Author #2
Forum Replies Created
11-19-2004
Friends and supporters of Joe Banister,
Early this morning I received a phone call from Joe Banister. As you know, yesterday a grand jury returned an indictment against Joe and Al Thompson. Joe was picked up by law enforcement authorities early yesterday morning and was subsequently released later in the afternoon on his own recognizance.
First, know that Joe is in good spirits.
Second, know that Joe said he was treated well by the IRS special agents and the other law enforcement officials.
His arrest was simultaneously coordinated with the arrest of Al Thompson. As part of the normal booking procedures he had a pre-trial probation interview. The interviewer made vague references to another matter about which Joe then had no knowledge of. This matter Joe eventually learned had to do with Al's arrest, which was still in progress at the time. They did not want to divulge much to Joe until they were assured that Mr. Thompson had been arrested and taken into custody. After that was confirmed and after they finished the interview with Joe, they were able to determine that Joe should be released on his own recognizance. I think he had a hearing scheduled for 2 p.m.
Third, know that Joe believes that one of the keys to his success lies with all the support he receives from all of you and he asked that I specifically remind everyone of that. He knows that a large number of people support him and are pulling for him and he asks that those who pray for him to continue in that.
As you can imagine, this type of thing can be very disruptive to families and can be especially trying for spouses. Please include in your prayers a request that peace and tranquility will remain in the Banister household.
I expect you may hear from Joe soon.
Sincerely,
Concerned former IRS Agent (identity protected)
JWR,
You are 100% correct. Dump the attorney and defend your own freedom. You can't challenge jurisdiction any other way! An attorney cannot assert any of your rights on your behalf. Only YOU, the sovereign, can. Below is a very good explanation of why we can?t be free and at the same time allow an attorney to represent us in court. The quote below is extracted from a federal court decision:
Quote:“The privilege against self-incrimination [Fifth Amendment] is neither accorded to the passive resistant, nor the person who is ignorant of their rights, nor to one who is indifferent thereto.? It is a fighting clause.? Its benefits can be retained only by sustained combat.? It cannot be claimed by an attorney or solicitor.? It is only valid when insisted upon by a belligerent claimant in person.“?? [U.S. v Johnson, 76 F. Supp. 538 (1947), Emphasis added]All rights come not from the government, from a judge, or any law, but from God, our Creator alone, just as the Declaration of Independence says. Since rights don?t come from any man, but from God, then it?s vain and foolish to ask any earthly man what your rights are. To remain free, we must know what rights are instinctively and be willing to literally fight for them at all times. It?s not only impossible, but illegal for an attorney who practices law to fight for your rights within the context of a court proceeding. Your attorney cannot claim or exercise any of the rights God gave you while he is representing you in any court proceeding.
Please notice the boldfaced and underlined words the court used in the above quote! What human endeavor are these words normally used in connection with? WAR! Freedom is not for the timid, but for the brave. That is why they call America ?Land of the Free and Home of the Brave!?. If you want to stay free, then you must be willing to fight with anyone and everyone who tries to take away that freedom, and especially with tyrannical public servants.
Quote:Rights [read Liberties] are always demanded!Also note in the quote above that what the court above called a ?privilege? is really structured in the Bill of Rights as a ?Liberty? or restraint on government! Who is afforded ?civil rights?? One who knows them and demands them! Our pledge of allegiance says ?with liberty and justice for ALL?. If you are going to stay free, then you must help everyone to stay free. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. The weakest link is the most helpless, ignorant, and defenseless members of society. We can only remain free so long as we are willing to donate our effort and money to defending the weakest members of society from government abuse. If we only protect our rights and don?t help our neighbor defend his, then the tyrants in government will isolate, divide, and eventually conquer and enslave everone.
Yes, I have visited Sui Juris several times, and it's a good site. They have several links to us.
God bless,
Author #2
JWR,
Please send me a private message and I'll get you a link to an updated of the program that may fix your problem. You can import the data you have entered so you don't have to reenter it.
In addition, please tell us:
1. What the type and version of the operating system is that you are running.
2. What version of MS Office or Access you are running.
3. Whether you have all the latest service packs installed on Office and what service pack that it.
4. Whether you have the latest Windows Service packs are installed and what the latest one is that you have installed.
Without this information, it is very difficult to reproduce and fix the problem you are having.
