How can it be falsely connecting them? The two paragraphs are adjacent.
Firstly, separate paragraphs are separate ideas. Secondly they are under different sections. There is no direct contextual link between the two.
The first paragraph does indeed mention the specific type of feat (namely bonus feats gained from class levels). The second then talks about the feats just mentioned and how you need prerequisites with them.
And remember, the Monster Manual entry is still talking only about two things: creatures created by the DM, and monster entries already found in the Monster Manual
You still have not shown anything to prove that, especially since the rules for monsters are the same as the rules for players. Until you can actually cite your position on this idea, it is entirely bogus.
And remember, since you're ignoring the sectioning in the PHB feat rules, the section a rule is in doesn't matter.
Really, though, just look at this exactly as you do the dragonwrought issue. You
are being quite the hypocrite here.
In one, you take unrelated items that were not intended to be used together and apply them without the context surrounding them because that context is not actually a limit on the mechanical definitions and the rules.
In the other, you say that taking unrelated items that were not intended to be used together and applying them without the context surrounding them because that context is not actually a limit on the mechanical definitions and the rules is wrong.