Another Terror Attack in Germany, Risks in USA

Al Qaeda chief urges kidnappings of Westerners for prisoner swaps

Al Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri has appeared in an audio interview calling on fighters to take Western hostages and exchange them for jailed jihadists, the monitoring service SITE Intelligence Group said on Sunday.

In recording posted online, Al-Zawahiri called on the global militant network to kidnap Westerners “until they liberate the last Muslim male prisoner and last Muslim female prisoner in the prisons of the Crusaders, apostates, and enemies of Islam,” according to SITE. More here from Reuters.

******

A 21-year-old Syrian refugee was arrested on Sunday after killing a pregnant woman with a machete in Germany, the fourth violent assault on civilians in western Europe in 10 days, though police said it did not appear linked to terrorism.

The incident, however, may add to public unease surrounding Chancellor Angela Merkel’s open-door refugee policy that has seen over a million migrants enter Germany over the past year, many fleeing war in Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq.

German police said they arrested the machete-wielding Syrian asylum-seeker after he killed a woman and injured two other people in the southwestern city of Reutlingen near Stuttgart. Much more here from Newsweek.

*****

Related reading on NGO’s: UNHCR – Partnership in Resettlement

Related reading: UNHCR –NGO Toolkit for Practical Cooperation on …

Related reading: NGOs Call on US to Resettle More Syrian Refugees | Al …

So what about the real vetting process in the United States you ask…..it is a great question.

After the Paris attacks, the White House called in 34 governors to discuss the policy and vetting process of refugees into the United States. While we focus on ‘Syrian’ refugees, they hardly make up the majority and it is this fact that must be noted. Even so, the White House, 3 days later published a chart of the vetting program and it does have some gaps (questions) that too must be answered.

‎Refugees undergo more rigorous screening than anyone else we allow into the United States. Here’s what the screening process looks like for them:

The Screening Process for Refugees Entry Into the United States (full text of the graphic written below the image)

The full text is found here from the White House.

The admission of refugees to the United States and their resettlement here are authorized by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended by the Refugee Act of 1980. The INA defines a refugee as a person who is outside his or her country and who is unable or unwilling to return because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. In special circumstances, a refugee also may be a person who is within his or her country and who is persecuted or has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. The maximum annual number of refugee admissions (refugee ceiling) and the allocation of these numbers by region of the world are set by the President after consultation by Cabinet-level representatives with members of the House and the Senate Judiciary Committees.

The Department of State’s (DOS’s) Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) is responsible for coordinating and managing the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. Prospective refugees can be referred to the U.S. program by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), a U.S. embassy, or a designated nongovernmental organization (NGO), or in some cases, they can access the U.S. refugee program directly. PRM generally arranges for an NGO, an international organization, or U.S. embassy contractors to manage a Resettlement Support Center (RSC) that assists in refugee processing.

Following the consultations, the President issues a Presidential Determination that sets the refugee ceiling and regional allocations for that fiscal year. Once the Presidential Determination for a fiscal year has been issued, INA Section 207 also allows for additional refugee admissions in response to an “emergency refugee situation.” In such a situation, the President may, after congressional consultation, issue an Emergency Presidential Determination providing for an increase in refugee admissions numbers.

For FY2016, the Obama Administration initially proposed a refugee ceiling of 75,000 and held consultations with Congress on that proposal. The proposal reportedly included an allocation of 33,000 for the Near East/South Asia, the region that includes Syria.5 The Administration subsequently announced that the United States would admit at least 10,000 Syrian refugees in FY2016. On September 29, 2015, the Obama Administration released the Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2016.6 It sets the FY2016 refugee ceiling at 85,000, with 79,000 admissions numbers allocated among the regions of the world and 6,000 admissions numbers comprising an unallocated reserve.7 The allocation for the Near East/South Asia region is 34,000.

Actual Admissions

In FY2015, the United States admitted 69,933 refugees. The Near East/South Asia region accounted for 24,579 admissions, of which 1,682 were Syrian refugees. In the first month of FY2016 (October 2015), total refugee admissions were 5,348, Near East/South Asia region admissions were 1,979, and Syrian admissions were 187. From October 1, 2010, through October 31, 2015, the United States admitted a total of 2,070 Syrian refugees.

