Latest videos by stihlman37 | Money-Management Videos

$NO INCOME TAX LAW FORMER \"IRS\" AGENT JOE BANNISTER PART 1$

NO INCOME TAX LAW FORMER "IRS" AGENT JOE BANNISTER PART 1
Posted by: stihlman37

Video duration: 579 seconds

Joe Bannister explains in a interveiw the 2 year investigation he did, resulted in the IRS forcing him to resign.

Related: alex, and, brown, ed, elaine, fedral, illegal, income, infowars, investigation, irs, jones, reserve, tax

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Latest comments made on this video:

so what i am ...
By: uuce. on 20 Nov 08, 17:15:05
so what i am getting from this income tax....is............so im paying the irs to work??????hahahhahahaa/....i gotta pay to work...wat a load of crap.VIVA LA REVOLUTION!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry for the ...
By: eklypse0. on 11 Nov 08, 07:38:59
Sorry for the errors in spelling. Was interrupted by a Sherrif in commission of his duties. Work is so fun. :p

I do, however ...
By: eklypse0. on 11 Nov 08, 07:20:38
I do, however dispute that Congress has the power to tax a right. I also dispute that title 26, subsection A allows for the taxation of Americans doing common labor.

Subtitle C is ' ...
By: eklypse0. on 11 Nov 08, 07:17:25
Subtitle C is 'employees' which is defined, but dies not include an average American being paid to do work. Subtitle A does comment on iddividualls a lot. But it is all about 'Taxable income'. By there being a taxable income, doesn't it stand to reason that there are incomes that are not taxable? That is the crux of the descussion. I don't doubt that there is part of the Constitution that allows Congress to tax. Nore do I doubt title 26.

"defined terms such ...
By: RetSquid. on 11 Nov 08, 06:46:35
"defined terms such as 'employees' " But, mostly 'individuals'.

[Read Title 26, ...
By: eklypse0. on 11 Nov 08, 06:38:23
[Read Title 26, it's there.] Title 26 revolves around 'Taxable Income' and specifically title defined terms such as 'employees' which on the surface sounds like everybody and all that comes in. When a critical thinker actually reads them, finds that title 26 is actually far more restrictive then it first appears.

Many people use ...
By: eklypse0. on 11 Nov 08, 06:24:57
Many people use what I am telling you and standing up to the IRS. Documents of direct correspondence to the IRS show that these people are getting everything back by forcing the IRS to reclassify the earnings as private sector compensation rather then the payers' incorrect claims that they are Income. Search for Lost Horizons and look at the documentation yourself. Would the IRS be giving up this money after such information was indicated if your views were correct?

You need to do more ...
By: RetSquid. on 11 Nov 08, 05:54:48
You need to do more research from the primary sources, don't depend on other's research that is inaccurate. If you are an individual making over 'X' amount after deductions you owe taxes. Read Title 26, it's there.

[What is average? ...
By: eklypse0. on 11 Nov 08, 05:40:56
[What is average? As an American citizen.] A person working exclusively in the private sector. If you work for WalMart, the corner store, or even yourself, and etc for any amount of money. That is what I term an average American. People who are not 'Average' in terms of the Income: Politicians, soldiers, Officers of Corporations are examples that are under the 'Income' and 'employment' tax laws under title 26.

[Yeah, only those ...
By: eklypse0. on 11 Nov 08, 05:34:35
[Yeah, only those who have an income from capitol or labor.] Yep, Income as defined before the 16th was enacted, which I have provided you several times as defined.

"Yes it a law, but ...
By: RetSquid. on 11 Nov 08, 05:27:46
"Yes it a law, but a specialized law for specialized cases, not a general law that is enacted over everyone for everything." Yeah, only those who have an income from capitol or labor. "Title 26 can be enacted as a 'Law' without it being 'Positive Law'." Not only 'CAN' but "WAS"! "average citizen's" What is average?

[Do you have any ...
By: eklypse0. on 11 Nov 08, 05:21:31
[Do you have any other "proof" that this law Title 26 does not exist?] No one ever said that 26 didn't exist, only that it is not Positive Law. Yes it a law, but a specialized law for specialized cases, not a general law that is enacted over everyone for everything. That is the difference, Title 26 can be enacted as a 'Law' without it being 'Positive Law'. This comes down to that the income tax, as originally written, is legal. However, it was not written to take average citizen's earnings.

