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.

[David Merrill]

The choppy nature of the lines tells me that his posts are a cut and paste job. He is grabbing the content from somewhere else so that the flow does not fit the format of the field provided by this Website.

The recurrant assertion is that I am a stateless person. So what? The purpose as Anthony Joseph pointed out is that one has a Record to form in the "exclusive original cognizance" of the United States Government according to the 'saving to suitors' clause.

"...the United States, ... within their respective districts, as well as upon the high seas; (a) saving to suitors, in all cases, the right of a common law remedy, where the common law is competent to give it; and [the district courts] shall also have exclusive original cognizance of all seizures on land,..." The First Judiciary Act; September 24, 1789; Chapter 20, page 77. The Constitution of the United States of America, Revised and Annotated - Analysis and Interpretation - 1982; Article III, §2, Cl. 1 Diversity of Citizenship, U.S. Government Printing Office document 99-16, p. 741.

It is frustrating that Mysticone will not put out the effort to be understood. I think the part that he is premising his correction on is incorrect though. I am a statesman:

That usage of the Great Seal of Authority is a class 5 felony (forgery) for anybody to do so who is not affiliated with state business, and it is against the rules to file an amicus curiae (without consent of both parties and leave of the court) unless you are the territory, state or the District of Columbia. To call me a stateless person when I am doing these things routinely, when the State Seal is often part of my signature with a notary seal too, is simply incorrect.

Everybody I know and I presume Genesis 1:27 correct that means everybody I don't know too has the same inherent state that I do - what Michael Joseph wisely directs us to consider our (e)state - our individual estates. And once our own estate is actualized by our acceptance and awareness we become statesmen and stateswomen of that estate - our dominions that we are in stewardship of.

I think that Mysticone should just tell us what his name is and what school of thinking he is trying to promote? Who are you Mysticone? I can get a good guess using keywords but may be off thinking that you and Motla68 are associated just because you have listened to the same videos and gone to the same seminars. Tell us where you learned I am a stateless person and maybe I can start to work around your poor and insulting form here.

Something else that seems a common denominator is the idea that there are only a small class of signatories party to the Constitution. One person in every six homes or so, in America is signatory to the Constitutions - they are called Government Employees. The rest of us can hold them to good behavior while they work - from whatever position that grants them that employment.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[MYSTICONE]

theres nothing mysterious about it , David...... I am familiar with your style of posts from the past 5-6 years. From the Original Jason Whitney Suijuris forum,
to Charles Sujuris Club. Just add a 666 to the Mystic, 6 protons, 6 electrons, 6 neutrons.. Im not affililated with Motla or Coresources Solution in any capacity.
I came here on my own "Google Merits and Accords" ...... You were curious what "school of thinking" that i study from. Im sure you have heard of David Parker Williams?
He has many treaties on the internet about the Right of Self Determination. The point I was "contrasting" is that the Judicary has endless patience for "bad trustees"
in terms of ownership of property, IT IS called defendent unable to pay, or defendent failed to identify himself, then a WARRANT is issued, so it severly limits your
trustee position in its ability to perform future contracts, unless you form your own estate per the UN CHARTER . YOUR main premise is that the 13th amendment, creates
diveristy to be a UNITED STATES citizen in the competent common law. SO your admitting to be a UNITED STATES citizen, but with common law territories/jurisdiction,
and delegation of authority easements, correct. HOWEVER, IF you carefully read the LIEBER CODE/ THE LAW OF WAR and the 11th AMENDMENT case law on the subject matter of your diversity arguments, you quickly find that your simply trying to "RAIL AGAINST THE MATRIX/COMPACT YOU are a citizen of. THE contrasting point, that it would be more worthwhile for people tired of being citizens, instead of wasting there time railing agains the "MAN" IN THERE refusuals to contract, it would be more worthwhile to create there own estate and have diplomatic and sovereign immunties, which the UN AFFORDS, not saying your saviing to suitors doesnt have merit in the JUDICARY, but the case law
pertaining to the 11th amendment, make your redemption attempts to the ORIGINAL COGNIZANCE futile .. YOU would be better served, by collecting a study group among us, and us forming our own compact with each other.... ITS CALLED looking at the bigger UNIVERSAL PICTURE.

