Democracy Now journalists arrested. The first ammendment is dead.

Here is footage of Nicole Salazar’s arrest by the brutal police crackdown at the RNC:

Amy Goodman discusses why they were arrested:

Behind all the patriotic hyperbole that accompanies the conventions, and the thousands of journalists and media workers who arrive to cover the staged events, there are serious violations of the basic right of freedom of the press. Here on the streets of St. Paul, the press is free to report on the official proceedings of the RNC, but not to report on the police violence and mass arrests directed at those who have come to petition their government, to protest.

It was Labor Day, and there was an anti-war march, with a huge turnout, with local families, students, veterans and people from around the country gathered to oppose the war. The protesters greatly outnumbered the Republican delegates.

There was a positive, festive feeling, coupled with a growing anxiety about the course that Hurricane Gustav was taking, and whether New Orleans would be devastated anew. Later in the day, there was a splinter march. The police-clad in full body armor, with helmets, face shields, batons and canisters of pepper spray-charged. They forced marchers, onlookers and working journalists into a nearby parking lot, then surrounded the people and began handcuffing them.

Nicole was videotaping. Her tape of her own violent arrest is chilling. Police in riot gear charged her, yelling, “Get down on your face.” You hear her voice, clearly and repeatedly announcing “Press! Press! Where are we supposed to go?” She was trapped between parked cars. The camera drops to the pavement amidst Nicole’s screams of pain. Her face was smashed into the pavement, and she was bleeding from the nose, with the heavy officer with a boot or knee on her back. Another officer was pulling on her leg. Sharif was thrown up against the wall and kicked in the chest, and he was bleeding from his arm.

I was at the Xcel Center on the convention floor, interviewing delegates. I had just made it to the Minnesota delegation when I got a call on my cell phone with news that Sharif and Nicole were being bloody arrested, in every sense. Filmmaker Rick Rowley of Big Noise Films and I raced on foot to the scene. Out of breath, we arrived at the parking lot. I went up to the line of riot police and asked to speak to a commanding officer, saying that they had arrested accredited journalists.

Within seconds, they grabbed me, pulled me behind the police line and forcibly twisted my arms behind my back and handcuffed me, the rigid plastic cuffs digging into my wrists. I saw Sharif, his arm bloody, his credentials hanging from his neck. I repeated we were accredited journalists, whereupon a Secret Service agent came over and ripped my convention credential from my neck. I was taken to the St. Paul police garage where cages were set up for protesters. I was charged with obstruction of a peace officer. Nicole and Sharif were taken to jail, facing riot charges.

The attack on and arrest of me and the “Democracy Now!” producers was not an isolated event. A video group called I-Witness Video was raided two days earlier. Another video documentary group, the Glass Bead Collective, was detained, with its computers and video cameras confiscated. On Wednesday, I-Witness Video was again raided, forced out of its office location. When I asked St. Paul Police Chief John Harrington how reporters are to operate in this atmosphere, he suggested, “By embedding reporters in our mobile field force.”

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080903_why_we_were_falsely_arrested/

We live in a world where everything is turned upside down.  Bad is good and good is bad.  Those who are a part of the secret combination machinery are praised and looked upon as the salt of the earth, whereas the true salt of the earth are trampled beneath the feet of riot police.

Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman arrested at the Republican National Convention!

This is absolutely outrageous.  The American police state has stooped to new lows with the arrest of Democracy Now’s amazing Amy Goodman.  This is an absolute contradiction of the freedom of the press afforded us in the Constitution.  Amy is famous.  I’ve been following her stuff for years.  How can they do this?  Would they similarly arrest Oprah Winfrey?  Outrageous.

Update 9:20pm.  Alternet has a little information on the reason Goodman was arrested.  I still don’t have a clear picture of what happened though.

Update 9:30pm.  DemocracyNow.org has further information now.  Goodman’s two producers were arrested for “rioting” and Goodman was arrested for “obstruction” of a “peace officer”.  Here is an excerpt:

Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman and producers Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar have all been released from police custody in St. Paul following their illegal arrest by Minneapolis Police on Monday afternoon.

All three were violently manhandled by law enforcement officers. Abdel Kouddous was slammed against a wall and the ground, leaving his arms scraped and bloodied. He sustained other injuries to his chest and back. Salazar’s violent arrest by baton-wielding officers, during which she was slammed to the ground while yelling, “I’m Press! Press!,” resulted in her nose bleeding, as well as causing facial pain. Goodman’s arm was violently yanked by police as she was arrested.