Do you have any ...
By: RetSquid. on 10 Nov 08, 08:16:34
Do you have any other "proof" that this law Title 26 does not exist?

LOL, I'm not even ...
By: PNWScout2. on 10 Nov 08, 07:50:53
LOL, I'm not even under duress, much less extreme duress. You might not be but your country sure is.

woot, go alex jones!
By: ty99999returns. on 09 Nov 08, 00:30:41
woot, go alex jones!

I did find one ...
By: RetSquid. on 08 Nov 08, 23:09:01
I did find one thing that was true on that site. "THIS IS ABOUT YOUR SOLE OWNERSHIP OF YOUR LABOR AND THE FRUITS OF THAT LABOR!!!" I think that you have an absolute right to the fruits of your labor...you only get taxed when you SELL your labor, or the fruits of your labor.

I agree that Title ...
By: RetSquid. on 08 Nov 08, 22:00:47
I agree that Title 26 is not positive law, can you prove that it is not law?

"The page cannot be ...
By: RetSquid. on 08 Nov 08, 21:40:48
"The page cannot be displayed" Would you like to try again? Maybe from a 'real' website? One you can actually connect to?

LOL, I'm not even ...
By: RetSquid. on 08 Nov 08, 21:37:58
LOL, I'm not even under duress, much less extreme duress.

Ever think that ...
By: PNWScout2. on 08 Nov 08, 21:31:30
Ever think that maybe they are siding with the LAW? They are. They're only siding with what they've been told from the IRS, what they think is the so-called law just like you. I can post the law, but I can't make you read or understand the law. You mean the law which was never enacted by congress into positive law?

Sorry, pnw I can't ...
By: PNWScout2. on 08 Nov 08, 21:27:27
Sorry, pnw I can't prove your argument and you can't either. Is that why you need help with it? LOL I already have proven it, it's you who refuses to see it for what it is.

Hey Ret you flying ...
By: PNWScout2. on 08 Nov 08, 21:26:16
Hey Ret you flying your flag upside down yet?

Why don't you post ...
By: PNWScout2. on 08 Nov 08, 21:25:28
Why don't you post a site for the entire court case and then we can debate it's merits. I'll do one better how about going to Tom Cryers website (truthattackDOTorg) and read for yourself all the proven court cases which the government and the IRS couldn't prove wrong. Oh his whole court transcript is there for you to read as well.

Sorry, pnw I can't ...
By: RetSquid. on 08 Nov 08, 21:24:47
Sorry, pnw I can't prove your argument and you can't either. Is that why you need help with it?

I didn't say he was ...
By: RetSquid. on 08 Nov 08, 21:22:51
I didn't say he was 'your attorney', I said he was your 'attorney', there is a difference. "the majority of judges and attornies who side with the IRS" Ever think that maybe they are siding with the LAW? They are. I can post the law, but I can't make you read or understand the law.

$NO INCOME TAX LAW FORMER \"IRS\" AGENT JOE BANNISTER PART 2$

NO INCOME TAX LAW FORMER "IRS" AGENT JOE BANNISTER PART 2
Posted by: stihlman37

Video duration: 391 seconds

Latest comments made on this video:

Where did you get ...
By: PNWScout2. on 22 Nov 08, 02:45:19
Where did you get this idea from? The same place as your others? Someone's imagination? Yours.

"where he now has ...
By: RetSquid. on 21 Nov 08, 19:04:41
"where he now has to take meds just to try and cope with life and reality" Where did you get this idea from? The same place as your others? Someone's imagination?

"The Bailiff was on ...
By: RetSquid. on 21 Nov 08, 19:01:45
"The Bailiff was on him even before the Judge did the 'contempt' thing." Thereby proving my point that there is more going on than shown in the video.

What difference ...
By: eklypse0. on 21 Nov 08, 14:29:06
What difference does it make? The judge required his jailing for him being confused at what he was supposed to do, because as he was sitting, the Judge spoke his name. So he stood up, then the judge yelled at him to sit down. The Bailiff was on him even before the Judge did the 'contempt' thing.

