ISIS burning the pilot alive on Hannity with Mike Ghouse

Disgusting video of ISIS’s burning the Jordanian Pilot alive.

I took me several minutes of walks in my office corridor and coffee, and washing up my face a few times to calm down, I am not a guy that gets easily angry, but this video of burning a human alive is beyond disgust.  

President Obama has this last chance to save humanity by eliminating the barbarians.  They are beyond dialogue, but we should still give them a warning to back off, repent and surrender or face the drones, we will wipe you out with all the might we have.

The ISIS has reached beyond the point of  recovery, and President Obama should target the area, and release gas to knock them out for a few hours, land and pick each one of them out and put them in high security prison.

 

On September 4, 2014,  I wrote in Huffington Post
"President Obama, go ahead, degrade and destroy the ISIS" 

The Quran recommends severe punishment to the oppressors and suggests hunting them down where ever they can be found and punishing them accordingly, unless they sincerely repent and back off, and if they do back off and surrender, they go to Guantanamo for a full orderly trial that US law permits. If those specific individuals don't surrender, drone them! Go ahead, degrade and destroy them.

This was when Abubakr Albaghdadi gave an ultimatum, “We offer them three choices: Islam; the dhimma contract -- involving payment of Jiziyah; if they refuse this they will have nothing but the sword."

Muslims have been praying for the safety of Christians, Yazidis, Shiites and other minorities who are victimized by these nuts, and they are sick of these rogues and will pray for you if you get rid of these men.

No body in the world wants to stand up for freedom, that leaves us, the Americans to do stand up and do the right thing.

I urge President Obama to take the action; the world will never be more with him than now, in one sweep, go clean those rascals. We need to rid of them, in the most civil way we can. We should never lose civility in our dealings with these men, and should not produce excuses in making innocent civilians a collateral damage, a shameful word in history of civilizations. Just go get them, as you did with Osama Bin Laden.

President Reagan, Bush Senior, Clinton and Bush – all of them did nothing about the Genocides until they were pushed to the corner as evidenced in the videos we have watched at our Annual Holocaust and Genocides events over a period of time.  The videos are listed in the heading “HG Videos to watch” at www.HolocaustandGenocides.com  – You see each president wanting to skip from “getting involved.” indeed, initially all of them looked like villains, but eventually they listened to Americans and mitigated major genocides from happening in  Bosnia, Darfur, Rwanda , Pol Pot and other places.

Of course,we are guilty of causing nearly a million deaths of innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan because of our president to whom facts did not matter. We owe an apology to the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, none of this would have happened, had we not gone into Iraq on falsities.

Obama has this last chance to save humanity by eliminating the barbarians.  They are beyond dialogue, but we should still give them a warning, back off, repent and surrender or face the drones, we will wipe you out with all the might we have.

Warning – the video is too graphic, suggest you not to watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8j5lYVfCaI

 Thank you

mike
Mike Ghouse
(214) 325-1916 text/talk
............................................................................................................................... Mike Ghouse is a public speaker, thinker, writer and a commentator on Pluralism at work place, politics, religion, society, gender, race, culture, ethnicity, food and foreign policy. He is a staunch defender of human rights and his book standing up for others will be out soon, and a movie "Americans together" is in the making.  He is a frequent guest commentator on Fox News and syndicated Talk Radio shows and a writer at major news papers including Dallas Morning News and Huffington Post. All about him is listed in 63 links atwww.MikeGhouse.net and his writings are at www.TheGhousediary.com and 10 other blogs. He is committed to building cohesive societies and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day. 

Not good for Israel - Netanyahu, Obama and Clinton

URL - http://israel-palestine-dialogue.blogspot.com/2012/11/not-good-for-israel-obama-netanyahu-and.html

They and Netanyahu are not good for Israel's long term security. They are messing with Israel's long term security, faking to secure it. The sane and wise but silent majority of Jews will not agree with them and I wish they speak up. I wish I can make the time to write about it. 

This was written on 11/22/12 - Unintended consequences and source for anti-Semitism.
http://israel-palestine-dialogue.blogspot.com/2012/11/how-to-achieve-security-for-israel-and.html

If the United Nations were to place “Cease fire” for vote today, more than likely, 178 nations will vote yes, and five will go against it including the United States, Israel and a few dependent nations. Do you think the people of the 178 nations feel resentment and bitterness toward the powerful? This is not good for Jews or Israel and the world in the long haul.