On Tuesday, Democracy Now! will broadcast video of these arrests, as well as the broader police action. These will also be available on: www.democracynow.org

Goodman was arrested while questioning police about the unlawful detention of Kouddous and Salazar who were arrested while they carried out their journalistic duties in covering street demonstrations at the Republican National Convention. Goodman’s crime appears to have been defending her colleagues and the freedom of the press.

http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2008/9/1/update_democracy_now_s_amy_goodman_sharif_abdel_kouddous_and_nicole_salazar_released_after_illegal_arrest_at_rnc

Stay tuned for more of this ugly situation.

Another good reason not to vote democrat… Biden is a Zionist

This is exactly the type of sentiment we need to get rid of in this country.  Let’s keep Biden, Obama, McCain and all of them out of office.  Vote 3rd party.

More truth about Russia, Georgia, South Ossetia and the USA

Better information is coming out all the time about the Russian-Georgian battle.  Of course you won’t find much of this good information in the US press.  All you hear is crap like VP Cheney saying that, “Russian aggression must not go unanswered,” and John McCain saying, “today, we are all Georgians.”  No, you have to search a bit in order to find out what is really going on in Georgia. 

Paul Craig Roberts former Assistant Secretary of the US treasury wrote this today:

And, today, August 9, 2008, as I write, it is the “liberal” Washington Post that has written an editorial urging the US to go to war with Russia.

With its editorial, “Stopping Russia: the US and its allies must unite against Moscow’s war on Georgia,” the Washington Post has established a world record for the maximum number of lies in the minimum number of words.

Except for the Washington Post, the entire world knows that Georgia (the birthplace of Joseph Stalin, not Georgia USA) initiated the aggression that killed Russian peacekeepers and hundreds of civilians in South Ossetia, peacekeepers who were there with the blessing of Georgia and international agreements.

The true facts are available all over the world press. But the “liberal” Washington Post serves up the lie that Russia has attacked Georgia and conceivably plans to conquer all of Georgia. “This is a grave challenge to the United States and Europe,” thunders the Bush Regime’s mouthpiece, aka, “the liberal media.”

Thirsting for blood, the “liberal media” declares: “The United States and its NATO allies must together impose a price on Russia.”

Here we see the combination of idiocy and delusion in one sentence. The United States has proved that it is incapable of occupying Iraq, much less Afghanistan. Russia has a large trade surplus. America’s NATO allies are dependent on Russian natural gas. Yet the “liberal” Washington Post wants a bankrupt US and “its NATO allies” who are dependent on Russian energy “to impose a price on Russia” for defending its peacekeepers!

Seldom has the world seen such total insanity as the neoconservative Washington Post, a propaganda sheet as far from “liberal media” is it is possible to be.

Georgia was part of Old Russia and the Soviet Union for two centuries. After Soviet communism collapsed, the US taxpayer funded neoconservative National Endowment for Democracy broke every agreement that President Reagan had made with Gorbachev and began using US taxpayers’ money to rig and purchase elections in former constituent parts of the Russian/Soviet empire.

The Endowment for Democracy purchased Georgia as a US colony. The affront to Russia was extreme, but at the time Russia was weak. Oligarchs with outside money had grabbed control over Russian resources, and Russia was in dire straits and could not resist American imperialism.

Putin corrected the situation for Russia.

Now using American weapons Georgia for reasons yet to be revealed has violated its own agreement with Russia and attacked South Ossetia, killing in the process Russian peacekeepers. Vladimir Vasilyev, chairman of the Russian State Duma Committee for Security told the press: “The things that were happening in Kosovo, the things that were happening in Iraq – we are now following the same path. The further the situation unfolds, the more the world will understand that Georgia would never be able to do all this without America.” http://english.pravda.ru/hotspots/conflicts/106046-russia_georgia-0

Yes, without America there would be no war in Ossetia and no war between Russia and its former constituent part.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20483.htm

With some more information from a slightly different perspective than what we get from D.C., there’s also this from the ex-President of the Soviet Union!

What happened on the night of Aug. 7 is beyond comprehension. The Georgian military attacked the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali with multiple rocket launchers designed to devastate large areas. Russia had to respond. To accuse it of aggression against “small, defenseless Georgia” is not just hypocritical but shows a lack of humanity.

Mounting a military assault against innocents was a reckless decision whose tragic consequences, for thousands of people of different nationalities, are now clear. The Georgian leadership could do this only with the perceived support and encouragement of a much more powerful force. Georgian armed forces were trained by hundreds of U.S. instructors, and its sophisticated military equipment was bought in a number of countries. This, coupled with the promise of NATO membership, emboldened Georgian leaders into thinking that they could get away with a “blitzkrieg” in South Ossetia.

In other words, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili was expecting unconditional support from the West, and the West had given him reason to think he would have it. Now that the Georgian military assault has been routed, both the Georgian government and its supporters should rethink their position.