God bless,
Bing,
VERY well said! Couldn’t have put it better myself. The 861 argument is mentioned in:
Great IRS Hoax, Section 5.7.6
http://famguardian.o…reatIRSHoax.htm
. . .but notice it is last in chapter 5 because it’s quite frankly not a good argument to use in a court. It’s a minefield, as you so eloquently described! HOWEVER, your comments were so good that they have been added to the next version of the Great IRS Hoax (version 3.76) by the Fellowship Board. See the new section 5.7.6.11.
That makes your work IMMORTAL, my friend.
Fiddo,
Great Article! Just posted it on the Family Guardian website as well:
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/News…d-FL-041018.pdf
Guess what? I just called up Mr. John Garrison who wrote the article and he is for real! The Florida Attorney General's office website where he works is:
http://myfloridalegal.com/contact
The phone number for the switchboard is: 850-414-3300.
Ask for “John Garrison”. When I spoke with Mr. Garrison in the Florida Attorney General's office, I thanked him for his courage in exposing the IRS scam. He acknowledged writing the article. I didn't ask him for any help, but just offered him the link to the Great IRS Hoax book to help him further with his research. He was very thankful.
Mr. Garrison also said the number of people calling him has created problems for him at work because he can't get his job done and there are so many people calling him to thank him for writing the article that exposes the IRS fraud 😀 !
Bing,
Right on the money. To catch a thief and a crook, you have to think like one. You have a knack for that, you know?…thinking like a crook, I mean. I have that telepathic ability as well.
😀
I'd like to qualify the above question with the proviso that anyone who responds must have followed the govenrment's own procedures for those using the nonresident alien status, which is that if they filed suit against the federal government, then they must have done so in the Court of Claims and can do so nowhere else. See the IRS Internal Revenue Manual section 35.18.10.1:
Quote:Internal Revenue Manual, Section 35.18.10.1? (08-31-1982) District Courts
Section 1402(a)(1) of the Judicial Code (28 U.S.C. 1402(a)(1)) provides that if an action is brought against the United States under section 1346(a) of the Judicial Code by an entity other than a corporation, it must be brought in the judicial district where the plaintiff resides. Accordingly, where an individual resides outside of the [federal] United States (e.g., a nonresident alien), he or she may not bring a refund suit in a district court.? Malajalian v. United States,504 F.2d 842 (1st Cir. 1974). These cases may be brought only in the Court of Claims.
See:
http://www.irs.gov/i…35/ch18s09.html
Anyone who claims to be a nonresident alien and argues the issue in a U.S. District Court is guaranteed to lose, based on the above, because he is wrongully admitting that he “resides” in the judicial distirct, which means that he is NOT a “nonresident”. Below is what happens when people don't follow the procedures above, documented in the Dept. of Justice Criminal Tax Manual, section 40.14[2]:
http://famguardian.o…DCTM/taxc40.htm
Andyd,
You may be using the wrong version of Adobe Acrobat reader. Please download and install the latest free version from Adobe at:
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html
If that doesn't fix it, the file may be corrupted. We did have problems building it because someone else assembled it for us and the file came to us corrupted. We did try to fix it but maybe we didn't get all the kinks out.
God bless,
Fiddo,
W-4 is the WRONG form! W-8BEN is the only proper form for people who aren't employed with the federal government and who are “nationals” and “nonresident aliens”, as far as we can tell. See:
http://famguardian.org/TaxFreedom/Instruct…pEmployerWH.htm
See also:
Federal and State Withholding Options for Private Employers
If you're not going to follow what's on this website or tell us why its wrong, then please avoid telling people how to DISREGARD what's on this website and fall into the same trap you did. AFTER you have read the above and explained what, if anything, is wrong about the above, then and only then should you be asking how to do it a different way.
Andyd,
You have an older version of the Acrobat reader…probably 4.0. Try downloading and installing the FREE Acrobat Reader 6.0 from http://www.adobe.com and your problem should go away.
Andyd,
The 6209 manual that is best to use, we believe, is the one that was released BEFORE that year. There are three versions that come with the MF Decoder: 1997, 1998, and 2003. The years you are decoding are all prior to 2003, so the 1998 version is the most appropriate. That's just an opinion, and we could not find anything in any IRS publication that would further address your question.
God bless,
Bing,
Hilarious! 😆
JWR,
In response to your earlier inquiry about what happened after our my friendly July 10, 2003 meeting with the IRS Gestapo in their offices:
1. The IRS apparently dropped pursuing the 26 USC 6700 Civil charges entirely, from what I can tell. I haven't heard a peep out of them after the embarrassing meeting they had with me. I guess they want to cut their losses:
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/News…tack-030710.htm
2. There have been no more calls or discovery on that issue from Mr. David Gordon, who was the grim reaper for the devil in that case. No more threatening letters since then. The friendly meeting and the correspondence I sent them subsequently apparently deterred them.