'm beginning to ...
By: PNWScout2. on 19 Nov 08, 19:18:33
'm beginning to think you DO have a tinfoil hat Lol, just traded mine in for a mylar hat, it's a little bit more durable ya know. ;)

At least you can ...
By: PNWScout2. on 19 Nov 08, 05:41:13
At least you can see under the hat. You can't seem to see though the blinders That's because he was a career semen who had his life messed up by them to the point where he now has to take meds just to try and cope with life and reality, even though it's obvious the meds aren't working. They're just dumbing him down now to the point of no return.

You keep saying ...
By: PNWScout2. on 19 Nov 08, 05:39:05
You keep saying that but can not or will not cite an example All one has to do Ret is go back to the numerous video threads here and read the back posts to see for themselves. That speaks for itself.

['m beginning to ...
By: eklypse0. on 19 Nov 08, 05:26:17
['m beginning to think you DO have a tinfoil hat] Personally, I believe that Tinfoil hats are in style. At least you can see under the hat. You can't seem to see though the blinders. If anyone in the government says don't look over there, or don't believe what you hear, you don't see or hear anything.

You keep saying ...
By: RetSquid. on 19 Nov 08, 05:15:28
You keep saying that but can not or will not cite an example. Let us know when you check back into reality. Bye

Here's a question ...
By: PNWScout2. on 19 Nov 08, 05:12:59
Here's a question you won't answer: Can you name one part of our debate where you proved ANYTHING I've said wrong? Uhhh ya all of it I've disproven, your just to ignorant or to heavily hopped up on meds to realize it. And yes I've answered it many times over.

What took place ...
By: RetSquid. on 19 Nov 08, 05:11:43
What took place BEFORE this vid?

You live in your ...
By: RetSquid. on 19 Nov 08, 05:10:42
You live in your own little world don't you? When did I ever 'brag' about the Navy? I'm beginning to think you DO have a tinfoil hat! Here's a question you won't answer: Can you name one part of our debate where you proved ANYTHING I've said wrong?

see that Ret is a ...
By: PNWScout2. on 19 Nov 08, 05:04:49
see that Ret is a romantic, wanting to believe the system can't be corrupt. Ya he is one of the sorriest excuses I've come across and a disgrace as an American person. All in all his actions just further insure he's just still a sheeple who has yet to wake up. He was in the Navy and likes to brag about it if that tells you anything.

you are still there ...
By: PNWScout2. on 19 Nov 08, 05:02:03
you are still there! Why don't you prove something for a change? Ya I figured you wouldn't be able to answer that. Oh by the way I've already proven a hell of alot more then you ever could even think of proving.

"Every one be ...
By: eklypse0. on 19 Nov 08, 04:46:22
"Every one be seated." He looked for his chair and started to sit. "Sit down!Sit Down!Sit DOWN!" Then when he just touched his ass to the chair, "Everyone rise." Then he is arrested for contempt of court.

.. not being needed ...
By: eklypse0. on 19 Nov 08, 04:39:02
.. not being needed. But, in truth, Ret is not a Romantic, because a romantic is someone who is initially ignorant of the state of things. Ret, on the other hand is 'Willfully Ignorant' or just plain dishonest in his opinions, which he holds despite the evidence that people have shown him time and time again. When the evidence is irrefutable, he closes his eyes trying to figure out why it doesn't fit with his world view.

That vid proves.... ...
By: RetSquid. on 19 Nov 08, 04:24:53
That vid proves....nothing. What happened before this incident? Do you have the vid for that?

ANd I'll even give ...
By: eklypse0. on 19 Nov 08, 04:00:25
ANd I'll even give you a youtube video proving that there are Judges who are children in black robes. "Ian Freeman arrested and jailed for 93 days RAW FOOTAGE" I see that Ret is a romantic, wanting to believe the system can't be corrupt. The system is run by men. Judges tend to have total authority, with almost no oversight, while in their courtrooms. They can suggest to the court stenographer, assuming one is being used a the time, to strike a phrase from the records, as not being needed.

