The Tonka Report

Real News In A Changing World

Archive for July 3rd, 2010

Exposing Government Lies: The Real Unemployment Rate Is 21.5%

leave a comment »

July 3, 2010: Mac Slavo / SHTF Plan – July 2, 2010

If you’re only paying attention to President Obama, the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the mainstream media, you’d think that the employment situation in America was getting much better. The BLS reports that the unemployment rate dropped from 9.7% in May to just 9.5% in June.

The recovery is well under way if you’re simply looking at headlines. The fine print, however, tells a different story. First, for those unaware of what the 9.5% reported rate for June means, it’s referred to by the BLS as the U3, or the “official” government unemployment rate. The following is a basic definition of the U3:

The official definition of unemployment used by the BLS includes anyone age 16 or older who is not institutionalized and is not currently employed, but able to work, available for work, and actively seeking work. The official definition of unemployment also excludes certain groups who are sometimes thought of as being unemployed or “underemployed.” Those who would like to work, but who have stopped looking for work — so-called discouraged workers — are not counted in the official definition because they are not actively seeking work. People working part time who would prefer full-time work are also not counted as unemployed because they are working — albeit fewer hours than they would like. Source: OLMIS

You can see the problem almost immediately with the “official” numbers touted by Washington and the talking heads on television. Most mainstream news you watch or read will provide information only on the U3. They stop short of going to the next BLS number, referred to as the U6. According to John Williams, this is how the U6 is defined:

The U-6 unemployment rate is the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) broadest unemployment measure, including short-term discouraged and other marginally-attached workers as well as those forced to work part-time because they cannot find full-time employment.

This month’s U6 unemployment number? Down from 16.6% in May to 16.5% in June. Remember though, that even the U6 is a government manipulated number, so we need to look a little bit deeper to see what the REAL unemployment rate is in America.

John Williams of Shadow Stats runs the numbers each month, and according to his most recent report, we’re actually hovering at around 21.5%. According to Williams, this is how the Shadow Stats “SGS Alternative” is calculated:

The seasonally-adjusted SGS Alternate Unemployment Rate reflects current unemployment reporting methodology adjusted for SGS-estimated long-term discouraged workers, who were defined out of official existence in 1994. That estimate is added to the BLS estimate of U6 unemployment, which includes short-term discouraged workers.

Williams’ unemployment numbers are more than double what Washington is telling us. (See graph below)

For those intent on preserving their personal and financial well-being, who are you going to believe? Will you believe that Government Actions Have Prevented Depression, Financial Meltdown, and Martial Law?

Or are you preparing for the Greatest Depression and potential monetary and financial chaos yet to come?

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: War is Peace… Freedom is Slavery… Ignorance is Strength– SJH  

Link to original article below…

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/the-real-unemployment-rate-215_07022010

Dangerous Crossroads: Obama’s Sanctions On Iran An Act Of War!

leave a comment »

July 3, 2010: Shamus Cooke / Global Research – July 3, 2010

When the UN refused to agree to the severe sanctions that the U.S. wanted, Obama responded with typical Bush flair and went solo. The new U.S. sanctions against Iran — signed into law by Obama on July 1st — are an unmistakable act of war.

If fully enforced, Iran’s economy will be potentially destroyed. The New York Times outlines the central parts of the sanctions:

“The law signed by Mr. Obama imposes penalties on foreign entities that sell refined petroleum to Iran or assist Iran with its domestic refining capacity. It also requires that American and foreign businesses that seek contracts with the United States government certify that they do not engage in prohibited business with Iran.” (July 1, 2010)

Iran must import the majority of its [refined] oil from foreign corporations and nations, since it does not have the technology needed to refine the fuel that it pumps from its [own] soil. By cutting this refined oil off, the U.S. will be causing massive, irreparable damage to the Iranian economy — equaling an act of war.

In fact, war against Japan in WWII was sparked by very similar circumstances. Franklin Delano Roosevelt spearheaded a series of sanctions against Japan, which included the Export Control Act, giving the President the power to prohibit the export of a variety of materials to Japan, including oil. This gave Roosevelt the legal stance he needed to implement an oil embargo, an obvious act of war. Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor simply brought the war out of the economic realm into the military sphere.

Iran is facing the exact same situation. Whereas the Obama Administration calmly portrays economic sanctions as “peaceful” solutions to political problems, they are anything but. The strategy here is to economically attack Iran until it responds militarily, giving the U.S. a fake moral high ground to “defend” itself, since the other side supposedly attacked first.

