Senior members of Alternative for Germany cut short a meeting Monday with the Central Council of Muslims, accusing the group of failing to renounce religious beliefs that they claim clash with the German constitution. The confrontation came days after the party — known by its acronym AfD — launched a campaign against the construction of a mosque in the eastern state of Thuringia, joining up for the first time with the group known as the Patriotic Europeans against the Islamization of the West.

Both groups have seen their popularity rise after Germany saw a greater influx of migrants in 2015 than any other European country. Nearly 1.1 million people — most of them Muslims — were registered as asylum-seekers, though the actual number who came is believed to be somewhat lower.

AfD had previously kept PEGIDA at arm's length due to its links with far-right extremists, but the party's leader in Thuringia, Bjoern Hoecke, said there was "a lot of overlap" between the two on the issue of Islam. "We see a need to send a signal," Hoecke told The Associated Press ahead of a rally last week in Erfurt, the state capital. "We have common goals."

Last year marked the 70th anniversary of the victory in WWII. Out of that tragedy were born the United Nations and the present system of promotion and protection of human rights. The establishment of the UN exemplifies the response of the Allies to the evil of Nazism. Our initiative is driven by deep concern over the spread of various extremist groups, in particular neo-Nazis who resort to violence against people of other ethnicities and religions. Their "inspiration" often comes from ideologies and practices the UN was created to fight against.

In a number of countries, public events aimed at the glorification of the Nazi movement and neo-Nazis continue to be held, former members of the Waffen SS glorified, and monuments and memorials in their honour erected. Attempts have been made to declare those who fought against the Allies or collaborated with Nazi Germany as national heroes. All of this is sacrilegious and an insult to those who fought to free the world from Nazism.

They say the focus on low-fat diets is failing to address Britain’s obesity crisis, while snacking between meals is making people fat. Instead, they call for a return to “whole foods” such as meat, fish and dairy, as well as high-fat, healthy foods including avocados, arguing: “Eating fat does not make you fat.” The report – which has caused a huge backlash among the scientific community – also argues that saturated fat does not cause heart disease while full-fat dairy, including milk, yoghurt and cheese, can actually protect the heart.

Processed foods labelled “low fat”, “lite”, “low cholesterol” or “proven to lower cholesterol” should be avoided at all costs, and people with type 2 diabetes should eat a fat-rich diet rather than one based on carbohydrates. The report also said sugar should be avoided, people should stop counting calories and the idea that exercise could help you “outrun a bad diet” was a myth. Instead, a diet low in refined carbohydrates but high in healthy fats was “an effective and safe approach for preventing weight gain and aiding weight loss”, and cuts the risk of heart disease, it said.

The report added: “Eating a diet rich in full-fat dairy – such as cheese, milk and yoghurt – can actually lower the chance of obesity. The most natural and nutritious foods available – meat, fish, eggs, dairy products, nuts, seeds, olive, avocados – all contain saturated fat. The continued demonisation of omnipresent natural fat drives people away from highly nourishing, wholesome and health-promoting foods.” The authors of the report also argue that the science of food has also been “corrupted by commercial influences”.

Financial institutions, mortgage lenders, and credit card agencies around the world, set their own rates relative to it, and at least $350 trillion in derivatives and other financial products are tied to the LIBOR. These mega banks suppressed LIBOR, during the beginning of the collapse, to boost earnings and make their bottom lines appear healthier.

This banking conspiracy to rig LIBOR was one of the key factors in bringing about the financial collapse of 2008. The scandal was so large, in fact, that it nearly bankrupted the planet. After the dust had cleared, multiple investors launched lawsuits against these megabanks. However, in March of 2013, US District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald dismissed much, though not all, of this class action lawsuit directed at the banks.

Buchwald argued in favor of the banks, saying that since the LIBOR-setting process was never meant to be competitive, the suppression of that process was not anti-competitive. This ruling was a huge win for the banks. However, a new ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has overturned that win.