Role of the Department of Homeland Security

USCIS adjudicates refugee applications and makes decisions about eligibility for refugee status. USCIS officers in the Refugee Corps interview each applicant in person and consider other evidence and information to determine whether the individual is eligible for refugee status. More comprehensive reading here.

 

Trump’s 1st Day to Day 100 as President

Some of this is impossible to disagree with considering there is so much to repair and restore. The question becomes just what are the priorities to this possible new administration and has the full mission been fully explained and published? There is argument that many Obama Executive Orders should in fact be terminated or amended immediately yet, there is no indication of this occurring as noted below.

So let’s begin with this former Goldman Sachs fella shall we?

A must read: Drudge and Breitbart Wont Tell You this on Trump

Report: Trump wants ex-Goldman Sachs partner to head Treasury

TheHill: Donald Trump is reportedly planning to nominate Steve Mnuchin, his campaign’s finance chairman, for Treasury secretary if he wins the White House in November. Anthony Scaramucci, a major fundraiser for the Trump campaign, told Fortune on Tuesday that the presumptive GOP nominee announced his intentions to a group of prospective donors. Trump tapped Mnuchin in early May to lead the campaign’s fundraising operation. The move raised eyebrows among Republican donors and fundraising operatives, many of whom had never heard of him.

Gingrich pushing Trump to issue hundreds of executive orders on first day

TheHill: CLEVELAND — Newt Gingrich, who is expected to serve as a senior policy adviser in Donald Trump’s administration if the GOP presidential nominee is elected, says he would urge a newly elected President Trump to sign as many as 300 executive orders on his first day in office.
Gingrich, who, while serving as Speaker of the House in the 1990s, struck deals with former President Bill Clinton to reform welfare and balance the budget, says Trump will have to build excitement in Congress to break the legislative gridlock that has defined most of President Obama’s administration.
“You’ve got an extraordinary opening day, where you sign [200] or 300 executive orders,” Gingrich told a gathering at The Union Club Tuesday evening.

Gingrich said one thing Trump might do right off the bat is move the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, something Trump pledged to do earlier this year. The move would please many pro-Israeli Jewish voters and Christians, who want Jerusalem to serve as the country’s undivided capital.

Gingrich also highlighted an executive order authorizing construction of the Keystone XL pipeline as another item on the first-day agenda.

“You have a whole bunch of stuff you can do on day one that gives you a sense of excitement,” he said at the event in downtown Cleveland hosted by the law firm Dentons.

Executive orders from Trump could do much to undo actions taken by President Obama, who has relied on executive orders extensively to move forward with his agenda.

Gingrich said Trump should start preparing for his first hundred days as soon as September by meeting with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) to pick five or six legislative items to pass in the first four months of 2017.
“In September, early October, you try to find with McConnell and Paul Ryan five or 10 big things,” he said.

Gingrich thinks Trump should unveil a list of policy proposals similar to the Contract with America, which Gingrich famously designed in 1994, to give voters a rationale for giving Republicans control of the House after 40 years of Democratic rule.

“Sometime in the next 60 days, they need to outline just a handful of big things, and they need to accomplish them by April 30th, which is the hundred days, and that will build a momentum of achievement,” he said.

But Gingrich acknowledged it will be important to bring Democrats on board. Otherwise, Trump’s legislative agenda is likely to get hung up by filibusters in the Senate and other obstructionist tactics.

“They ought to get as many Democrats as they can,” he said.

Gingrich and Trump sat down for a two-and-a-half-hour meeting recently in Indianapolis, where they discussed the possibility of Gingrich serving as Trump’s running mate.

When it became apparent that Gingrich would likely not get the nod, Trump asked him what role he would like to serve in the administration. Gingrich asked to be given a special position akin to a tsar in charge of reviewing the federal bureaucracy.

“He said, ‘Look, if you don’t get the vice presidency, what do you want?’ ” Gingrich recounted. “I said I want to be the senior planner for the entire federal government, and I want a letter from you that says Newt Gingrich is authorized to go to any program in any department, examine it and report directly to the president.”

He said he wanted to serve in the job without pay to have “absolute ability to say what I think.”

But Gingrich, who was one of the most divisive figure in politics when he served as Speaker — played a central role in the 1995-96 government shutdown and oversaw impeachment proceedings against Clinton — acknowledged that soliciting Democratic cooperation will be essential.

