The initiative differs little from the idea of a "Multi-speed Europe" that has been recently voiced by French President Emmanuel Macron in his speech at the Sorbonne, Vladimir Ardaev wrote for RIA Novosti. According to the political observer, the initiative contributes to a standoff within the EU, as it literally divides the bloc's members into "first" and "second" class.

"The desire to unite the ‘EU's core,' consisting only of those ready for a closer integration of the countries, didn't come out of thin air. Disagreements in the European community have lately been increasing with the main division line passing along the borders of the Eastern European and Central European states. These states, that joined the European Union after the dissolution of the socialist bloc, differ from the Western ‘veterans' not only in their development, but also in their stance on very important issues," Ardaev wrote.

In his recent speech, the SPD leader stated that the concept of a national state has become outdated. In the times of globalization, such problems as climate change, migration and others can only be resolved by a consolidated, single European super-state, SPD leader Martin Schulz said on Thursday at a SPD party congress in Berlin. EU members that disagree with the new constitution would have to leave the EU automatically, he concluded.

It is important to note that the Protection of Holy Places Law of 1967 states in part: “The Holy Places shall be protected from anything likely to violate freedom of access of the members of different religions to the places sacred to them.” In 1994, Izhak Englard, later a justice on the Supreme Court, wrote: “To argue that freedom of access does not include freedom of worship is an absurdity.”

Basic Law: Jerusalem, Capital of Israel also states in part: “The Holy Places shall be protected... from anything likely to violate the freedom of access of the members of the different religions to the places sacred to them.” Further, we should note the Israel-Jordan peace treaty of 1994, in which Article 9 states: “Each Party will provide freedom of access to places of religious and historical significance.”

In this context, prime minister David Ben-Gurion stated in 1949: “We have always respected the wishes of all states concerned with freedom of worship and free access to the holy places and desiring to safeguard existing rights relating to the holy places and religious sites of Jerusalem, and shall continue to do so.”

Concomitant with access, this denotes the ability for prayer in these holy places! The prevention of Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount is done to mollify Arab violence against Jews. To permit perceived and actual Arab violence as legal conduct results in a perversion of the rule of law. The fact is that Arab policy ratified by the status quo equates to blatant anti-Semitism. I think it is fair to say that the status quo is a veritable no-no!

Haley was speaking at an emergency session of the UN Security Council Friday, convened at the request of eight of the fifteen countries making up the international body. The meeting followed President Donald Trump’s decision to move the American embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv, officially acknowledging the contested city as Israel’s capital. The decision was unanimously condemned by all members of the Security Council – apart from the US, of course – for undermining the ongoing peace process.

“The UN has done much more to damage the prospects for Middle East peace than to advance them. We will not be a party to that. The United States no longer stands by when Israel is unfairly attacked in the United Nations. And the United States will not be lectured to by countries that lack any credibility when it comes to treating both Israelis and Palestinians fairly,” Haley said at the assembly.

“It is no coincidence that the historic peace agreements between Egypt and Israel, and between Jordan and Israel, were both signed on the lawns of the White House. If and when there is a historic peace agreement between the Israelis and Palestinians, there’s a good likelihood, that it too, will be signed on the White House lawn.

Why is that? It’s because the United States has credibility with both sides. Israel will never be, and should never be, bullied into an agreement by the United Nations, or by any collection of countries that have proven their disregard for Israel’s security,” Haley added.

As tensions with North Korea heighten, Rand's 190-page report, entitled "US Military Capabilities and Forces for a Dangerous World," also discussed war scenarios with NATO-Russia involving the Baltic states. It also broke down a possible US-China clash over Taiwan and gaps in existing US capabilities.

With those factors in mind, the Rand report's authors said that the nation's armed forces are "insufficiently trained and ready" when looking at the active service components. That assessment comes despite the US military presence in several regions of the world, and ongoing anti-terrorism missions and the war in Afghanistan, which is nearing its 20th year.

I have emphasized for some time that Washington’s gratuitous and aggressive actions against Russia and the constant barrage of false accusations against Russia and its government have convinced Russia that Washington is planning a military attack. There is nothing more reckless and irresponsible than to convince a nuclear superpower that you are preparing an attack on them.

One would think that such irresponsible and reckless behavior would have the citizenry aroused and the media reporting the risk. Yet, there is only silence. It is more important to the media whether NFL players stand for the national anthem and that some male politicians show sexual interest in women in inappropriate ways. Insouciant America is walking into Armageddon.