“Appellants sustained their burden of showing injury by alleging that they paid artificially fixed higher prices,” Circuit Judge Dennis Jacobs wrote for a three-judge appeals court panel. The revived antitrust lawsuit, according to the appeals court, could be devastating to these 16 banks, including Deutsche Bank AG, Royal Bank of Canada, Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, UBS AG, HSBC Holdings Plc, Barclays Plc, Credit Suisse Group AG, Bank of America Corp, Citigroup Inc, and JPMorgan Chase & Co.

“Requiring the banks to pay treble damages to every plaintiff who ended up on the wrong side of an independent Libor‐denominated derivative swap would, if appellants’ allegations were proved at trial, not only bankrupt 16 of the world’s most important financial institutions, but also vastly extend the potential scope of antitrust liability in myriad markets where derivative instruments have proliferated,” the US Court of Appeals in New York said in the ruling.

Regardless of the outcome of this case, it will only serve to open the eyes of those who remain oblivious to the ruling class and money changers. Through the issuance of cheap money, at the expense of taxpayers, the banking system has facilitated a full-time warfare state — all the while making risky and irresponsible decisions that threaten the people’s life savings.

As Ron Paul put it, “It is no coincidence that the century of total war coincided with the century of central banking.”

Chancellor Merkel has upset Germany’s European partners. They are wary of her curious mixture of profound ethics paired with determined self-assurance and high-handed decision making. It is increasingly hard to trust these decisions on faith alone. In Europe, Merkel’s Germany is seen as a rising power that needs to be tied down. Her defense of German euro policy – “If the euro fails, Europe fails” – is echoed in the demand for all EU countries to accept refugees.

At home, her administration is increasingly seen as opaque and closed. The dangerous fuse between these two dimensions is that her own party — not only her political base, which has long admired her steady hand, is now openly questioning her leadership and sense of realism, if not truthfulness.

Somber recollections of earlier single-minded decisions for which Chancellor Merkel bet on public acceptance of her wisdom begin piling up, such as when she announced the end of the military draft and an accelerated end to nuclear energy generation in Germany, after the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

The final straw that has led to this emerging break among her domestic supporters and her government is the debate over the flood of refugees from Syria. It has become a political as well as constitutional crisis.

The Christian Law Fellowship has exhaustively researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now safely conclude that this Executive Order has never been repealed, amended, or superceded by any subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is still valid.

When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy – the author of Profiles in Courage - signed this Order, it returned to the federal government, specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to create and issue currency - money – without going through the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Kennedy’s Executive Order 11110 gave the Treasury Department the explicit authority: “to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury.” This means that for every ounce of silver in the US Treasury’s vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there.

As a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of the united States of America.

Perhaps the assassination of JFK was a warning to all future presidents not to interfere with the private Federal Reserve’s control over the creation of money. It seems very apparent that President Kennedy challenged the “powers that exist behind US and world finance”.

Of course, in a simple sense they are right, because it is possible to be in the EU and yet out of the euro - which is precisely our position. But this separation is flimsy. The mess that is the euro goes right to the heart of why the UK should leave the EU. First and foremost, it needs to be understood that the euro is the EU's creature. It didn't happen by accident, it was not imposed from the outside and it wasn't necessary. The euro was the EU's choice. It emerged from the essential nature of the Union and its tortured politics.

It had always been envisaged by those who dreamed of a United States of Europe that this body would have a common currency. In the Werner Report of 1970, plans were discussed as to how a common currency could come about. In the event, what got the plans off the drawing board and the euro emerging into reality was the new dynamic created between France and Germany by the possibility of German reunification. This caused the French authorities to worry that Germany would become overwhelmingly dominant in Europe.