He said Trump is well suited to strike bipartisan deals because of his professional experience working with Democratic politicians in New York and other cities on major real estate projects.

Gingrich said that, if elected, Trump should use his deal-making skills to put together a massive infrastructure bill that would be paid for with royalties from opening federal lands to oil and gas drilling, mining, and other development.
He said giving energy and mining companies access to federal lands could generate up to $1 trillion for infrastructure projects.

Haley Barbour, a longtime party strategist who served as Republican National Committee chairman in 1994, when Republicans took over the House, said it would be a good idea for Trump to come up with something similar to the Contract with America.
“I think it is very helpful to Trump politically to talk about serious, substantive policy,” he said. “One of the issues is a lot of Republicans and independents are not sure what he’s really for. So lay it out.

“It would give a lot of Republicans who are not certain some comfort,” he added. “Talk about economics, budget, debt, crime.”

Barbour, who voted for Ohio Gov. John Kasich in the presidential primary, is attending his 11th Republican National Convention.

Going towards day 100:

IF DONALD TRUMP WAS PRESIDENT The world v the Donald
HIS presidency is only 100 days old, yet already some are wondering if Donald Trump will ever again match the approval ratings he enjoyed one week after inauguration day. His “Made in America” summit, held in a blizzard-lashed White House on January 27th, delighted the public, according to opinion polls, even as it reminded the president’s critics of an event more suited to Vladimir Putin’s Russia. Mr Trump dressed down two dozen corporate chieftains on live television as “dishonest and greedy” and demanded that they promise, on the spot, to close or scrap named manufacturing plants in China within his first term and bring production back to America. The newspapers the next day carried images of Tim Cook, the head of Apple, and Dennis Muilenburg, the boss of Boeing, shivering in the North Portico as they waited, coatless, to be picked up by their drivers after declining to make such a promise, prompting their summary expulsion from the building.

Supporters also cheered Mr Trump’s appointment in his first week of Joe Arpaio, the hardline sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, to chair a presidential task force on building a fortified border with Mexico within three years, named “Make America Safe Again”. There was a more muted response to a third announcement: that the new president’s first overseas visit would be to Moscow, for a meeting with Mr Putin to explore common ground in the fight against Islamist terrorism.

True, Mr Trump promised he would strike “only the toughest deals, the smartest deals, or I walk from the table”. But his quick offer to meet the Russian president reminded many Americans, uncomfortably, of the murky espionage scandal that played so large a role in the defeat of Hillary Clinton. In October top-secret files had appeared on the internet, allegedly extracted by hackers from Mrs Clinton’s private e-mail server when she was secretary of state, identifying individuals as American intelligence assets in Russia and Ukraine; one, an Israeli-Russian businessman, was soon afterwards found dead at a Geneva hotel. Mrs Clinton continues to deny any knowledge of the leaked documents. Her husband, ex-President Bill Clinton, sparked fresh headlines with an intemperate interview in March in which he charged that “Kremlin dirty tricks” helped to swing the 2016 election.

One hundred days into the Trump era, that Moscow trip remains on hold. Like much else it has been delayed by diplomatic, military and commercial moves by China, Mexico and Russia that a dissident Republican, Senator Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, has called a “pre-emptive strike by the rest of the world” against Mr Trump’s “America First” agenda.

No date has been set for Mr Trump’s emergency trip to Beijing, announced by him on Twitter several weeks ago but now deemed “just a suggestion” by the White House spokesman, Sean Hannity. There has been no suggestion of a summit with the leader who has most gleefully cast himself as the anti-Trump, President Enrique Peña Nieto of Mexico.

Relations with Russia trouble the Washington national-security establishment the most. The president faces growing questions about the mysterious disappearance of a helicopter carrying Estonian troops over the Baltic Sea on March 1st, amid claims that the aircraft may have been shot down by a Russian warship. Mr Trump is being pressed over reports that he told the Estonian president in a telephone call that his small Baltic republic, a member of NATO, needs to “get smart and shut up”, because America’s national interest lies in co-operating with Russia in Syria, not with defending European allies. Declining to address those reports, Mr Trump used a rambling White House press conference to complain about the media, about official leaks and about disloyalty at the Pentagon, where, he said, “there are a lot of generals who need firing, believe me.”