The retaliatory actions taken by Netanyahu, and endorsed by Obama are detrimental to Israel’s security in the long run. Their actions do not mitigate conflicts, but flare up and prolong the eternal dream of Jews to live in peace and security. Not only that, they massively contribute to the growing  Antisemitism which has been the very reason for the suffering of Jews for over 3000 years. 

Injustice against the weak will not go un-reacted to, the only thing the people around the world will feel is build resentment towards the United States and certainly events like this will contribute to  Antisemitism.
....

VIDEO APPEAL 09/17/2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WA2NlDU-LM

....

PRESIDENT OBAMA - SAY YES - 09/19/11
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNYmI6MlhZw&feature=related

...

Mike Ghouse

TEXAS FAITH: What does feminism mean to you?

   

That question is the subject of a growing discussion given that Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann both claim to be feminists. Except their feminism differs from the days of Gloria Steinem. Lisa Miller, a religion writer for Washington Post.com and On Faith, describes Bachmann's feminism this way.

There are about 12 panelists in Dallas Morning News’ Texas Faith’s weekly column and all opinions including mine are at: http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/08/texas-faith-what-does-feminism.html

MIKE GHOUSE, PRESIDENT, FOUNDATION FOR PLURALISM

The Palin-Bachman feminism is a new phenomenon; indeed they are setting a new assertive standard for feminism, where the deferential role for a woman in public square may become extinct like the dinosaurs. Palin-Bachman may not be the right role models, but they are the first most visible ones.

Way back in the movie Disclosure, Demi Moore played a challenging role of an aggressive female boss which at that time was labeled as manly woman’s role, it went to the other end of the spectrum of feminism. During the last Presidential election campaign Hilary Clinton was firm and assertive but not an aggressive, gun-toting attacking tigress like the Palin-Bachman duo, she applied logic and reason and rightfully the media was not deferential to her because she was a female.

In case of Palin-Bachman the media is at a loss in handling their aggressiveness and not sure if they would cross the line of feminism and get attacked for seeking substantiated answers. They need to treat the duo like they would any candidate male or female, and on their part the duo needs to substantiate their responses to set the new standards of feminism and not chase the media out with incomplete brash answers as it will be injustice to the emerging healthy feminism. NPR had a great story on Bachman on Tuesday which addresses the media shyness.

Yet, the three candidates accepted the traditional role of a deferential female to the husband within the family setting believing it to be a religious duty. This is the new public standard for the role of a woman until the deference gets replaced with equal partnership, yet maintains the family harmony and cohesion; there is room for us to grow up. 

We may have to modify the Virginia slims slogan to “You have come a long way woman (baby no more)” in establishing and defining the new feminism; genderless in the public square where no one dares to have an upper hand in any endeavor of life and yet and play feminine traditional role in the family setting. Helen Reddy’s song “I am woman” is playing in my ears now.

It has a lot of winning appeal to women; it authenticates their own vision of womanhood and offers a role model for them to emulate. Be yourselves, do what is right irrespective of the opinions out there, eventually that will become the standard and the norm of the society where you are viewed as an individual contributor for the wellbeing of the family and the society. I welcome this new benchmark, it was long overdue.

Mike Ghouse is a speaker committed to a cohesive America and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day – all his work is indexed at www.MikeGhouse.net

Wiki leak - damage control

I was not a fan of Hillary Clinton, but appreciate the damage control she has done. She said something to the effect, " I was talking with an Ambassador about the leaks, and he said, don't you worry about it,  you don't know what we talk about you". No matter what goes wrong, we ought to focus on mitigating conflicts and nurturing goodwill instead of exacerbating it. I do hope the Republicans dont' act like idiots to have political gains, its going to hit them as well. It is not just us Americans, every nation does this.

Those who are making fun of this ought to think about it, it will do a lot of damage. We have to learn from this and pursue a prudent policy in dessimination of secrets collected.

Mike Ghouse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM39yvQojak&feature=player_embedded#!

