Don,

Have you looked at the link you mentioned, and the "logic" of those protesting the US attack? Are you sure that you want ALL of us to be held to the rules you insist on? I have found all of the following:

Fallacies of Relevance

Personal Attack (Ad Hominem): an attempt to divert attention away from the evidence in favor of an attack on the person stating the premise

Appeal to Audience Bias (Ad Populem): an emotional appeal to the presumed attitudes or beliefs of an audience, under the assumption that the need for evidence is irrelevant

Red Herring: an attempt to avoid the central issue of an argument by sidetracking, that is, changing the subject or digressing onto a tangential point

Appeal to Authority: an argument based on the assumption that an authority outside a particular field is a qualified expert on the matters in question

Appeal to Ignorance (Proving a Negative): an argument that asserts a claim is true because no one can prove it is wrong; this shifts the burden of proof to the audience or opponent rather than the claimant

Sentimental Appeal: a faulty emotional appeal, often using pity or fear, designed to provoke an audience to divert attention or in lieu of evidence

Non-Sequitur: an argument in which a conclusion fails to follow logically or coherently from the given premises