On the economic front moves by Chinese authorities against American companies have panicked investors. The first firm to be hit was Boeing, days after a speech by Mr Trump calling it “just disgusting” that the aerospace giant is planning to open a new facility in China. Chinese state media gave prominent coverage to a speech by an aviation regulator warning that planned sales of hundreds of aircraft to Chinese airlines might need to be reviewed if “certain entities are not the reliable long-term suppliers that they claim to be.”

Soon afterwards the China headquarters of Apple, a computer firm, and Pfizer, a drugs company, were raided by antitrust investigators from the State Administration for Industry and Commerce; both firms say they are in full compliance with competition laws. In early March the Ministry of Environmental Protection announced that the most popular models sold by General Motors and Ford in China will face new tests of their exhaust emissions. Brushing aside assurances from American car executives that their emissions comply with all Chinese laws, the ministry added that Chinese consumers might care to wait for tests to be completed before choosing an American vehicle. More poetically, a recent editorial in the state-run Global Times talked of China being willing to take “resolute actions” against “an arrogant foreign leader who prattles like a monk about honesty while hiding a stolen goose in his sleeve”. Read more here as Mexico is next up as summarized by The Economist.

 

Venezuela, Chaos in our Hemisphere, Inflation Skyrockets

Venezuelans flee to Mexico to escape economic crisis


Kimberly-Clark: Venezuela seizes and re-opens US-owned factory

BBC: The government of Venezuela has said it has seized a factory owned by the US firm Kimberly-Clark.

The firm had said it was halting operations in Venezuela as it was unable to obtain raw materials.

But the labour minister said on Monday that the factory closure was illegal and it had re-opened “in the hands of the workers”.

Kimberly-Clark, which makes hygiene products including tissues and nappies, said it had acted appropriately.

Over the weekend it became the latest multinational to close or scale back operations in the country, citing strict currency controls, a lack of raw materials and soaring inflation.

 Employees outside closed Kimberly-Clark gates in Maracay on 10 July 2016 Reuters: No to the closure” read graffiti on the firm’s gates over the weekend

General Mills, Procter & Gamble and other corporations have reduced operations in Venezuela as the country is gripped by economic crisis and widespread shortages of basic household goods.

What has gone wrong in Venezuela?

Labour Minister Oswaldo Vera, from the ruling Socialist Party (PSUV), visited the factory in Maracay and said it was illegal.

Almost 1,000 workers had asked him to re-start production, he said.

Mr Vera said: “Kimberly-Clark will continue producing, now in the hands of the workers.

“We’ve just turned on the first engine.”

The Texas-based company said in a statement: “If the Venezuelan government takes control of Kimberly-Clark facilities and operations, it will be responsible for the well-being of the workers and the physical asset, equipment and machinery in the facilities going forward.”

In just 12 hours, more than 35K Venezuelans cross Colombian border to buy food, medicine

In just 12 hours, more than 35,000 Venezuelans crossed the border into Colombia on Sunday to buy food and medicines in the city of Cucuta, when the Venezuelan government agreed to opened border crossings for one day only.

People began crossing the Simon Bolivar international bridge at 5:00 a.m. to purchase products that are scarce in Venezuela.

“We’re from here in San Antonio (and), honestly, we don’t have any food to give our children, so I don’t think it’s fair that the border is still closed,” a Venezuelan woman told EFE in Cucuta.

The woman, who preferred to not give her name, crossed the international bridge with her husband and children ages 5 and 2.

The border crossings between Tachira state and Norte de Santander province were closed on Aug. 19, 2015, by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, who said he took the measure to fight smuggling and prevent members of paramilitary groups from entering Venezuela.

Maduro later ordered all crossings along the 1,378-mile border closed.

Tachira Gov. Jose Gregorio Vielma Mora said Saturday that the border would be opened on Maduro’s orders.

After the announcement, hundreds of Venezuelans began lining up to cross the Simon Bolivar international bridge.

“A second entry by Venezuelans into Colombia was planned by the Venezuelan right, with the pretext of buying food and medicines,” Vielma Mora said.