But the U.S. is provoking militarily too. According to the New York Times: “The Obama administration is accelerating the deployment of new defenses against possible Iranian missile attacks in the Persian Gulf, placing special ships [war ships] off the Iranian coast and antimissile systems in at least four [surrounding] Arab countries, according to administration and military officials.” (January 30, 2010)

The same article mentions that U.S. General Petraeus admitted that, “… the United States was now keeping Aegis cruisers on patrol in the Persian Gulf [Iran’s border] at all times. Those cruisers are equipped with advanced radar and antimissile systems designed to intercept medium-range missiles.” Iran, as well as the whole world, knows full well that “antimissile systems” are perfectly capable of going on the offensive — their real purpose.

Iran is completely surrounded by countries occupied by the U.S. military, whether it be the mass occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the U.S. puppet states that house U.S. military bases in Arab nations (not to mention Zionist Israel, a U.S. cohort in its war aims against Iran). Contrary to the statements of President Obama, Iran is already well contained militarily.

It remains to be seen how closely U.S. allies will follow the new oil sanctions; they will be under tremendous pressure to do so. The European Union has already signaled that it will follow Obama’s lead.

Ultimately, the march to war begun by Bush is picking up momentum under Obama. Congressional Democrats and Republicans gave the President their overwhelming support in passing these sanctions, proving that the two party system agrees to the necessity of more war.

Uniting the U.S. anti-war movement is crucial if current and future wars are to be stopped. A step in this direction will take place at the National Peace Conference, in Albany, New York, July 23-25.

http://nationalpeaceconference.org/Home_Page.html

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: What is clearly missing in the propaganda leading up to the imminent war against Iran is the British government and BP oil connection. Yea, that BP! Case in point:

In May 1901, William Knox D’Arcy was granted a concession by the Shah of Iran to search for oil, which he discovered in May 1908.[12] This was the first commercially significant find in the Middle East. On 14 April 1909, the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (APOC) was incorporated as a subsidiary of Burmah Oil Company to exploit this.[12] In 1935, it became the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC).[12]

After World War II, AIOC and the Iranian government initially resisted nationalist pressure to revise AIOC’s concession terms still further in Iran‘s favour. But in March 1951, the pro-western Prime Minister Ali Razmara was assassinated.[13] The Majlis of Iran (parliament) elected a nationalist, Mohammed Mossadeq, as prime minister. In April, the Majlis nationalised the oil industry by unanimous vote.[14] The National Iranian Oil Company was formed as a result, displacing the AIOC.[15] The AIOC withdrew its management from Iran, and organised an effective boycott of Iranian oil. The British government – which owned the AIOC – contested the nationalisation at the International Court of Justice at The Hague, but its complaint was dismissed.[16]

By spring of 1953, incoming U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower authorised the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to organise a coup against the Mossadeq government with support from the British government.[17] On 19 August 1953, Mossadeq was forced from office by the CIA conspiracy, involving the Shah and the Iranian military, and known by its codename, Operation Ajax.[17]

Mossadeq was replaced by pro-Western general Fazlollah Zahedi,[18] and the Shah, who returned to Iran after having left the country briefly to await the outcome of the coup. The Shah abolished the democratic Constitution and assumed autocratic powers.

After the coup, Mossadeq’s National Iranian Oil Company became an international consortium, and AIOC resumed operations in Iran as a member of it.[15] The consortium agreed to share profits on a 50–50 basis with Iran, “but not to open its books to Iranian auditors or to allow Iranians onto its board of directors.”[19] AIOC, as a part of the Anglo-American coup d’état deal, was not allowed to monopolise Iranian oil as before. It was limited to a 40% share in a new international consortium. For the rest, 40% went to the five major American companies and 20% went to Royal Dutch Shell and Compagnie Française des Pétroles, now Total S.A..[20]

The AIOC became the British Petroleum Company in 1954. In 1959 the company expanded beyond the Middle East to Alaska[21] and in 1965 it was the first company to strike oil in the North Sea.[22] In 1978 British Petroleum acquired a controlling interest in Standard Oil of Ohio or Sohio, a breakoff of the former Standard Oil that had been broken up after anti-trust litigation.[23]

British Petroleum continued to operate in Iran until the Islamic Revolution in 1979. The new regime of Ayatollah Khomeini confiscated all of British Petroleum’s assets in Iran without compensation, finally closing British Petroleum’s 70-year presence in Iran.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BP