3. Earlier this year on March 18, 2003, the IRS launched a criminal investigation of “HANSEN”, based an imputed tax liability for years 2000, 2001, and 2002. The investigation began with the sending out of 8 IRS form 2039 summons to various financial institutions.
4. On May 4, 2004, a James Kerr, Revenue Office, asked for tax returns for years 2000-2002 for a person with a similar name who was not me. I called him and had a long chat with him about his lawful responsibilities. Apparently, Mr. Kerr is trying to gather evidence for Jason Powell to use against me, and I gave him far more than he ever bargained for. He could spend the next year reading and still not finish looking at everything I sent him that is directly related to the case. It had a copyright notice so he couldn't use it against me without witness immunity under 18 U.S.C. 6002. It also said that if any part of the information was used, ALL of it had to be admitted into evidence as a condition of the copyright.
5. On 5/21/2004, I re-sent to Mr. Kerr and Jason Powell the Affidavit of Refunds for years 2000-2002 that I have already sent them before plus a “Tax Statement” for year 2003. The total size of the mailing was about 3,000 pages. Also included was a complete copy of the Family Guardian website and my “Reliance Defense DVD”, which contains my entire administrative history with the IRS from the very beginning….over 4Gigabytes of data!
6. There was a second wave of three more summons they sent to organizations they found out about from the responses to the first round. These began just after I sent the tax returns.
7. I filed a lawsuit against the agent, Jason Powell, who began the criminal investigation. The suit was filed April 4, 2004 in federal district court. I sued him personally and not in his official capacity, because he was acting outside the authority of the law. He was sued for malfeasance, violations of rights, violation of privacy (fourth amendment).
8. The government responded with a motion to dismiss (typical), which was heard on July 12, 2004 by the Chief Justice, Marilyn Huff.
9. Huff ruled on 7/26/2004 to grant the government's motion to dismiss. In her order:
9.1 She ignored over 100 pages of pleadings and MAJOR, MAJOR issues raised.
9.2 Her ruling looked like it was written by the opposing attorney and not her.
9.3 The presumptions she made about my citizenship contradicted the affidavit I submitted under penalty of perjury.
9.4 The U.S. attorney submitted no evidence whatsoever and did not respond or contradict any of the arguments I made in any of my pleadings.
In short, the ruling was just a boilerplate, very presumptuous, completely unjustified by any law, quoted irrelevant case cites that were completely inconsistent with my situation stated in a sworn affidavit, and without evidence or foundation. The government defaulted on so many issues it isn't funny. What they DIDN'T address speaks volumes about what they agree to. Since that time, I have not heard from anyone about the investigation. Generally, it takes up to two years to refer a criminal case for prosecution, so I'm doing my homework in the interim by getting copies of IMF's, decoding them, rebutting them, and making sure they are following the law to the letter in my case. If they followed the law or even READ it for that matter, they would quickly find out there are no regulations giving them any authority at all to prosecute tax crimes under 26 U.S.C. 7201 through 7217 and 26 CFR 601.701(a)(2)(II) says they can't adversely affect my rights without regulations. It would be a violation of due process for them to “assume” anything that clearly contradicts the evidence I gave them or which is not backed up by evidence they have provided.
Only time will tell what the result is, but I'm not sitting still while I'm waiting. I'm weaving a spider web with their own lies that they are going to get caught in. Whatever the result, I gladly accept whatever the Lord hands me, because it is in His hands, not mine.
God bless,
Guest_JWR
Thanks for the flattering words, but before I respond to this, can you explain something about your post? I don't believe the last post was by JWR, because his IP address shows he lives in St Louis, and that post came from Kansas and from a different IP address. Are you traveling, JWR? Why didn't you use your regular login, and can you repost your question with JWR's login?
We're always on the lookout for moles on this board.
Thanks,
R.K.
You need to tell me:
1. What version of the program you are using.
2. What version of Windows you are using.
3. What version of Microsoft Office you are using and the service pack level applied.
4. What is the exact error and error number that is being reported?
You are the first and only one so far to report such a problem, and so it isn't the program, and is probably your system. Chances are, you have an older version of MS Office, or you have a virus on your system or the database itself somehow got corrupted. I hope you backed it up onto CD because if you didn't we can't help you.
Frequently Asked Questions #30 and 6 at:
answer your question about getting a replacement program. We don't archive older versions, so we can't provide a replacement for the one you lost, nor does SEDM provide free upgrades that I am aware of.
God bless and hope this helps,