The governor was apparently referring to an incident last Tuesday, when about 500 Venezuelans from the city of Ureña crossed the closed Francisco de Paula Santander international bridge and went into Cucuta to buy food.

Norte de Santander Gov. William Villamizar, for his part, said in a Twitter post after visiting the border crossings that the humanitarian corridor “has benefited 25,000 people” who were able to buy “food and medicines.”

Villamizar spoke with some of the people streaming across the border and posed for photos with a family carrying a poster that read, “Colombia, gracias por su solidaridad con Venezuela” (Colombia, Thanks for Your Solidarity with Venezuela).

“This is super nice on Colombia’s part, very good,” Rosalba Jaimes, a San Antonio resident, told EFE.

Betty Rojas, a Venezuelan already heading home, said she and others planned to cross whenever the border was open.

“We bought rice, pasta, sugar, toilet paper, butter, everything we could bring back. We had enough for lots of stuff,” Rojas told EFE, adding that she wanted to tell the Colombian government “thank you.”

Cucuta police chief Col. Jaime Barrera said officers would “guarantee security in Cucuta’s business districts for the thousands of people coming from Venezuela.

Officers have been posted at the border crossings and at businesses across the border city, the provincial police chief said.

Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos and Foreign Minister Maria Angela Holguin visited Cucuta on Wednesday.

The president said he would try to negotiate with Maduro in an effort to reopen the border crossings.

Venezuela: Decree Grants New Powers To President, Defense Minister

Stratfor: Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro issued a presidential decree July 11 granting new, sweeping powers to himself and Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino Lopez, Sumarium reported. Maduro said the decree establishes a new program that concentrates economic and political power at the very top of government, which will enable the country to correct its economic woes and get production back on track. Moreover, all government institutions and ministries in the country will now fall under the direct control of the president and the defense minister. The president said that he will provide more information about the decree, which effectively makes Padrino Lopez a second head of state in Venezuela, within the coming days.

 

New Prime Minister of Britain ‘Tomorrow’ and Larry

David Cameron Confirms He Will Resign On Wednesday, Theresa May Next Prime Minister

Zerohedge:With Theresa May the last (wo)man standing, it should not be totally surprising that David Cameron has just confirmed he will officially resign as British prime minister on Wednesday after Prime Minister’s Questions. Early strength in sterling is holding.

David Cameron says he will resign by Wednesday, Theresa May to be next British Prime Minister.

She will be tasked with either triggering the Article 50 process for the UK’s departure from the EU, or trying to undo the entire process.

**** Larry is staying however at 10 Downing Street. Who is Larry?

Larry the cat Larry the Cat gazes through the window. The brown and white tabby is entrusted with the rat-catching portfolio Images from Getty/Guardian

A Cabinet Office spokeswoman said: “It’s a civil servant’s cat and does not belong to the Camerons – he will be staying.”

Larry, who was rehomed from Battersea Dogs and Cats Home in 2011, was said to have a “strong predatory drive” that suggested he would be well suited to the task of rat catching. Guardian 


At least Theresa May is on the right side of a major issues, radical and militant Islam.

Published on Mar 23, 2015

An extensive wish list of counter-extremism measures has been reeled off by the Home Secretary in her last major speech before the start of the general election campaign. From launching an investigation into the use of Sharia law to promoting “British values” through social media, and from an inspection of police responses to honour crimes to stricter English language requirements, Theresa May set out how a Conservative majority government would deal with extremism. The Home Secretary used the speech to warn radical Islamists that the “game is up” and that they are no longer tolerated in Britain, but also called on British Muslims to help tackle extremism.

Regarding the recent vote on Brexit:

Factbox: Theresa May’s plans for a Brexit ministry and who might lead it

MAY’S BREXIT MINISTRY

Reuters: “Nobody should fool themselves this process will be brief or straightforward. Regardless of the time it takes to negotiate an initial deal, it is going to take a period lasting several years to disentangle our laws, rules and processes from the Brussels machinery,” May said on June 30 when she launched her candidacy to be prime minister.

“That means it is going to require significant expertise and a consistent approach. I will therefore create a new government department responsible for conducting Britain’s negotiation with the EU and for supporting the rest of Whitehall in its European work.

“That department will be led by a senior Secretary of State — and I will make sure that the position is taken by a member of parliament who campaigned for Britain to leave the EU.”