Hostilities must cease as soon as possible, and urgent steps must be taken to help the victims — the humanitarian catastrophe, regretfully, received very little coverage in Western media this weekend — and to rebuild the devastated towns and villages. It is equally important to start thinking about ways to solve the underlying problem, which is among the most painful and challenging issues in the Caucasus — a region that should be approached with the greatest care.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/11/AR2008081101372_pf.html

CNN poll has Nader at 6%!

This is awesome.  Nader is above 5% in this latest CNN poll!

This survey, taken after Obama’s high-profile trip to Iraq, Afghanistan, the Middle East and Europe, shows him with about the same lead he had last month. It also shows little change since the spring in the faith people have in Obama to handle the Iraq war, terrorism and other issues. People thought his trip was appropriate by a two-to-one margin. More than four in 10 say they think Obama is acting like he’s already won the election, and nearly that many say McCain is attacking him unfairly. Just over a third think both are arrogant. Obama leads McCain by 46 percent to 42 percent when third-party candidates are included, with Ralph Nader getting 6 percent and Bob Barr, a former GOP congressman from Georgia running for president as a Libertarian, getting 3 percent.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ijClHoidEl8XEJMJoUooHU1R_nmgD928DRQG4

US Venezuelan policy, looks to continue under the next leader of the Empire

Just noticing these days how nothing much has changed with the Empire’s rhetoric toward Venezuela and Chavez.  In the Presidential race, McCain has ruled out talks with Chavez saying he’s a charlatan and thug:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/02/uselections2008.usa?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

and Obama is fairly inflammatory towards Venezuela himself saying that Chavez is an enemy of the US and calling out for sanctions against him.  Most recently he said that Venezuela “is a destructive force in the region” because of its alleged support for the Colombian guerilla group, the FARC, its “anti-democratic practices,” and its “incendiary rhetoric” against the U.S.

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/3657

This sort of talk is uninformed and unfortunate.  It is fairly clear that Chavez has not supported the FARC’s armed struggle, nor has he supported the FARC financially as Colombian liar Uribe would like us to believe.  Obama would do well to take a look at how destructive US foreign policy has been in Latin America for the last century.  Yet, he continues to play the game and support US imperial design on the riches of Latin America.  I guess it only makes sense since the people that pay for his campaign are at least partially made up of companies which make a killing on trade with Latin American countries.  Ah what a refreshing thing it would be to see someone with a backbone running for president for once.  Then again, we already have such men as Nader and Paul, but they are marginalized by the press (which is owned by the same people who give financial support to the two major candidates) and are seen as non-viable wierdos.

Chavez, of course, is no dummy in all of this:

“The two candidates for the US presidency attack us equally, they attack us defending the interests of the empire,” Chavez said at a meeting of his socialist party. “Let’s not kid ourselves, it is the empire and the empire must fall. That’s the only solution – that it comes to an end.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/17/venezuela.usa

Also notable in US/Venezuelan relations is the old charge championed previously by Rumsfeld that Venezuela buying arms from Russia is an unnecessary and suspicious activity:

“We’ve repeatedly communicated concerns with Russia about Chavez’s arms build-up in the past, and we’re going to continue to do so,” Gonzalo Gallegos, a US State Department spokesman said.

“We continue to question … whether such acquisitions are in line with Venezuela’s legitimate defense needs,” Gallegos added.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=HomePage&id=265ce87e-dc86-4aaa-baf9-a378d992682f&MatchID1=4735&TeamID1=8&TeamID2=6&MatchType1=1&SeriesID1=1194&PrimaryID=4735&Headline=US+criticises+Russia-Venezuelan+arms+deal&strParent=strParentID

Remember Rumsfeld’s concerns from 3 years ago?

After the meeting, Mr. Rumsfeld told journalists the United States was troubled by reports that Venezuela is seeking to buy 100,000 assault rifles and 10 military helicopters from Russia.

“I can’t imagine what is going to happen to 100,000 AK-47s,” he said.  “I don’t understand why Venezuela needs 100,000 AK-47s.”

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2005-03/2005-03-23-voa82.cfm?CFID=16536995&CFTOKEN=56773369

These concerns are unfounded and are most likely politically motivated as pointed out here:

However, one military expert said that Venezuela is merely replacing old equipment rather than than increasing its stocks. Anna Gilmour of the well known defense magazine, Jane’s, said, “ Venezuela has increased indeed its military purchases over the last three years. But it is replacing obsolete weapons and military equipment, instead of just buying new equipment or new weapons.” She also hinted that Rumsfeld may have “political” reasons for making the comments about Venezuela.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez has also inserted himself into the row. He called Rumsfeld a “war dog” and said that the U.S. is threatening Venezuela, something Rumsfeld denies, “ The dog says in a cynical way that he knows no one who is threatening Venezuela, so he does not know himself. We should give the little dog a mirror so that he can see his face,” said Chávez.