How can the American public understand when they do not know, because the few voices telling them are not reported. Indeed, the military/security complex, the Israel Lobby and the lobby’s American agents among the neoconservatives are actively working to discredit those who are aware of the dangerous situation.

The power of the military/security complex and the Israel Lobby, the two prime war-mongers of the 21st century, have immobilized the President of the United States. Trump is helpless in the face of a special prosecutor who is “investigating Russiagate,” a hoax created for the express purpose of preventing President Trump from restoring normal relations with a nuclear superpower.

“We want a United States of Europe,” thundered Martin Schulz, seemingly out of nowhere, at the annual convention of his Social Democrats (SPD) on Thursday. “Let’s finally find the courage to take Europe forward,” demanded the same man who spent his recent campaign for chancellor downplaying the decades he spent in EU politics.

As recently as last month, Europe was little more than a speck on Germany’s political radar. The question of how to maneuver the EU out of its rut was largely ignored by Germany’s two largest parties during the election campaign. Most German media devoted little attention to the question of Europe’s future. After vociferously ruling out a grand coalition both before and after Merkel’s attempt to build a three-way alliance collapsed, Schulz’s credibility is at stake. Nothing less than the pursuit of a United States of Europe, it seems, would justify such an about-face.

Schulz, who was roundly criticized both inside and outside his party for not emphasizing his European credentials during the campaign, has now moved to the other extreme. If his call for a US of E weren’t enough of a jaw dropper, Schulz added that any country that refused to jump on board by 2025 should be kicked out of the EU altogether.

Despite the newfound enthusiasm for European reform among some senior political leaders, Germans at large have yet to show much appetite for the kind of grand plans outlined by the French. Nearly 55 percent of Germans reject Macron’s ideas, according to a poll published this week by the Körber Stiftung, a German foundation. Germans are particularly allergic to proposals that would require them to pay more into the EU coffers or take on additional financial risk.

Trump’s phone call to Mahmoud Abbas on Tuesday, the day before he made his bombshell announcement on Jerusalem, appeared to shed new light on behind-the-scenes efforts by White House advisers to craft a peace blueprint expected to be rolled out in the first half of 2018 but which has now been thrown into doubt because of an angry outcry across the Middle East.

With Palestinians declaring it will be difficult for the United States to act as an honest broker after essentially siding with Israel on one of the central disputes in the conflict, administration officials said they expected a “cooling-off period.”

Trump’s team, led by his son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, will press on with development of a plan to serve as the foundation for renewed Israeli–Palestinian negotiations, hoping the furor will blow over and that any pause in diplomatic contacts with the Palestinians will not last long, US officials said.

But amid protests in the Palestinian territories and uncertainty about whether the Palestinians will stay engaged in the peace effort, one US official said the process could still be disrupted. One US official said the Palestinians were in such a weak position that they would ultimately have no choice but to stay involved in US-led peace efforts.

Another argument that Trump’s aides will likely make to Palestinians is that having granted Israel recognition of its claim to Jerusalem, the US leader might now have more leverage for seeking concessions later on from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the US official said.

Colorado’s anti-discrimination law forbids businesses denying goods and services due to various reasons, including typical grounds like race and color, but also including sexual orientation.

A same-sex couple sued Jack Phillips when they asked him to customize a wedding cake to celebrate their same-sex marriage in 2012, at a time when Colorado did not recognize same-sex marriage or civil unions. Phillips declined on the grounds that his Evangelical Christian faith teaches that marriage is the union of a man and woman.

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) defended Phillips on the grounds that his right to decline to celebrate same-sex marriage is protected by either the Free Speech Clause or the Free Exercise Clause in the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which trumps Colorado law.

The whistle was blown by two Australian scientists Dr Albert Parker and Dr Clifford Ollier in a paper for Earth Systems and Environment. The authors do not mince their words. They refer to these adjustments as “highly questionable” and “suspicious.” That’s because they can find no plausible scientific explanation for the adjustments.

What’s extraordinary is the desperation of scientists at what ought to be impeccably neutral and trustworthy institutions such as NASA, NOAA and PSMSL to pretend that it is. When alarmists in charge of surface temperature datasets make dishonest adjustments to exaggerate the appearance of global warming, it looks like corruption.

When alarmists in the entirely separate field of sea level measurement make precisely the same sort of dishonest adjustments in order to accord with the same global warming narrative, it starts to look like a conspiracy.