CANDIDATES TO BE MAY’S BREXIT NEGOTIATOR

DAVID DAVIS

A senior Conservative lawmaker who was beaten by David Cameron in the party’s 2005 leadership election contest, Davis has been in parliament since 1987 and is a former junior Foreign Office minister.

Davis was born in York and grew up in south London. He first worked as an insurance clerk before spending 17 years at global food ingredients provider Tate & Lyle.

He has served as Conservative Party chairman and was also the party’s home affairs spokesman in opposition.

In an article for Conservative grassroots website Conservative Home on Monday, Davis said Britain should take its time before triggering Article 50. The government should first work out its negotiating strategy and begin the formal process of leaving the EU “before or by the beginning of next year”.

“We need to take a brisk but measured approach to Brexit. This would involve concluding consultations and laying out the detailed plans in the next few months,” he said.

LIAM FOX

Fox ran for the Conservative leadership himself before backing May when he was eliminated in the process of winnowing the candidates down to two.

During the leadership contest, Fox said he would trigger Article 50 by the end of this year, with the intention of a full British exit from the EU by Jan. 1, 2019.

Long a figure on the right wing of the Conservative Party, Fox was born and raised in Scotland and attended the local state school before studying medicine at the University of Glasgow.

He worked as a doctor and civilian army medical officer before becoming a Conservative lawmaker in 1992.

Fox was defense secretary from 2010-2011, when he resigned over his relationship with a businessman who acted as his adviser. A government investigation found he had breached the ministerial code by allowing an “inappropriate blurring of lines between official and personal relationships”.

He has also held the posts of junior foreign office minister and Conservative Party chairman.

MICHAEL GOVE

Gove was a leading Brexit campaigner who ran for the party’s leadership but was eliminated in the second round of voting.

He had been expected to support former London mayor Boris Johnson for the leadership but made a surprise announcement hours before Johnson was due to launch his bid that he did not believe Johnson was up to the job and would run himself instead.

Gove was brought up in Scotland and studied at Oxford University before becoming a journalist. He worked at the BBC and the Times newspaper, where he was assistant editor.

He was also chairman of the center-right thinktank Policy Exchange before being elected to parliament in 2005.

Under outgoing Prime Minister David Cameron he has served as Education Secretary and Justice Secretary.

CHRIS GRAYLING

Grayling, currently the leader of Britain’s lower house of parliament, was May’s campaign manager during the leadership contest. A former Justice Secretary and minister in the Work and Pensions department, Grayling has been in parliament since 2001.

Before becoming a lawmaker he worked in television production and marketing.

Last month he told Reuters he expected Britain to have informal talks with the EU about its future relationship before triggering Article 50, which he said should only be done when Britain is ready.

CANDIDATES TO BE MAY’S FINANCE MINISTER

PHILIP HAMMOND

Currently Foreign Secretary, Hammond campaigned for Britain to remain in the EU. A lawmaker since 1997, he is also a former defense minister and minister for transport.

While the Conservatives were in opposition, he was a junior spokesman for the party on finance.

Before entering parliament he had a career in business including working for companies in manufacturing, consultancy, property, construction, and oil and gas.

Last week Hammond said the government was not yet in a position to begin substantive negotiations and therefore should not begin the process by triggering Article 50.

He also said the economic and fiscal impact of Brexit in the short term would reduce government revenues, making it harder to significantly boost funding for trade negotiation resources.

SAJID JAVID

A lawmaker since 2010, Javid has been Business Secretary since last May’s election. He also previously served in two junior minister roles at the Treasury.

The son of a bus driver, Javid had been promised the role of finance minister by leadership candidate Stephen Crabb, who pulled out after the first round of voting. Both have working-class roots, leading them to be dubbed the “blue collar ticket” by some newspapers.

Before joining parliament he worked at Chase Manhattan Bank in New York and then at Deutsche Bank, where he focused on helping raise investment in developing countries.

Javid, who campaigned for Britain to remain in the EU, has said securing access to the bloc’s single market should be the top goal in Brexit negotiations.

He has said he would lead a series of trade missions this year, and last week began preliminary talks with India on an eventual bilateral trade deal.

