John Derbyshire does some of the most interesting writing at National Review. He's never more interesting than when he's saying things that I find unsettling.
In this case, he reports newspaper headlines from "an alternate universe in which the U.S.A. has been conducting a real war on terror." Some of them cause me to suspect that Mr. Derbyshire has perhaps a bit too much fiber in his diet.
Some of them actually seemed just right to me, like the story from Gaza in which the IDF was attacking pro-Hamas demonstrators. Yes, exactly right.
The Libya story, in which American military suddenly whacked Khadaffi seemed a little iffy, but arguably defensible.
Where he really lost me though, was rolling in issues of illegal Mexican immigration as part of the war on terror, and proposing several harsh measures for dealing with immigration issues based on that national security consideration.
Foul! Mexican immigration involves a lot of significant legitimate problems, but Mexican illegals are not coming here to kill us. They've come to harvest our produce and bus our tables. Considering all Mexican illegals as if they were potential terrorists is not justified by the facts, and it's not cool. It's not necessary, and it's not nice.
Then throw in Derbyshire's Cairo dateline, which involved absolutely literally declaring war on al-Jazeera television network, treating their headquarters and reporters as enemy combatants.
That's maybe just a BIT much, don't you think, Derb?