Secretary Clinton's remarks on WikiLeaks documents

By Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton - 11/29/10 03:40 PM ET

 http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/lawmaker-news/130973-secretary-clintons-remarks-on-wikileak-documents

Well, good afternoon.  Do we have enough room in here?  I want to take a moment to discuss the recent news reports of classified documents that were illegally provided from United States government computers.  In my conversations with counterparts from around the world over the past few days, and in my meeting earlier today with Foreign Minister Davutoglu of Turkey, I have had very productive discussions on this issue.
The United States strongly condemns the illegal disclosure of classified information.  It puts people’s lives in danger, threatens our national security, and undermines our efforts to work with other countries to solve shared problems.   This administration is advancing a robust foreign policy that is focused on advancing America’s national interests and leading the world in solving the most complex challenges of our time, from fixing the global economy, to thwarting international terrorism, to stopping the spread of catastrophic weapons, to advancing human rights and universal values.  In every country and in every region of the world, we are working with partners to pursue these aims.

So let’s be clear:  this disclosure is not just an attack on America’s foreign policy interests.  It is an attack on the international community – the alliances and partnerships, the conversations and negotiations, that safeguard global security and advance economic prosperity.

I am confident that the partnerships that the Obama administration has worked so hard to build will withstand this challenge.  The president and I have made these partnerships a priority – and we are proud of the progress that they have helped achieve – and they will remain at the center of our efforts.

I will not comment on or confirm what are alleged to be stolen State Department cables.  But I can say that the United States deeply regrets the disclosure of any information that was intended to be confidential, including private discussions between counterparts or our diplomats’ personal assessments and observations.  I want to make clear that our official foreign policy is not set through these messages, but here in Washington.  Our policy is a matter of public record, as reflected in our statements and our actions around the world.

I would also add that to the American people and to our friends and partners, I want you to know that we are taking aggressive steps to hold responsible those who stole this information.  I have directed that specific actions be taken at the State Department, in addition to new security safeguards at the Department of Defense and elsewhere to protect State Department information so that this kind of breach cannot and does not ever happen again.

Relations between governments aren’t the only concern created by the publication of this material.  U.S. diplomats meet with local human rights workers, journalists, religious leaders, and others outside of governments who offer their own candid insights.  These conversations also depend on trust and confidence.  For example, if an anti-corruption activist shares information about official misconduct, or a social worker passes along documentation of sexual violence, revealing that person’s identity could have serious repercussions:  imprisonment, torture, even death.

So whatever are the motives in disseminating these documents, it is clear that releasing them poses real risks to real people, and often to the very people who have dedicated their own lives to protecting others.

Now, I am aware that some may mistakenly applaud those responsible, so I want to set the record straight:  There is nothing laudable about endangering innocent people, and there is nothing brave about sabotaging the peaceful relations between nations on which our common security depends.

There have been examples in history in which official conduct has been made public in the name of exposing wrongdoings or misdeeds.  This is not one of those cases.  In contrast, what is being put on display in this cache of documents is the fact that American diplomats are doing the work we expect them to do.  They are helping identify and prevent conflicts before they start.  They are working hard every day to solve serious practical problems – to secure dangerous materials, to fight international crime, to assist human rights defenders, to restore our alliances, to ensure global economic stability.  This is the role that America plays in the world.  This is the role our diplomats play in serving America.  And it should make every one of us proud.

The work of our diplomats doesn’t just benefit Americans, but also billions of others around the globe.  In addition to endangering particular individuals, disclosures like these tear at the fabric of the proper function of responsible government. 

People of good faith understand the need for sensitive diplomatic communications, both to protect the national interest and the global common interest.  Every country, including the United States, must be able to have candid conversations about the people and nations with whom they deal.  And every country, including the United States, must be able to have honest, private dialogue with other countries about issues of common concern.  I know that diplomats around the world share this view – but this is not unique to diplomacy.  In almost every profession – whether it’s law or journalism, finance or medicine or academia or running a small business – people rely on confidential communications to do their jobs.  We count on the space of trust that confidentiality provides.  When someone breaches that trust, we are all worse off for it.  And so despite some of the rhetoric we’ve heard these past few days, confidential communications do not run counter to the public interest.  They are fundamental to our ability to serve the public interest.

In America, we welcome genuine debates about pressing questions of public policy.  We have elections about them.  That is one of the greatest strengths of our democracy.  It is part of who we are and it is a priority for this administration.  But stealing confidential documents and then releasing them without regard for the consequences does not serve the public good, and it is not the way to engage in a healthy debate.