GEORGE OSBORNE

It is not certain May will replace Osborne, the current finance minister, immediately. One possibility is that he stays on in the short-term while the dust settles, and continues to represent Britain at upcoming international gatherings such as this month’s G20 finance minister meeting in China.

 

 

Merkel of Germany Admits Terrorists Among Refugees

Can she be impeached? Do they do that in Germany? Is Merkel concerned about the security of her citizens and country at all? She and Barack Obama have the same attitude…a free for all for migrants…

‘Terrorists’ smuggled into Europe with refugees, Merkel says

Reuters: Militant groups smuggled some of their members into Europe in the wave of migrants who have fled from Syria, German Chancellor Angela said on Monday.

“In part, the refugee flow was even used to smuggle terrorists,” Merkel told a rally of her Christian Democrats in eastern Germany.

More than 1 million migrants arrived in Germany last year, many of them Syrians.

***** Sure wish the study below polled the thoughts of Americans, but then the political elitist class in Washington DC would spin the results anyway….right? We are all citizens of the world now….

Europeans Fear Wave of Refugees Will Mean More Terrorism, Fewer Jobs

Sharp ideological divides across EU on views about minorities, diversity and national identity

PewResearch: The recent surge of refugees into Europe has featured prominently in the anti-immigrant rhetoric of right-wing parties across the Continent and in the heated debate over the UK’s decision to exit the European Union. At the same time, attacks in Paris and Brussels have fueled public fears about terrorism. As a new Pew Research Center survey illustrates, the refugee crisis and the threat of terrorism are very much related to one another in the minds of many Europeans. In eight of the 10 European nations surveyed, half or more believe incoming refugees increase the likelihood of terrorism in their country.

Many Europeans concerned with security, economic repercussions of refugee crisis

But terrorism is not the only concern people have about refugees. Many are also worried that they will be an economic burden. Half or more in five nations say refugees will take away jobs and social benefits. Hungarians, Poles, Greeks, Italians and French identify this as their greatest concern. Sweden and Germany are the only countries where at least half say refugees make their nation stronger because of their work and talents. Fears linking refugees and crime are much less pervasive, although nearly half in Italy and Sweden say refugees are more to blame for crime than other groups.

Views of Muslims more negative in eastern and southern Europe

Most of the recent refugees to Europe are arriving from majority-Muslim nations, such as Syria and Iraq. Among Europeans, perceptions of refugees are influenced in part by negative attitudes toward Muslims already living in Europe. In Hungary, Italy, Poland and Greece, more than six-in-ten say they have an unfavorable opinion of the Muslims in their country – an opinion shared by at least one-in-four in each nation polled.

Most Europeans say Muslims in their country want to be distinctFor some Europeans, negative attitudes toward Muslims are tied to a belief that Muslims do not wish to participate in the broader society. In every country polled, the dominant view is that Muslims want to be distinct from the rest of society rather than adopt the nation’s customs and way of life. Six-in-ten or more hold this view in Greece, Hungary, Spain, Italy and Germany. Notably, the percentage saying that Muslims want to remain distinct has actually declined since 2005 in four out of five countries where trend data are available. The biggest drop has been in Germany, where the share of the public expressing this view has declined from 88% to 61%.

While most Europeans think the recent surge of refugees could lead to more terrorism, there is less alarm that Muslims already living on the Continent might sympathize with extremists. The percentage of the public saying that most or many Muslims in their country support groups like ISIS is less than half in every nation polled. Still, 46% of Italians, 37% of Hungarians, 35% of Poles and 30% of Greeks think Muslims in their countries are favorably inclined toward such extremist groups. On these and other questions included on the poll, Greece, Hungary, Italy and Poland often stand out for expressing greater concern and more negative views about refugees and minority groups.

Those on ideological right more unfavorable toward Muslims in most countriesAcross the EU nations surveyed, the refugee crisis has brought into sharp relief deep ideological divides over views of minorities and diversity. On nearly all of the questions analyzed in this report, people on the ideological right express more concerns about refugees, more negative attitudes toward minorities and less enthusiasm for a diverse society.

Partisan divides in France, UK on refugees in their countryFor example, negative opinions about Muslims are much more common among respondents who place themselves on the right of the ideological spectrum. In Greece, 81% of those on the right express an unfavorable view of Muslims, compared with 50% of those on the left. Significant right-left gaps in attitudes toward Muslims are also found in Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, Spain, France and the United Kingdom.

