Fatal Flaws of Logic – Part 1

by Randy Maugans with contributions from Keith Hansen (a/k/a “Vyzygoth”)
Presented in four parts:
Fatal Flaws of Logic – Part 2

Fatal Flaws of Logic – Part 3
Fatal Flaws of Logic – Part 4

Paul Collins, of the Collins Brothers, plays a set-up scenario, and accuses Vyzygoth,  Gordon Comstock, and myself of “not checking sources”. To wit we respond—with sources—and some corrections on the dishonest assertions:

The subject of the March 6, 2010 Watchmen Live show seemed straightforward enough: “Corporate entities and legal “persons”; the United States as a corporate extension of Great Britian…” Subjects my co-host and I have discussed together, and separately, for several years. So it came as a surprise when Paul Collins, half of the Collins Brothers writing team and guests of many radio shows (including Threshing Floor and Vyzygoth’s “Grassy Knoll” shows), fired what can only be called an unexpected salvo at the presentation therein:

Comment:
Paul Collins
E-mail : thecollinsbros@yahoo.com

There are some severe flaws in this presentation. Instead of presenting conspiracy fact, we have more patriot mythology here that started with Roger Elvick’s Redemption Movement.
There is a big difference between possessing a corporation and being a corporation. The United States owns a corporate status, but it absolutely does not exist as a corporate entity. The corporate status exist merely to make representing the United States of America easier in a court of law. You can’t drag everyone in America into a courtroom, so the corporate status is merely for practicality.
A natural person and a legal person are not separate from one another in court. The collection of the United States Code includes both a natural person and a corporation under the category of person.
These sort of myths were designed to radicalize people, and they work. Elements of the Redemption Movements beliefs can be found in the Freeman movement, the militia movement, and the patriot movement.
Does anyone check their sources anymore?

In this initial comment (posted at the Watchmen Live website), Collins managed to construct an out-of-context, highly nuanced thread out of material that was not presented, or even implied, in the course of the show. As I pointed out repeatedly to Mr. Collins in private emails: none of the hosts have, at any time, discussed or even tangentially espoused, the work of Roger Elvick, the Freemen, or the Redemption Movement to which he alludes. It must also be said that, aside from the flawed logic Collins attempts to scale, the tactic which most comes to mind in his little polemic is tantamount to intellectual scapegoating.

Paul Collins, along with his brother, Phillip can best be described as hyper-literate investigators into “suppressed history and the shadowy undercurrents of world political dynamics.”  The Collins’ dense presentations of arcane socio-political intrigue would  lead one to believe they are consummate researchers, and dispassionate presenters. But, as this brief opus unfolds, we shall see that Mr. Collins is, in certain areas of inquiry, a biased demagogue and willfully ignorant of critical details.

My reply to Paul Collins’ comment:
Subject: Re: [Watchmen On the Wall Live] Please moderate: “Watchmen Live-Kingdoms of the World Exposed-Hour 1″]

 

Paul-
First off, I have to say I am disappointed that you chose to post this onto a public comment area of my website rather than approaching me. I appreciate your OPINION, but it is just an opinion as such… and tossing the tar baby of Elvick at us is, at best, disingenuous, and worse mean-spirited. A private critique would have better served the cordial relationship that we had enjoyed until this point.I’d certainly entertain your citations to such. Tell me where, in case law or statutory regulations you can make such a broad-sweeping statement with certitude that the U.S. is NOT a corporation. Also define for me HOW it could operate AS a corporation without BEING a corporation. Given that the original governing structures, delineated by founding documents, are now little more than so much toilet paper…exactly what IS this entity?
Please tell me exactly what the UNITED STATES is, inasmuch as you claim a natural person and a “legal” person are indistinct: WHO would be the “natural person(s)” behind the corporate entity? Furthermore, what does your research tell you about the changes which occurred in the nomenclature of the union previously called the “united States of America” and the present UNITED STATES OF AMERICA which is now accepted universally?
hermore, another important distinction is made very early which indicates the nature of the United States:DE: Title 28,3002. Definitions
(15) “United States” means —
(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States.
“The United States Government is a foreign corporation with respect to a state.” Volume 20: Corpus Juris Secundum, (P 1785: NY re: Merriam 36 N.E. 505 1441 S.Ct. 1973, 41 L. Ed. 287)
Both these legal cites indicate the status of the United States AS a corporation which appears to employ other corporate entities (i.e.-agencies, departments, commissions, etc.) under its corporate umbrella. I will note that Manta lists the Government of the United States AS a corporation: http://www.manta.com/c/mmg5dxg/government-of-the-united-states

Paul-

First off, I have to say I am disappointed that you chose to post this onto a public comment area of my website rather than approaching me. I appreciate your OPINION, but it is just an opinion as such… and tossing the tar baby of Elvick at us is, at best, disingenuous, and worse mean-spirited. A private critique would have better served the cordial relationship that we had enjoyed until this point.I’d certainly entertain your citations to such. Tell me where, in case law or statutory regulations you can make such a broad-sweeping statement with certitude that the U.S. is NOT a corporation. Also define for me HOW it could operate AS a corporation without BEING a corporation. Given that the original governing structures, delineated by founding documents, are now little more than so much toilet paper…exactly what IS this entity?

Please tell me exactly what the UNITED STATES is, inasmuch as you claim a natural person and a “legal” person are indistinct: WHO would be the “natural person(s)” behind the corporate entity? Furthermore, what does your research tell you about the changes which occurred in the nomenclature of the union previously called the “united States of America” and the present UNITED STATES OF AMERICA which is now accepted universally?

another important distinction is made very early which indicates the nature of the United States:DE: Title 28,3002. Definitions:

(15) “United States” means —

(A) a Federal corporation;

(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or

(C) an instrumentality of the United States.

“The United States Government is a foreign corporation with respect to a state.” Volume 20: Corpus Juris Secundum, (P 1785: NY re: Merriam 36 N.E. 505 1441 S.Ct. 1973, 41 L. Ed. 287)

Both these legal cites indicate the status of the United States AS a corporation which appears to employ other corporate entities (i.e.-agencies, departments, commissions, etc.) under its corporate umbrella. I will note that Manta lists the Government of the United States AS a corporation: http://www.manta.com/c/mmg5dxg/government-of-the-united-states

That all noted, Paul, I find your comments to be a pathetic broadside laced with deliberate distortions in that you know all three people who were on the program. You also know that none of us advocate Rodger Elvick, the redemption or freeman movements—certainly, I have NEVER even discussed these movements in any public manner. To my knowledge, my co-hosts have likewise not been advocates of such—ever!

Given you and Phillip’s ability to exposit minutiae on nearly any topic, this smear tactic is beneath your dignity. WHY? All your well-reasoned writing and research…on my show, Vyz’ shows and elsewhere now seem to me to be window dressing for your own logical disconnect. When you dishonestly attack us by equating us with “fringe” movements; you, in effect, construct what could be a few valid criticisms out of lies and dissimulation!

What evidence do you have to connect us, or the commentary on the Friday show with Elvick, the Freeman Movement, or the “radicalized” patriot movement? Looking back, I think in our own ways we have each debunked such movements for their failures. What are you smoking?

I suggest you pull that wild hair out of your ass and now produce something of substance to validate your irrational comments…data beyond beyond your sophistry and stilted presumptions. Truth begins where your presumptions leave off.

Randy Maugans

Continue:  Fatal Flaws of Logic – Part 2