He knows exactly ...
By: eklypse0. on 19 Nov 08, 02:47:57
He knows exactly how the fifth amendment rights work. He was ordered to go to the IRS building and bring his paperwork. He did, with a _real_ attorney, which surprised them, who advised him to answer each question with the right to remain silent. When The meeting was over and he went back to court. The judge threw him in jail.. for a little while for standing on his correctly used fifth amendment rights.

If you start to ...
By: RetSquid. on 19 Nov 08, 02:40:32
If you start to talk and answer questions you have waived your rights to remain silent.

you are still there ...
By: RetSquid. on 19 Nov 08, 02:39:37
you are still there! Why don't you prove something for a change?

It isnt' a trick. I ...
By: eklypse0. on 19 Nov 08, 02:18:02
It isnt' a trick. I posted an example of a Judge that refused to allow Rights to enter 'his' court, in fact, calling it contempt of his court for falling on the right to remain silent. The judge in fact said, "You waved your 5th amendment rights" when the defendant never did.

Ah yes, the old ' ...
By: PNWScout2. on 19 Nov 08, 01:52:50
Ah yes, the old 'courts are corrupt and the judges fear the IRS' trick Prove that they don't. Ret.

Ah yes, the old ' ...
By: RetSquid. on 18 Nov 08, 23:51:24
Ah yes, the old 'courts are corrupt and the judges fear the IRS' trick.

To be more specific ...
By: eklypse0. on 18 Nov 08, 14:33:37
To be more specific, IRS agents are enforcing laws against individuals who are not actually under their jurisdiction, but use 'Color of Law' to make it seem that they have the power to do so. Judges tend to rule in favor if IRS despite their entire case is circumstantial, rather then require that the trial assume the defendant is innocent until proven guilty. Look at Dave Champion. He went to court vs the IRS. The judge railroaded him, but he is still practicing to help non-taxpayers now.

$NO INCOME TAX LAW FORMER \"IRS\" AGENT JOE BANNISTER PART 3$

NO INCOME TAX LAW FORMER "IRS" AGENT JOE BANNISTER PART 3
Posted by: stihlman37

Video duration: 354 seconds

Latest comments made on this video:

does anyone know ...
By: uuce. on 20 Nov 08, 17:35:13
does anyone know the name of the guy mentioned here????JACK ????????.?

kaysandesses, ...
By: BRYAN351. on 17 Oct 08, 05:31:35
kaysandesses, congratulations. Since you found the law that requires people to pay taxes on wages, then go claim your $50,000 prize. Some organization offered this reward years ago, and their full page ad in USA Today is shown in the Sherry Jackson video in my favorites. Guess what? Nobody has ever been able to claim it. If there is a clear cut law, why doesn't the IRS come right out and state it in response to the thousands of people asking them to show it? The answer? There is no law.

"That would be the ...
By: kaysandesses. on 21 Sep 08, 22:17:11
"That would be the "Internal Revenue Code." That's not law. Nice try though." Nice try at appearing to know what you're talking about, Stooge. The IRS Code, AKA Title 26 of the United States Code is law. Title 26 is derived from legislation passed by both Houses of Congress and signed by the President. Enjoy your crow pie.

That would be the " ...
By: DemonicCollusion. on 20 Sep 08, 02:30:01
That would be the "Internal Revenue Code." That's not law. Nice try though.

Thanks
By: stihlman37. on 13 May 08, 22:05:48
Thanks

it is not illegal ...
By: IRSFRAUDEXPOSED. on 23 Apr 08, 01:58:09
it is not illegal to avoid the income tax. you file to either correct or concure with the the information returns like w2. if you have no information returns of any type being submited on you then they have no information and you dont need to file , whats to file?

I'm Sorry Sir, I am ...
By: kbleuel. on 31 Mar 08, 22:20:51
I'm Sorry Sir, I am not trying to be a smart ass or anything like that. I am just telling you that if you really look in to this not by going to the IRS website, but really looking for yourself. There is no law requiring you to pay taxes on your wages. If you can find it and and post it I will send you $ 100.00 I know it it's not much but it is all I can afford. Good Luck!