Similarly, supporters of far-right political parties hold much more negative attitudes toward refugees and Muslims and are much more skeptical about the benefits of a diverse society. For instance, fears that the surge of refugees will lead to more terrorism and harm the economy are considerably more widespread among supporters of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) in the UK and the National Front in France.

Ideology is not the only dividing line in European attitudes, however. On many questions, education and age also matter, with older people and less-educated individuals expressing more negative opinions about refugees and minorities.

These are among the key findings from a new survey by Pew Research Center, conducted in 10 European Union nations and the United States among 11,494 respondents from April 4 to May 12, 2016, before the Brexit referendum in the UK and terrorist attacks at the Istanbul Atatürk Airport, both of which took place in late June. The survey includes countries that account for 80% of the EU-28 population and 82% of the EU’s gross domestic product.

Along with worries about refugees and minorities, the survey finds mixed views regarding the overall value of cultural diversity. When asked whether having an increasing number of people of many different races, ethnic groups and nationalities in their country makes their society a better place to live, a worse place or does not make much difference either way, over half of Greeks and Italians and about four-in-ten Hungarians and Poles say growing diversity makes things worse.

Relatively few Europeans believe diversity has a positive impact on their countries. At 36%, Sweden registers the highest percentage that believes an increasingly diverse society makes their country a better place to live. In many countries, the prevailing view is that diversity makes no difference in the quality of life.

Negative attitudes toward minorities common in many nations

Muslims are not the only minority group viewed unfavorably by substantial percentages of Europeans. In fact, overall, attitudes toward Roma are more negative than attitudes toward Muslims. Across the 10 nations polled, a median of 48% express an unfavorable opinion of Roma in their country. Fully 82% hold this view in Italy, while six-in-ten or more say the same in Greece, Hungary and France. Negative views of Roma have gone up since 2015 in Spain (+14 percentage points), the UK (+8) and Germany (+6). Greeks have also become increasingly unfavorable (+14 points) since 2014, the last time Greece was included in the survey.

Negative opinions about Roma, Muslims in several European nations

Negative ratings for Muslims have also increased over the past 12 months in the UK (+9 percentage points), Spain (+8) and Italy (+8), and are up 12 points in Greece since 2014. In France – where coordinated terrorist attacks by ISIS at the Bataclan concert hall and elsewhere in Paris in November left 130 people dead – unfavorable opinions are up slightly since last year (+5 points).

Negative attitudes toward Jews are much less common. A median of only 16% have an unfavorable opinion of Jews in their country. Still, a majority of Greeks give Jews in their country a negative rating, and one-in-five or more express this view in Hungary, Poland, Italy and Spain. Unfavorable attitudes toward Jews have been relatively stable since 2015.

Language, customs and tradition seen as central to national identity

Language crucial to national identityOpinions vary about the key components of national identity, but European publics clearly agree that language is fundamental. Across the 10 EU countries surveyed, a median of 97% think that being able to speak the national language is important for truly being able to identify with their nationality. A median of 77% say this is very important. Majorities believe it is very important in every nation polled.

There is also a strong cultural component to national identity. A median of 86% believe sharing national customs and traditions is important, with 48% saying this is very important. Fully 68% in Hungary say sharing national customs and traditions is very important for being truly Hungarian, and 66% express similar sentiments in Greece. In contrast, fewer than four-in-ten consider sharing these traditions and customs very important in the Netherlands (37%), Germany (29%) and Sweden (26%).

There is less agreement about the need to be born in a given country. Still, a median of 58% say it is important for someone to be born in a country to be truly considered a national of that country; a third think this is very important. Religion is generally seen as less central to national identity. However, it is an essential factor to many in Greece, where 54% say it is very important to be Christian to be truly Greek.

To further explore this topic, we constructed an index based on the four questions we asked regarding national identity (importance of speaking the national language, sharing customs, being native born and being Christian). The results highlight the extent to which exclusionary views vary across the EU. By far, restrictive views are most common in Hungary, Greece, Poland and Italy; they are least common in Sweden, Germany and the Netherlands.

Views about  national identity vary across Europe

More to the study here.