I wasn't setting up a puzzle for you to solve. It was just an idle post of something stumbled upon while surfing your link. I wasn't intending it as the fulcrum of an essay...though, ex post facto, I could take a shot at it.

A superficial analysis of tone and writing style really isn't all that meaningful. There isn't much, at that level, to distinguish Osama bin Laden from Randall Terry. If that was all we had to go on, it would logically follow that Terry is an enemy of the US, and that the automatic response should be to invade Florida, the state that's harboring this religious terrorist. Sure, that's reductio ad absurdum. That's where you go starting from a superficial analysis.

You would have to go deeper into the case of Randall Terry to discover that he founded Operation Rescue, a sort of homegrown anti-abortion al Qaeda. Examining the history of that group and its leader would reveal an MO of agitators like Terry obliquely inciting footsoldiers of that group to take violent action, including bombings and murder. You'd begin to develop a strategy to fight them tailored to the unique characteristics of that enemy. You'd know it's not enough to roll up the cannon fodder, because there's an endless supply. You'd know you have to find a way to link the leaders to the rank-and-file violence. And you'd also know you'd have to be very careful, because this enemy benefits from political cover provided by right-wing rhetoric. They claim that they're "defending life" when they kill, and can cite Bush's frequent statements exhorting America to develop a "culture of life". They know that they're heroes to a small but politically-powerful segment of the populace.

Perhaps the "mote" thing has to do with recognizing that religious extremists in general are a threat to civilization. It's too easy to skirt the issue of our own domestic extremists by carefully labelling the problem "Islamic extremism". It's possible that this has created a philosophical bind for the present Republican administration, because acknowledging the true nature of the problem would offend one of its powerful constituencies. Making the subect offlimits handicaps development of an effect strategy.

How's that?