then add this question?

    Hi Harry/Harriet,

    In a reply back to me over the next 7 days, could you Harry/Harriet please advise me (and in full, precise, details, as to just where you get any "power" at law (meaning, what "crown backing" at law do you or, any man/woman from your corporation - and as living men or, women ultimately have) for any of you to now continue to enforce what amounts to an unlawful punishment on me (being the existing payment plan), as a living man?

    Please be sure to reply to me within the 7 days with a satisfactory answer and that through this query sent registered to you, I now require it, to be answered fully, by you.

    Your failure to do so Harry/Harriet (and within the 7 days) with a satisfactory answer and that through this query sent registered to you, it will then mean my stopping any further payments being made by me to your corporation, as per the existing plan I am on.


    Yikhai Wong

    Jodie Rogut then commented: "You've already entered into a guilty contract with them by accepting their payment plans."

    I then replied, that ....... the question being asked basically is, just where does any man or, women get any "power" at all from, at law (meaning, what "crown" is backing them, at law), for them to continue to enforce what clearly now amounts to being an unlawful punishment on another living man or, one that you yourself refer to as being, "a guilty contract"?

    Why is it considered to be a "guilty" contract by you when it has only ever been, always one that was made under deception or, coercion (besides any previous corrupt crown involvement), ab initio?

    There is NOTHING to enforce any such [guilty] "CONtract", at law.

    How is this "guilty contract", a lawful one?

    Your answer is what I am looking forward to. [No reply, as yet.]


    So, why is all this so? It's because...

    The "Fiction of Law" is dead. It now has no "crown" backing it.

    Since the CQV Act (1666) a few centuries of corrupt Popes (the crown) and many from the Vatican (bishops/cardinals) along with the Vatican bank, that all supported the criminal fraud at law - that is, the NAME "game" (the Legal fiction or, colour of law) and they clearly did so, for a 'cut' of the action.

    On his way out the door (he was the 1st Pope to stand down in many centuries), Ratzinger/Benedict announced the closing down (the "killing off") of the corrupt Roman cult. (Gun at his head?)

    The new Pope (Francis) then made a further decree, that put the final nail in the coffin. (September 1st, 2013.)
    Gold Shield Alliance (among others/Frank O'Collins), says below:

    ........... "The age of the Roman Cult, as first formed in the 11th Century and that hijacked the Catholic Church first formed by the Carolingians in the 8th Century, then the Holly Christian Empire or Byzantine Church by the 13th Century and the world at large by the 16th Century ceased to exist around March 14th 2013 upon the election of Pope Francis."
    Testimony to the closure?

    Vatican Bank Nett profit fell by 97% in the 1st year, following the closure.

    If you ask me, I'd suggest that there are many "policy enforcers" who are already strong candidates to receive a similar "please explain" from many victims, of their unlawfulness.

    To break a law is to commit a crime. No one is above the Law.

    And Australia, like the United Kingdom and Canada, has no statute of limitations in criminal matters.

    Always only an opinion.


    Jan 16 4:51 AM | Link | Comment!
  • How To Get Out Of Paying Fines, Rego, Fees And Tolls?

    Facebook -

    "How to get out of paying fines, rego, fees and tolls"

    For ALL Statute matters? Here's a great option? Unlose-able?

    Elect to go to court on the matter - then simply challenge the jurisdiction of the Court?

    Tell them in no uncertain terms - that you won't be attending court.

    Certainly consider doing so if you fully comprehend that the corrupt "fiction of law" is now dead.

    That it (the fraud "NAME game", that was once "powered" through the Roman cult) now, no longer exists, at Law.

    It was shut down/killed off (lawfully - meaning, that it no longer has the/any "crown's backing"), at the end of February/March in 2013. (Benedict XVI/Francis.)

    The Pope's Decree (Motu Proprio), has put the final nail, in it's coffin. For what now becomes a "flow-on" effect, it's only a matter of time.

    Why is this so?

    It's because a "maggot's caught" no longer has any jurisdiction over you or, I as a living man or, woman, that's why. It deals (only) in, the fiction.

    < These challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court can be legally explained.

    The very first step a court takes before a default of appearance case is to demonstrate that it has the legal authority to deliver a judgment.

    If the jurisdiction of the Court cannot be found, the case will be terminated; therefore, there is no need for the non-appearing party to address the details of the claims brought against it by the other party. >

    Image Credit: Peace Palace, The Hague via

    International Law and the South China Sea

    China's approach to international law is driving the US and ASEAN into a 'juridical alliance.'

    By Truong-Minh Vu and Trang Pham

    December 22, 2014

    China's position paper published on December 7, 2014 is one of the rare documents in which Beijing officially expressed its opinions on the issues in the South China Sea as well as on the arbitration proceedings that the Philippines initiated at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in January 2013.


    Always, only an opinion.


    Dec 26 11:40 AM | Link | Comment!
  • Deprivation Of Liberty And The Rule Of Law

    Rule of Law

    All states are corporations. As a corporation, they are "registered" (ultimately) with the Holy SEE in Rome. - This then means that they are all under the Law of, the registrar. (Pope Francis, being the "boss".)

    All men and women in the corporations are not "powered" by that same Law, to punish anyone. This includes the police. No one can give them any power outside the Lawmaker.

    This includes any/all the politicians.

    Just as you and I have no "Lawful" right to stop another from doing whatever they are doing -- unless it can be proven that they are clearly breaking a law or, there is strong enough evidence that can be shown or, proven in a court of law that they are about to break the law. (A reason then, can be justified.)

    And this is the only "power" that police themselves have, too.

    This has been made very clear by the lawmaker:

    (The Supreme Law - as from September 1st, 2013, says that no living man or, women can now get to punish another living man or, women unless they are to break the law in applying of, any administrative sanction. [Any deprivation of liberty. That right to travel freely. An unfettered right.]

    The Rule of Law says that no one is above or, can break a law.

    This is clear from within that September 1st, 2013 Decree/Law:

    Pope Francis says that:

    ......... "One of the cornerstones of the system introduced by this law is constituted by the so-called rule of law, as a result of which administrative sanctions may be imposed only in cases defined by law."

    Here's that law, issued Motu Proprio -

    And it's true, what the owner of this car says:

    "I don't need anyone's permission to roam the earth it's not my fault people wear costumes and think they can get a note from someone saying they're above other humans and can harm steal kidnap rape and kill."

    From Facebook

    Aussie Bush Lawyer shared Franky Jay's photo.

    Franky Jay
    Follow · 5 hrs ·

    "It's been 4 months since I dropped 'rego' and licence, driven well over 25 hours driving, I've been through Melbourne many times, been pulled over twice, been arrested once, nearly had car taken once, the highlight of it all was when hearing the cops say they know the government is a corporation and they don't care that they enslave people as that's what they are paid to do. It's all worth it. I don't need anyone's permission to roam the earth it's not my fault people wear costumes and think they can get a note from someone saying they are above other humans and can harm steal kidnap rape and kill."

    Join us on Facebook:

    Always, only an opinion.


    Dec 25 2:06 AM | Link | 1 Comment
Full index of posts »
Latest Followers


More »
Posts by Themes
Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.