President Mitterrand of France insisted that his country could only agree to German reunification if Germany gave up the Deutschmark which, it was perceived, was the source of much of her strength and power. Germany agreed. And so the euro was born. As nearly everyone now acknowledges, the euro has been a disaster. Not only has it impoverished the countries of southern Europe, with huge numbers of people made unemployed, but it has also allowed Germany to run an enormous current account surplus, now amounting to over 8 percent of GDP, obliging other countries to run corresponding deficits.

This economic catastrophe was imposed on the people of Europe in order to achieve the central objective of the EU - and to pander to the French establishment's (as it happens erroneous) view of what was in France's national interest. In order for it to survive, its members must move to fiscal and political union. If they don't, the euro must break up. Either of these outcomes would have profound consequences for the UK.

In the event of a euro collapse, we would be better placed if we were outside the EU - and thereby able to control both our finances and our borders.

Timm quite rightly wondered: why were these warnings in the report? Were the authors just anticipating a possible crime? Or were they reflecting the fact that the NSA had already been engaging in the crime? If this was just a bit of anticipation, why leave it naked in the report? Why not say there was no current evidence the NSA had been manipulating financial systems? Those systems would, of course, include the stock market, and all trading markets around the world.

Well, there is definite evidence of other NSA financial snooping. From Spiegel Online, “‘Follow the Money’: NSA Spies on International Payments,” 9/15/13: “The National Security Agency (NSA) widely monitors international payments, banking and credit card transactions, according to documents seen by SPIEGEL.”

“The NSA’s Tracfin data bank also contained data from the Brussels-based Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), a network used by thousands of banks to send transaction information securely… the NSA spied on the organization on several levels, involving, among others, the [NSA] agency’s ‘tailored access operations’ division…”

The NSA’s “tailored access operations” division uses roughly 1000 hackers and analysts in its spying efforts. The next step in all this spying would naturally involve penetrating trading markets and, using the deep data obtained, manipulate the markets to the advantage of the NSA and preferred clients. The amount of money siphoned off in such an ongoing operation would be enormous.

Meanwhile, earthquakes continue to shake the globe with alarming regularity. Just last week, Ecuador was hit by a magnitude 6.7 earthquake and a magnitude 6.8 earthquake in rapid succession. Overall, there have been more than 3,000 earthquakes of magnitude 1.5 or greater within the past month globally.

So yes, I write constantly about the rapidly accelerating deterioration of our financial system, but the coming “collapse” is not just about money. I am convinced that we are entering a “perfect storm” in which a confluence of factors will absolutely cripple society and bring about changes that most of us would not even dare to imagine right now.

Yehuda Glick’s journey — from the United States to Israel, from government bureaucrat to outspoken demonstrator at Jerusalem’s most contested site, and from a hospital bed to elected office — is an unlikely one. And Glick’s arrival in the halls of the Knesset reflects the growing reception of his push for Jews’ right to visit and worship on the Temple Mount.

Between 2009 and 2014, Jewish visits to the site nearly doubled. Glick has been barred from the mount — revered by Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary — and was even charged with assault there (the charges were dropped). Glick and his fellow religious activists see his accession to the Knesset as a victory for a just cause following his brush with death. Critics, however, say the power he wields could exacerbate tensions at a regional flashpoint.

Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb is the Grand Imam of Cairo’s Al-Azhar Mosque, and some have described him as “the highest figure in Sunni Islam”. The Daily Mail said that the meeting between these two men was a “historic bid to reopen dialogue between the two churches”, and this is yet another in a long series of attempts by Pope Francis to build bridges between Catholicism and various other faiths.

In the end, what are we to make of all of this? Could it be possible that Pope Francis is laying the groundwork for the “super world church” and the coming one world religion that David Wilkerson and so many others have warned about? Pope Francis made sure that when he embraced Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb there would be plenty of reporters there to document the moment.

There is a very clear pattern developing here. Pope Francis believes that Christians and Muslims worship the same God, and he wants us to know that he considers Islam to be a perfectly acceptable way to seek God. It has become exceedingly clear that Pope Francis believes that all major religions are completely valid paths to the same God, and there is virtually no uproar over this.