In the past few days, I have spoken with many of my counterparts around the world, and we have all agreed that we will continue to focus on the issues and tasks at hand.  In that spirit, President Obama and I remain committed to productive cooperation with our partners as we seek to build a better, more prosperous world for all.

Thank you, and I’d be glad to take a few questions.

MR. CROWLEY:  We’ll begin with Charlie Wolfson of CBS in his last week here covering the State Department.

SECRETARY CLINTON:  Where are you going, Charlie?

QUESTION:  I’ll (inaudible) into the sunset, but let me get to a question.

SECRETARY CLINTON:  Yes, sir.  (Laughter.)

QUESTION:  Madam Secretary, are you embarrassed by these leaks personally, professionally?  And what harm have the leaks done to the U.S. so far that you can determine from talking to your colleagues?

SECRETARY CLINTON:  Well, Charlie, as I said in my statement, and based on the many conversations that I’ve had with my counterparts, I am confident that the partnerships and relationships that we have built in this administration will withstand this challenge.  The president and I have made these partnerships a priority, a real centerpiece of our foreign policy, and we’re proud of the progress that we have made over the last 22 months.

Every single day, U.S. government representatives from the entire government, not just from the State Department, engage with hundreds if not thousands of government representatives and members of civil society from around the world.  They carry out the goals and the interests and the values of the United States.  And it is imperative that we have candid reporting from those who are in the field working with their counterparts in order to inform our decision-making back here in Washington.

I can tell you that in my conversations, at least one of my counterparts said to me, “Well, don’t worry about it.  You should see what we say about you.”  So I think that this is well understood in the diplomatic community as part of the give-and-take.  And I would hope that we will be able to move beyond this and back to the business of working together on behalf of our common goals.

MR. CROWLEY:  Kim Ghattas of BBC.

SECRETARY CLINTON:  Kim.

QUESTION:  Madam Secretary, I was wondering whether you could tell us what you think your upcoming trip is going to look like.  Presumably, a lot of the people who have been mentioned in those alleged cables are going to have conversations with you.  Do you think it’s going to cause you discomfort over the coming week as you engage in conversations with those leaders?

And I know you don’t want to comment on the particulars of the cables, but one issue that has been brought up into the daylight is the debate about Iran.  What do you think the impact is going to be of those documents on the debate about Iran in the coming weeks and months?

SECRETARY CLINTON:  Well, Kim, you’re right.  And I don’t know if you’re going on this trip or not, but we will be seeing dozens of my counterparts in Astana, and then as I go on from Kazakhstan to Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan and then ending up in Bahrain for the Manama dialogue.  And I will continue the conversations that I have started with some in person and over the phone over the last days, and I will seek out others because I want personally to impress upon them the importance that I place on the kind of open, productive discussions that we have had to date and my intention to continue working closely with them.

Obviously, this is a matter of great concern, because we don’t want anyone in any of the countries that could be affected by these alleged leaks here to have any doubts about our intentions and our about commitments.  That’s why I stressed in my remarks that policy is made in Washington.  The president and I have been very clear about our goals and objectives in dealing with the full range of global challenges that we face.  And we will continue to be so and we will continue to look for every opportunity to work with our friends and partners and allies around the world and to deal in a very clear-eyed way with those with whom we have differences, which of course brings me to Iran.

I think that it should not be a surprise to anyone that Iran is a source of great concern not only in the United States, that what comes through in every meeting that I have anywhere in the world is a concern about Iranian actions and intentions.  So if anything, any of the comments that are being reported on allegedly from the cables confirm the fact that Iran poses a very serious threat in the eyes of many of her neighbors, and a serious concern far beyond her region.

That is why the international community came together to pass the strongest possible sanctions against Iran.  It did not happen because the United States went out and said, “Please do this for us.”  It happened because countries, once they evaluated the evidence concerning Iran’s actions and intentions, reached the same conclusion that the United States reached – that we must do whatever we can to muster the international community to take action to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state.

So if anyone reading the stories about these alleged cables thinks carefully, what they will conclude is that the concern about Iran is well founded, widely shared, and will continue to be at the source of the policy that we pursue with likeminded nations to try to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.