War On The IRS -
To Tell the Truth
By Steffan M. Bertsch <>

For a while, I've been meaning to address Otto Skinner's criticism of Joseph Banister. However, I've been quite busy this week, and haven't had a chance. Skinner thinks that Banister is a fool because he is using old arguments that have not been successful in court to prove fraud in the IRS. On these points, I will agree in part and disagree in part.
Banister is using old, failed arguments--but, he is not a fool.
I won't belabor the point to detail out the differences in Skinner's and Banister's approaches to battling the IRS. Skinner has some very sound arguments concerning the fraud. Intellectually, they are state of the art. However, they falter in the fire, as do everyone else's arguments against the IRS; are arguments are losers.
Banister can't crack the IRS nut, and neither can Skinner. The IRS fraud isn't upheld by reason or logic, nor by law or authority. It is held up by an evil essence. The essence is in total opposition to truth. Many recognize it as an anti-Christ essence, some claim it is the anti-Christ.
As long as that evil essence dominates this planet and keeps things running, the IRS will remain afloat. Evil keeps the people ignorant and uninformed. It haunts the judges and lawyers with bribes, threats and other persuasive tactics. It controls the minds of the masses. It is the current ruler of this world.
Not Skinner's, not Banister's, not Becraft's, not Kidd's, not Kotmire's, not Schiff's, not Bertsch's, not anyone's arguments will defeat against the IRS until the evil essence is destroyed. That is the vision that soldiers of truth should keep ever emblazoned upon their minds--the destruction of the evil essence--which will in turn destroy all of the IRS fraud, and all other fraud for that matter, and you won't need anyone's arguments . . . because evil will simply no longer be, and the IRS can't survive without the evil essence supporting it.
As to Banister's sincerity in this war of the essences, I will say that I have worked with Joe for many months, have assisted him in writing his book, and, a couple of weeks ago at the preparedness conference in Puyallup, Washington, met him for the first time in person. I attended the conference with two friends, one of them being well known for his expertise in tax fraud, who goes by the moniker of "ICE."
As ICE and I listened to Banister give a talk, we sat quietly listening to Joe. About a quarter of the way through the presentation, I turned to ICE and said, "This guy is totally pure!" Oddly, ICE said that he was just about to turn to me because he was thinking the exact same thing.
How can I explain my feelings there at that time? It's very difficult to put it into words. I just knew then, as I know now, that Joe Banister has a pure heart. It's known in my deepest core. I would trust him with anything.
Yes, I've been fooled before--and probably will be fooled again--many times. But, rarely, if ever, when my inner essence speaks, and when I truly listen to it, have I been wrong. It's only when I allow my ego to override my intuition and inner knowledge that I get fooled.
From deep within, I know Joe Banister to be a Friend of Liberty. That is the highest tribute I pay anyone on this earth! So, for what it's worth, Joseph Banister, you have my unqualified support and approval.
May God be with you.
From Marc Spess <>
That you should post about Otto Skinner. I asked him some questions, and
got some answers from him that are very interesting. I thought at first that
Otto was pro-IRS, but after asking questions, and reading his page, I
realised that he seems to be actually more educated, and has done more
research then Bill Conklin and Joe Banister combined. He is also anti-IRS
Here is what he wrote me, below his message is what I originally asked him:
Hi Marc,
You ask a couple of pretty good questions. Yes, I actually have a copy of
Conklin's book. I also have several copies of his $50,000 offer. One is
from an old copy of AntiShyster News Magazine. The one I am looking at now
is out of Banister's book at page 6. There are two things one must prove to
get the $50,000. 1) A statute that make him liable to pay an income tax,
and 2) How can he file a 1040 tax return without waiving his Fifth Amendment
The first item has absolutely no connection to the second item. Just
because one item cannot be proved does not mean that the second item cannot
be proved. This is the clever little method used so that these "fantastic"
offers can be made with no fear of actually having anyone ever be able to
prove all the items. The offers seem very fantastic, they seem very
impressive, and few people ever see through the clever method used to
impress people, and cause them to ask the very questions you have asked me.
Regarding the first item, there is no statute that makes one liable for a
so-called "income" tax. There is no statute that requires one to pay a tax.
If their was such a statute that required one to pay a tax, it would
actually create debtors prisons, especially for the individual who simply
had no ability to pay. Debtors prisons are not allowed in this country.
But there is a statute (26 U.S.C. 7203) that makes it a crime to willfully
fail to pay a tax that is owed. In other words, if one has the ability to
pay a tax that he owes, and willfully fails to pay the tax, he has violated
26 U.S.C. 7203, which is a misdemeanor.
Regarding the second item, if one has not committed a crime, there is
nothing he could say that would tend to incriminate him. This is also
explained in my Banister article which is on my web site at
So with the clever offer made, Conklin then tries to make it look like his
Fifth Amendment argument is valid. Even to the point of claiming he won
cases that he did not win. Get copies of these cases and see for yourself.
In United States v. Neff, the court explains in great detail what I have
tried to explain in an e-mail message. The number of the Neff case is in
the article on the web site. Check it out. Get a copy of this case and
study it for yourself.
Regarding your "voluntary" question, the statutes do not use the word
"voluntary". The IRS talks about voluntary compliance.
You can print out and study several of my special articles from my web site.
Happy reading,
Otto Skinner
-----Original Message-----
From: []
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 7:42 AM
Subject: Re: Ex-CID Agent Joe Banister. Friend or foe??? (Rev. 7
First off,
After reading some articles on your page, I find that it is obvious you
have done more research into the Income Tax then Joe or Bill combined. It
very impressive. I am definitely changing my web page to post what you have
told me. Would it be okay if I actually used the text you wrote to me in
last e-mail about Bill Conklins reward? I think it would be great to put up
for everyone to see.
I am not sure exactly if you read often, but the editors
are in a major IRS battle. They have been targeted by the IRS for being
tough on Bill Clinton in some of there stories. They are a non profit
organization! They made a link between Clinton, audits, and organizations
opposition to Clinton being audited. Its very interesting to read. They
also pointed out how the IRS can hand your tax information over to other
authorities. You might want to contact the editor "Joe Farah" I think is
name. If they handed your info over to the police chief for instance, maybe
it is possible that your 1040 links you to criminal activity that can be
in a criminal court? Im not exactly sure if my assumption even makes sense.
But you might like to look into that. World Net Daily knows quite a lot
about certain aspects of the IRS's goings on through their investigations.
would read there page for any up-to-date stuff that they post. They have in
the past highlighted Joe Banister's work, and have ever since been trying to
figure out legally what the facts are.
I would also like to order the Conklin law documents for 20.00. I will be
sending my check today. When I got some more freelance work, and have
money, I will also buy some of your books.
Thanks a million
Marc Spess