"You need to do ...
By: kaysandesses. on 31 Mar 08, 15:32:31
"You need to do research before you make comments." You really should take your own advice. Prepare for a first rate smack-down. "Mr. Banister does not file a return on his wages as his his service is being evenly traded for compensation by his employer." Prove it. "You can look and look and you will find no law requiring tax on wages. " You simply have to look past the TP websites and videos to find the law requiring a tax on our wages. Look no farther: 26 USC 61

You need to do ...
By: kbleuel. on 29 Mar 08, 18:05:11
You need to do research before you make comments. Mr. Banister does not file a return on his wages as his his service is being evenly traded for compensation by his employer. If he is filing a return it is on profits made for other ventures as law requires. You can look and look and you will find no law requiring tax on wages. The only question is are you willing to stand up for your rights?

except that their ...
By: Sparkygravity. on 27 Mar 08, 14:12:07
except that their has never been any law passed that interprets wage as income. The courts have held that wage is part of income. But due to the way in which the 16th amendment was "ratified", no pubic vote, or bill has ever defined wage as income. That's what tax protesters mean when they say "Show me the law". There isn't one, only court interpretations.

"he still files an ...
By: kaysandesses. on 27 Mar 08, 12:32:20
"he still files an income tax because it is against the law to avoid tax. Their is no law against tax evaded federal income tax," Well, which is it sparky: is it illegal or not? "the 16th admendment never got passed" Never got what? "So you file your income tax and you don't report the income that portion of your income that can't be taxed." Ah, well that's tax fraud, not tax evasion but it's still illegal to intentionally misreport your income.

because it is ...
By: Sparkygravity. on 07 Mar 08, 17:04:28
because it is against the law to avoid income tax. You must file your income taxes or else you will be arrested and convicted. However, you are not required to report income that is illegal for the goverment to tax. The 16th amendment was never ratified. So the broad definition of what income includes was never passed into law. The moral of the story is file your income taxes. Or risk becoming a prisoner, whether or not they imprison people illegally is a matter of perspective.

he still files an ...
By: Sparkygravity. on 07 Mar 08, 16:57:58
he still files an income tax because it is against the law to avoid tax. Their is no law against tax evaded federal income tax, since the 16th admendment never got passed. So you file your income tax and you don't report the income that portion of your income that can't be taxed. So the moral of the story is you need to file your income tax, or you will be arrested. But there is money income that can't be legally taxed.

What? And ruin a ...
By: bosunbilly. on 22 Feb 08, 21:20:04
What? And ruin a perfectly good conspiracy theory?

Why didn't they ask ...
By: kaysandesses. on 08 Feb 08, 17:00:56
Why didn't they ask Banister why he still files income tax?

Thanks for posting ...
By: keltec223. on 04 Feb 08, 12:33:31
Thanks for posting these vids stihlman37. They're helpful. Keep up the good work. :-)

My system shut down ...
By: BipolarProject. on 23 Dec 07, 00:37:06
My system shut down twice, while watching these video's. I have never seen an error while playing a video on youtube. HUM?

Oh god... don't ...
By: BlackRabbit2264. on 21 Nov 07, 10:11:03
Oh god... don't start me. How do the American people put up with blatant Fascism? I feel rather hopeless being all the way here in Europe. But this is where I began to question the motives of Alex Jones. There's a lot in that man people aren't seeing.

Thanks! I am just ...
By: stihlman37. on 19 Nov 07, 22:57:59
Thanks! I am just a caring Canadian Friend that has a hard time believing what is happening there, including the arrest of Ed and Elaine Brown.

Thanks for putting ...
By: BlackRabbit2264. on 19 Nov 07, 04:47:26
Thanks for putting them up. I'm embedding these on my income tax section of my pro-Truth site. So keep them up ;)

I put this up to ...
By: stihlman37. on 28 Jun 07, 12:32:45
I put this up to stress the relavance of Ed and Elaine Browns fight with the IRS and the Feds, and to help keep them fresh on everyones mind. So who is lying now?

MADNESS
Posted by: stihlman37

Video duration: 376 seconds

My first Sheeple try at making a clip, and editing so please forgive the poor quality. My Idea of the 911 Story Line and implications there of. Open your MIND!