[David Merrill]

theres nothing mysterious about it , David...... I am familiar with your style of posts from the past 5-6 years. From the Original Jason Whitney Suijuris forum,
to Charles Sujuris Club. Just add a 666 to the Mystic, 6 protons, 6 electrons, 6 neutrons.. Im not affililated with Motla or Coresources Solution in any capacity.
I came here on my own "Google Merits and Accords" ...... You were curious what "school of thinking" that i study from. Im sure you have heard of David Parker Williams?
He has many treaties on the internet about the Right of Self Determination. The point I was "contrasting" is that the Judicary has endless patience for "bad trustees"
in terms of ownership of property, IT IS called defendent unable to pay, or defendent failed to identify himself, then a WARRANT is issued, so it severly limits your
trustee position in its ability to perform future contracts, unless you form your own estate per the UN CHARTER . YOUR main premise is that the 13th amendment, creates
diveristy to be a UNITED STATES citizen in the competent common law. SO your admitting to be a UNITED STATES citizen, but with common law territories/jurisdiction,
and delegation of authority easements, correct. HOWEVER, IF you carefully read the LIEBER CODE/ THE LAW OF WAR and the 11th AMENDMENT case law on the subject matter of your diversity arguments, you quickly find that your simply trying to "RAIL AGAINST THE MATRIX/COMPACT YOU are a citizen of. THE contrasting point, that it would be more worthwhile for people tired of being citizens, instead of wasting there time railing agains the "MAN" IN THERE refusuals to contract, it would be more worthwhile to create there own estate and have diplomatic and sovereign immunties, which the UN AFFORDS, not saying your saviing to suitors doesnt have merit in the JUDICARY, but the case law
pertaining to the 11th amendment, make your redemption attempts to the ORIGINAL COGNIZANCE futile .. YOU would be better served, by collecting a study group among us, and us forming our own compact with each other.... ITS CALLED looking at the bigger UNIVERSAL PICTURE.

Untrue. You are incorrect about the Libel of Review.

There are a few people who misunderstand the Instructions at the end and try it without formally becoming suitors, who have taken it to appeal. They are the ones you must be thinking of who rail against the machine or whatever you keep constructing around Hollywood's The Matix. I cannot say it any better than Anthony Joseph did and what has been in the instructions for years.

You are simply incorrect.



Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S. For one thing you might have to convince me that not only is The Matrix a message from the Illuminati or whatever, that you must convince me you have the correct key to the esoteric and the interpretation.

[Anthony Joseph]

theres nothing mysterious about it , David...... I am familiar with your style of posts from the past 5-6 years. From the Original Jason Whitney Suijuris forum,
to Charles Sujuris Club. Just add a 666 to the Mystic, 6 protons, 6 electrons, 6 neutrons.. Im not affililated with Motla or Coresources Solution in any capacity.
I came here on my own "Google Merits and Accords" ...... You were curious what "school of thinking" that i study from. Im sure you have heard of David Parker Williams?
He has many treaties on the internet about the Right of Self Determination. The point I was "contrasting" is that the Judicary has endless patience for "bad trustees"
in terms of ownership of property, IT IS called defendent unable to pay, or defendent failed to identify himself, then a WARRANT is issued, so it severly limits your
trustee position in its ability to perform future contracts, unless you form your own estate per the UN CHARTER . YOUR main premise is that the 13th amendment, creates
diveristy to be a UNITED STATES citizen in the competent common law. SO your admitting to be a UNITED STATES citizen, but with common law territories/jurisdiction,
and delegation of authority easements, correct. HOWEVER, IF you carefully read the LIEBER CODE/ THE LAW OF WAR and the 11th AMENDMENT case law on the subject matter of your diversity arguments, you quickly find that your simply trying to "RAIL AGAINST THE MATRIX/COMPACT YOU are a citizen of. THE contrasting point, that it would be more worthwhile for people tired of being citizens, instead of wasting there time railing agains the "MAN" IN THERE refusuals to contract, it would be more worthwhile to create there own estate and have diplomatic and sovereign immunties, which the UN AFFORDS, not saying your saviing to suitors doesnt have merit in the JUDICARY, but the case law
pertaining to the 11th amendment, make your redemption attempts to the ORIGINAL COGNIZANCE futile .. YOU would be better served, by collecting a study group among us, and us forming our own compact with each other.... ITS CALLED looking at the bigger UNIVERSAL PICTURE.

http://therightofselfdetermination.c...lfrom=%2Fforum

For $27/month, you too can gain the privilege of conversing on those forums; and, if you act now, you can create a downline of subscribers who you refer to the site and make money for those referrals.

Can anyone say... pyramid scheme???

This guy is a bona fide provocateur and is attempting to distract us from our discussions and work here. Little does he know that this "brain trust" assembly is discerning and not susceptible to that kind of interruption or interference. What he does not know is that we use his brand of "agenda trolling" in order to further strengthen what we know to be true.

Nice try. Go play somewhere else; your approach and intent has shown NO clarity or good will of any kind.

[David Merrill]

http://therightofselfdetermination.c...lfrom=%2Fforum

For $27/month, you too can gain the privilege of conversing on those forums; and, if you act now, you can create a downline of subscribers who you refer to the site and make money for those referrals.

Can anyone say... pyramid scheme???

This guy is a bona fide provocateur and is attempting to distract us from our discussions and work here. Little does he know that this "brain trust" assembly is discerning and not susceptible to that kind of interruption or interference. What he does not know is that we use his brand of "agenda trolling" in order to further strengthen what we know to be true.

