I will say, however, that you continue to fall into the trap that the thought-masters at DNC headquarters set for you, Dicky. That is, you believe that UBL would be all chummy with the West … and especially, the United States … if only we would abandon Israel to its fate.

In accepting this line of reasoning, you fail to note the nature of the religion of Islam, itself. If there had never been an modern Israel. If not one American airman had ever dropped a bomb … or a soldier fired his rifle … at a Muslim, Islam would still be the enemy at the gates of the West.

There are many wonderful people who follow the religion called "Submission". I have known them, studied with them, and taught them in the university setting. But their religion calls for the submission to Allah of the entire world, and it will never rest until that end has been achieved.

You may choose whatever religion or political philosophy you wish, and you can determine which countries and peoples you will support in your lifetime. But as a Christian, I will never cease praying for the peace of Jerusalem.

What you said, above, goes like this:

All persons who are Reagan are persons who hate communists.
All persons who are Hitler are persons who hate communists.
Therefore, all persons who are Reagan are persons who loved Hitler.

It could be re-phrased as:

All persons who are Trickyblain are are persons who hate the KKK.
All persons who are Stephen Brady are persons who hate the KKK.
Therefore, all persons who are Trickyblain are persons who sincerely appreciate Stephen Brady.

There is no causal connection between the first line and the second line in the syllogism, which would lead one inevitably to the conclusion. Though you and I might both hate the KKK, we could be bitter enemies.

Continuing …

Besides the ludicrous nature of the truth-claim in the syllogism … which itself amounts to a non-sequitur … I think that you're missing the central point of the article. That is, that UBL probably hates everything and everyone on the planet, and could care less about the environment. He's attempting to make points with the common man in the West on what he perceives to be important to us. There's a secondary point that his rhetoric on the issue resembles Western liberals (from whom he probably lifted his prose, in the first place).

Obviously, he missed the meeting in Copenhagen.

Maybe FPM should be less concerned about what some tape says and more concerned with the issues facing America.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I heard that Hitler was a vegetarian, so I am going to go eat an enormous amount of meat whether it's good for me or not. That will show him!

All dogs are mammals.
All cats are mammals.
Therefore, all dogs are cats.

This is the fallacy of the undistributed middle. All A are B. All C are B. Therefore, all A are C.

Faulty, indeed. That's my point regarding the terrible logic this article attempts to employ.

This Brand New Video Blows a Huge Gaping Hole in Obama's Cap and Tax Scheme: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVm5-6H_sH4