I was only being humorous.  The comment was really more on the Godzilla meme than your theory.  Also, have you not seen the "your argument is invalid" meme? If not, you are missing out the best part of the internet: http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/your-argument-is-invalid

Both Solex and I were being flippant.  But since you mention it, I think the point of Solex's Godzilla picture is that the statement "bitcoin is legal because it is a credit swap" is not really an accurate one. You can draw a lot of parallels between a bitcoin transaction and a credit swap, but that isn't what makes one legal.  States of affairs are prima facie legal.  Certain laws, like the MSB regulations in this instance, can be a reason why an act or state of affairs is "illegal", but the contrapositive is not true.

Also, the statement "BTC is an Over the Counter Credit Swap Derivative  (OCD) in the eyes of the law" is just not a coherent one.  A BTC transaction may be many things under many circumstances, and fall under more than one regulatory regime.  For example, FinCen, by and large, treats a bitcoin as a 'virtual currency'.  The IRS treats most BTC transactions as something similar to a barter.  Some people offer credit swaps denominated in bitcoin, but that doesn't make "a bitcoin" a credit swap.

Does that make sense?

Edit: oh, I see you ninja-edited some more into to your post.