Why saving to suitors is an asine methodology

[shikamaru]

BECAUSE the common law man has not standing or capacity to Suitor against the State he is a citizen/trust of.

SUITOR. One who is a party to a suit or action in court. One who is a party

to an action. In its ancient sense, suitor meant one Who was bound to attend

the county court, also, one who formed part of the secta. (q.v.)

A citizen can't be a party to a suit?

If you are trying to claim a common law remedy, you are doing so as an admitted " STATELESS PERSON",
STATELESS PEOPLE HAVE NO STANDING/CAPACITY TO SUE, ONLY TRUST OWNERS HAVE THE CAPACITY
TO SUE PARTIES, BUT BEING THAT YOU DO NOT OWN THE TRUST, THE STATE DOES, YOU HAVE NO CAPACITY
TO SUE FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT-= THUS TORT FEASOR..

How can a citizen be a stateless person when a citizen is a member of the state?
I think you are drawing scope to a case beyond its bounds.
You are aware that citizen and subject are synonymous, yes?

YOU CANT EXIST OUTSIDE THE SYSTEM, AND THEN
COMPLAIN THAT THE STATE INJURED YOU BECAUSE= STATELESS INHBABINATS HAVE NO RIGHT OF PROTECTION AS FAR AS
CONTRACTS ARE CONCERNED, NOW IF YOU WANT TO LIVE TOTALLY OFF THE GRID ON YOUR OWN ISLAND AND NEVER
CONTRACT WITH YOUR FELLOW BRETHREN, THEN YOUR REFUSAL TO CONTRACT WITH SOCIETY MIGHT HAVE MORE
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES- THUS WHERE THE REMEDY OF THE RIGHT OF SELF DETERMINATION, WRITTEN INTO
THE UN CHARTER- GIVES ONE THE ABILITY TO FORM ONES OWN COMPACT/STATE, SO THAT WAY THE CAN
EFFECTUATE REMEDY IN ABILITY TO FREELY CONTRACT/COMPACT/TREATY WITH DIPLOMATIC AND SOVEREIGN IMMUNITIES.
tHE RIGHT OF SELF DETERMINATION, AND THE RIGHT OF EXHILE, THATS WHAT THE KEYMAKER WAS ABOUT IN THE MATRIX SERIES.
TO OWN PROPERTY, YOU HAVE TO FORM YOUR OWN ESTATE- WHICH THE UN CHARTER BASED ON NATURAL LAW AND THE LAW
OF NATIONS ALLOWS YOU TO DO. OTHERWISE BY TRYING TO EXIST OUTSIDE THE TRUST SYSTEM AND NEVER CONTRACT-
WHO CAN REALISTICALLY LIVE A VAGABOUND LIFE LIKE THAT- THATS WHERE THE RIGHT TO CONTRACT/ RIGHT TO PROPERTY USE ARGUMENT BECOMES WEAK.
SURE YOU CAN REDEEM LAWFULLY MONEY, BUT YOU DONT HAVE STANDING FOR LAWFUL MONEY, BECAUSE YOU ARE ACTING IN THE CAPACITY AS A STATELESS
PERSON, BUT THEN CONTRADICTING YOURSELF ASKING THE STATE TO OFFER YOU PROTECTION IN THE REFUSAL TO CONTRACT, WHICH YOU ARE NOT A PARTY TOO.
ITS THE OLD ADAGE "TRYING TO HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO"

I think you can make your point without shouting by way of all caps.