And BP never forgot! The coming war against Iran is as much about revenge as it is anything else– SJH

Link to original article below…

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20008

Chicago Approves Tough New Handgun Restrictions For Residents

leave a comment »

July 3, 2010: Don Babwin / Associated Press (AP) via Yahoo News – July 2, 2010

CHICAGO – The Chicago City Council on Friday approved what city officials say is the strictest handgun ordinance in the nation, but not before lashing out at the Supreme Court ruling they contend makes the city more dangerous because it will put more guns in people’s hands. The new ordinance bans gun shops in Chicago and prohibits gun owners from stepping outside their homes, even onto their porches or in their garages, with a handgun. It becomes law in 10 days, Corporation Counsel Mara Georges said.

The vote comes just four days after the high court ruled Americans have the right to have handguns anywhere for self-defense — a ruling that makes the city’s 28-year-old ban on such weapons unenforceable. “I wish that we weren’t in the position where we’re struggling to figure out a way in which we can limit the guns on our streets and still meet the test that our Supreme Court has set for us,” said Alderman Toni Preckwinkle, minutes before the council voted 45-0 to approve the ordinance.

It was swift action for a council that typically takes far longer to pass ordinances, but Mayor Richard Daley — who promised the city would not “roll over” if the court ruled against the city’s handgun ban — clearly wanted to give police a law they could begin enforcing as quickly as possible. “You have to get the tools to the police,” Daley said. And even though the ban remains in effect until it is struck down by an appellate court, Georges said it was important to pass a new law to clear up confusion Chicagoans might have about what kind of weapons they can legally own and how they can use them.

Some residents applauded the vote. “There’s just too much killing going on (and) we need protection,” said Mary Fitts, a retiree who came from her home on the South Side to watch the vote. “You can’t even sit on your front porch.” Others, like Senesceria Craig, wondered how much good it would do. “They’re not going to abide by it,” she said of criminals, pointing out that her 20-year-old daughter was shot and killed with a handgun in 1992, 10 years after the city’s ban went into effect.

But gun rights supporters quickly criticized Daley and the City Council and promised lawsuits. “The city wants to put as many hurdles and as much red tape in the way of someone who just wants to exercise their constitutional right to have a gun,” said Todd Vandermyde, a lobbyist with the National Rifle Association in Illinois.

Vandermyde would not say when lawsuits might be filed. But he said the ordinance would be attacked on a number of fronts — including requiring prospective gun owners to pay $15 for each firearm registered, $100 every three years for a Chicago Firearms Permit, not to mention the cost of the required training — saying they all add up to discrimination against the poor. “How are some people in some of the poorer neighborhoods who merely want to have firearms for self-defense supposed to afford to get through all this red tape?” he asked.

David Lawson, one of the plaintiffs in the case decided by the Supreme Court this week, agreed. He wondered if a challenge could be raised over the issue of training, saying it’s unfair to require training but prohibit that training from taking place in the city. Daley and Georges said they expect lawsuits but that they were confident they could withstand legal challenges. The ordinance also states:

• Limits the number of handguns residents can register to one per month and prohibits residents from having more than one handgun in operating order at any given time.

• Requires residents in homes with children to keep handguns in lock boxes or equipped with trigger locks and requires residents convicted of a gun offense to register with the police department, much as sex offenders are now required to do.

• Prohibits people from owning a gun if they were convicted of a violent crime, domestic violence or two or more convictions for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

• Requires prospective gun owners to be fingerprinted, take a four-hour class and one-hour training at a gun range.

• Calls for the police department to maintain a registry of every registered handgun owner in the city, with the names and addresses to be made available to police officers, firefighters and other emergency responders.

Those who have handguns, illegal under the ban, would have 90 days from the day the ordinance is enacted to register those weapons. Residents convicted of violating the ordinance face a fine of up to $5,000 and be locked up for as long as 90 days for a first offense, and a fine of up to $10,000 and as long as six months behind bars for subsequent convictions.

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: “…put more guns in people’s hands.”? The only people with guns in this city are the Chicago police and the murderous criminals killing dozens of people every week! The gun ban is a complete failure and a farce as all statistics prove out, not to mention it’s completely unconstitutional. But the real question is: How can the criminal government, mafia, pimps, illegal immigrants, drug dealers and thugs then operate without impunity if the law-abiding citizens are actually armed? Answer: They can’t! Thus, the “tough new handgun restrictions”… SJH

Link to original article below…

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_chicago_gun_laws