That's a formal logical fallacy. This is the card as it is written.
1. If A bears B, then C for each B.
2. Also, if A skirmishes D, then E and F.
I gotta agree with Bib on this one. Both sections of the card's text target a mounted man. The correct wording of your logic chain would be:
1. If A bears B, then C for each B.
2. Also, if A bears B and skirmishes D, then E and F.
The first part of the card specifies that it targets a mounted Man. The second part of the card then says it targets "that Man," meaning the same mounted Man as before. If you haven't satisfied the initial targeting requirements, then the second part of the card can't come into play either.