Bill Maher Gives Jihadis a “Come Hither” Gaze

Bill Maher was on Hannity and Colmes the other night and was in his usual mid-season witless form while discussing potential torture policies in the United States military and intelligence services and his assertion that CBS has censored him. When the discussion of “water boarding” came up he belittled the idea of supporting such measures with his usual morally superior sneer and questioned whether one would want to have that happen to oneself. Obviously only a severe masochist would desire a personal water boarding session so that particular bit of bumper sticker wisdom at least has the power of emotion. The problems that Mr. Maher seems not to understand are both strategic and moral. The strategic problem should be pretty obvious; we are not fighting the Swedes. The enemies we are fighting behead people; waterboarding is not on their menu despite the fact that US authorities have said that the practice is 100% effective without physically harming the enemy prisoner. If I am not mistaken the last enemy to treat US POWs in a manner consistent with the Geneva Convention was the German Luftwaffe that was headed by the Nazi Reich Marshall Herman Göring. Göring was later sentenced to death for war crimes and crimes against humanity. The strategic problem is compounded by the fact that Iran has been busy attempting to build nuclear weapons while simultaneously supporting a wide variety of vehemently anti-western terror groups.

The threat of Iranian supplied nuclear weapons in the hands of a terrorist group or groups is so potentially threatening to what we know as liberal democracy that the literal refusal to use effective tools to fight that threat is morally reprehensible. The threat that Radical Islam poses to people of other faiths is overwhelming. Overwhelming as it could include death or slavery. Let’s not forget the threat that Radical Islam represents to liberal special interest groups like women, gays, children and Jews. The refusal to aid those sometimes defenseless humans when presented with an outwardly benign option is simply not a moral stand.

Mr. Maher’s assumption of moral superiority is particularly galling as it came from a man who refuses to help others due to the fact that his sensibilities may potentially be offended. At some future time (maybe not even that far in the future) if our nation faces the threat of nuclear armed terrorist groups the refusal to use stronger methods than advocated by Mr. Maher (name, rank, jihadi number) would be suicidal, literally. Dr. Sanity has insightfully labeled much of this thinking as a problem with narcissism. The stance that Mr. Maher and many others have taken on this issue is repugnant, even within what many of us thought would be a portion of Mr. Maher’s moral compass.

Flying Debris discussed Mr. Maher in an earlier post here.