Related: 911, alex, bush, channey, conspiracy, coverup, goverment, infowars, jones, montage, news, prisonplanet, proffessor, steven, wtc

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Latest comments made on this video:

The fellow that is ...
By: stihlman37. on 24 Jun 07, 01:48:28
The fellow that is in charge of the Disclosure Project is on the push again, first time since before 911.

Also Thinking on it ...
By: stihlman37. on 19 May 07, 02:23:42
Also Thinking on it more, what kind of message was sent when the craft went straight for them and then veered away at the last second. Think of being in the towers looking up and seeing the jet heading for you. (You would'nt even have time to say or think ..... CRAP!) coming at you. Thaats where the premise of subliminal warning of the purposeful blatant bee line for them, then veering off at the last possible moment. The whole crash synopsis. Let me know what you think. Thanks!

Funny, When I ...
By: 911truthnc. on 11 May 07, 01:29:19
Funny, When I received the email about this comment. I was watching Dr. Ted Loder of Disclosure Project discussion. The topic you refer to here. "Were they trying to subliminaly warn us?" Interesting thought. Had not ocurred to me.

Corrections: Yes it ...
By: stihlman37. on 11 May 07, 01:19:30
Corrections: Yes it is an implication. (Deep, "David Icke")) "Disclosure Project" go check it out. I have It in My favs it has alot to do with free energy systems that they (NWO) does not want to let us know about. And I was curious as to the time corralation of the UFO, if it maybe was during one of there power downs of the WTC for maintenance? Where they trying to subliminaly warn us? What floor was it at in relationship to the crash site(s)? That kind of trivial stuff. I think to much.

I agree. An after ...
By: 911truthnc. on 11 May 07, 00:45:11
I agree. An after thought. I am not sure what role the UFO clip is suppose to play. It is an interesting clip. But how does it fit into your story line? Are you implying something here? It seems to me it is out of place.

Ditto that 911, but ...
By: proudyke. on 10 May 07, 23:54:35
Ditto that 911, but it's his first try and he did very well.

Trying to give some ...
By: 911truthnc. on 10 May 07, 22:53:00
Trying to give some honet feedback. If I was not in the know. I would find the clip hard to follow. I can make the connection between the fire in Madrid and WTC. I bet most people do not. I seems like you are trying to connect the global elite at bohemian grove to 9/11. Which I think is correct. It could be given more clarity here I believe, Use your text to tie the scenes together.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ...
By: stihlman37. on 10 May 07, 21:39:46
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm very, very interesting. Do me a favour? If you can find more info. could you please send it too => "Paul Watson" watson ( at )prisonplanet ( dot ) com Thanks Bud! And let them know in the email what you have learned. I would LOVE to hear them explain their way out of that lol.

Not religious, but, ...
By: proudyke. on 10 May 07, 11:12:36
Not religious, but, AMEN!

Out of all the ...
By: proudyke. on 10 May 07, 11:11:09
Out of all the factual information, here is one of many that I find extremely interesting. A thermite reaction generates large amounts of ultraviolet radiation: On 27 September, the officials ordered 2000 gallons of [Pyrocool FEF], which when added to water produces a slippery, low-viscosity foam. ... Berger adds that "Pyrocool also contains two powerful ultra-violet absorbers." [New Scientist] WhatreallyhappenedDOTcom/thermiteDOThtm

Thank you! Steel ...
By: stihlman37. on 09 May 07, 14:26:43
Thank you! Steel does not collapse.

Good first editing ...
By: proudyke. on 09 May 07, 08:06:06
Good first editing try s37

BABY BOOGIE
Posted by: stihlman37

Video duration: 37 seconds

CUTE CUTE CUTE

Related: baby, boogie, cute, dance, funny, rap, sweet

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

$Reg\$

Reg's Short Visit from N.S.
Posted by: stihlman37

Video duration: 12 seconds

My buddy popped by for about half an hour after about 8yrs.

Related: comedy, fooled, funny, pictures, reg, spoof, visit

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Money-Management Videos

Watching: Latest videos by stihlman37

Search

Money-Management Sponsors

Finance Resources