Nice try. Go play somewhere else; your approach and intent has shown NO clarity or good will of any kind.

Thank you for the research Anthony Joseph. I am putting trust in it.

[David Merrill]

I have drifted through a couple first reactions to this news.

I have settled tonight on this response. I think that it is poor judgment to put such stake in The Matrix for a source of historical social modeling as seems to be present on that website link. The truth be told though, I really don't know what that is about because I feel a little too intelligent than to invest the $27/month to pursue it. It almost feels like a copyright infringement to build a ponzi scheme on the movie trilogy.

Here is what we are looking at:

I think starting this thread - calling the 'saving to suitors' clause asinine was inflammatory and to try justifying it with such half-baked theories as Hollywood movies and soforth is indicative that Mysticone is hoping for some kickback funds from the pyramid scheme website. I also think that anybody with $27 and a healthy curiousity might find time to explore that if they find it interesting.

So unlike with Motla68 - when he excluded the remedy from an explanation that I had to prod out of him for many posts over a couple days, I will not banish Mysticone for promoting another website or calling the 'saving to suitors' clause asinine. Even for calling me "thick".

I believe that Anthony Joseph has a justified and accurate accusation framed here. I suppose that the question is what to do about it? I do not see other propositions about remedy and insights into mental models a threat to the remedy written into the law - especially after a couple days of seeing the examples Motla68 has brought to light, and would not have done so except that I lifted his banishment here.

At the moment I deem Mysticone's acute and even rude intrusion here productive, albeit unpleasant and in my judgment improperly balanced, leaning way too much on a presumption that The Matrix is more than great Hollywood entertainment that we all have subjective and different interpretations about. I feel like warning you all that I think that putting the weight that Mysticone has expressed in believing that there are important messages that apply to such important mental models as reproducible remedy about courts, law and money/taxes is foolish.

Like Frederick Burrell expressed though, if you do not like Mysticone or anybody else here, you can jockey your mouse accordingly. As Mysticone continues, or not to insult me and remedy here I will respond accordingly - or not. The quality of learning and entertainment here are my concern and I learned a lot about that from my experience with Motla68. I think as this and other developments - especially should the Quatlosers become bored enough to start registering here - we will find very few situations were with the 'saving to suitors' clause and §16 of the Fed Act written into the law from inception - we will not endure any type of intrusion without benefitting and learning a great deal.





Regards,

David Merrill.

[Mark Christopher]

BECAUSE the common law man has not standing or capacity to Suitor against the State he is a citizen/trust of.
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.. 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 am sure the Wachowski Brothers would be flattered about your thoughts regarding their keen insights into the "real world" thru the creation of the matrix. MYSTICONE, with all due respect please correspond respectfully. Your use of CAPS and vehement ramblings (although it does appear to have some truth) are giving me 'asine'.

Asine - the feeling you get when someone is trying to ram their beliefs up your arse.

Please note that you are starting to look a little frazzled by your style of writing. But it is a free country, right? If anything I have learned a lot from this thread from David and Michael J responding to your blurps, so my appreciation for that is offered. So, do you have any experience with Lawful Money or the LoR? You are here to learn these things are you not? If not, I respectfully ask not to gum up the works becuase some of us are trying to learn and really don't need the misdirection.

Be Well
Mark Christopher.

[David Merrill]

I took a look and Mysticone has posted about 15 posts, all here on this thread that he started. Being that he is here selling the Matrix Solutions plan, I interpret him being so tidy about it a sign of respect for the website.

Thank you Mysticone.

[motla68]

Quote from David Merrill:
" Motla68 tends to believe that there is some kind of a funding program inherent with directing the coupon be delivered to the Treasury for Redemption. That is written into the law - "

At is written:
TITLE 12 > CHAPTER 45 > SUBCHAPTER II > § 4421
(2) Over-the-counter derivative instrument
The term “over-the-counter derivative instrument” includes—
(A) any agreement, contract, or transaction, including the terms and conditions incorporated by reference in any such agreement, contract, or transaction, which is an interest rate swap, option, or forward agreement, including a rate floor, rate cap, rate collar, cross-currency rate swap, basis swap, and forward rate agreement; a same day-tomorrow, tomorrow-next, forward, or other foreign exchange or precious metals agreement; a currency swap, option, or forward agreement; an equity index or equity swap, option, or forward agreement; a debt index or debt swap, option, or forward agreement; a credit spread or credit swap, option, or forward agreement; a commodity index or commodity swap, option, or forward agreement; and a weather swap, weather derivative, or weather option;

There is 2 ways to do it, one through a trust to redeem a security (there is many kinds of securities to swap) through IRS,
The other way is through a broker who I spoke directly to had told me what this is called and that I would need a " Credit Swap Broker " to do it.
Please reference the U.S. code above as it is written.

motla68