Chávez also made a polite request to Colombian President Álvaro Uribe that he make a comment on Rumsfeld’s remarks. Colombia borders Venezuela and, although relations between Uribe and Chávez are good, the border area is renowned for military and paramilitary activity on both sides. Chávez wants Uribe to say whether he is one of those “neighbors” with “concerns.”

According to the news agency EFE, Uribe was asked today in a radio interview how he would respond to Chavez and merely stated that Colombia has “very good relations” with the countries of South America, among these Venezuela, and with the United States.

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/1988

The Vice President of Venezeula, Jose Vicente Rangel was very eloquent in pointing out the absurdity of Rumsfeld’s preoccupation with the Venezuelan government’s military purchases:

The Lord of War, Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense of the United States made some statements following the same line of repeating the usual impertinences about Venezuela. These impertinences inspired by the goal of getting involved in the internal politics of other nations and violate our sovereignty, continue being utilized systematically by U.S. officials.

In Venezuela we are worried about the elevated military spending by the United States, which stands around 450 billion dollars, representing a spending that surpasses that of the 18 other military powers that follow them. The U.S. alone absorbs 36% of the world’s military spending. This has generated great preoccupation in the majority of the countries around the world, since there is no justification for the building of so many devices for war.

As the government of that country has said in repeated opportunities, they are the greatest military power in history, and its objectives are to control and assure its hegemony over the rest of the world. What are they fearing in order to justify such increase in military spending? Can anybody believe such country could be invaded by a foreign power?  What is really happening is that the U.S. has developed a very new doctrine through which they justify their arms buildups. This is the frequently mentioned preventive war. For them it is not about peace, but about preventive war. This is the doctrine that has the whole world worried because, as we all know, it has already been put into practice.

That is the big difference with the arms purchase which we are doing in an act of political sovereignty, with the only goal of defending our independence and guaranteeing the self-determination of our people. These weapons, as everybody knows, don’t have the potential for aggression against anybody. They are exclusively for defense, to which we have a right as all nations of the world do.

We have to say even more: in this moment the U.S. has started a new phase in its imperialist aggression against our homeland. They started with a propaganda war, and now they increase their attack, using one of the promoters of the so called Star Wars, who seeks to create enemies for Venezuela, among our friends. The North American strategy is aimed at destroying Latin American unity, and take possession of our energy resources. Venezuela is just one step in their global ambitions.

The escalation of these attacks confirms the existence of a plan by the U.S. government against Venezuela. This plan was tested on April 11 of 2002, with the coup d’etat against President Hugo Chavez, and continued developing with the strike and oil sabotage starting December 2, 2002, with systematic statements by spokespersons of the Bush administration, with a media campaign such as those that the empire has unleashed through history whenever they want to consummate an aggression, or through the assassination attempts of that have been detected, and other series of efforts to destabilize.

Definitely, the U.S. is worried because Latin America is liberating itself. This preoccupation is that of the slave owner who does not accept the liberating struggles of the oppressed peoples. The U.S. preoccupation with Venezuela is because our country is building a true democracy of equals, something that the U.S. does not carry through neither with their own people, nor with the international scene.

The U.S. preoccupation arises because we are building another world, a world in which other worlds can fit. They are worried that the South also exists.

From the south we respond, with dignity as our flag, and understanding the big responsibility we have as the descendants of San Martin, Artigas, O’Higgins, Abreu e Lima, and Bolivar.

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/1019

Nader takes away more voters from McCain than from Obama. Nader is paying attention Mr. Obama.

Interestingly, in a recent Times/Bloomberg poll, it appears that Nader will be taking away more votes from McCain than from Obama:

Both Nader — a consumer advocate who was the Green Party candidate in 2000 and an independent candidate in 2004 — and former Rep. Barr (R-Ga.) appear to siphon more votes from McCain than from Obama. When Nader and Barr are added to the ballot, they draw most of their support from independent voters who said they would otherwise vote for the Republican.

The same poll has Obama leading McCain by 12 points in a 2 man contest and Obama leading by 15 points when it goes to a 4 man contest including Barr and Nader.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-poll25-2008jun25,0,5763707.story

The Nader/Gonzalez newsletter yesterday challenged Obama on 3 particular issues for which Obama has had only sad excuses for answers so far:

One, why don’t you support single payer national health insurance, which is supported by a majority of doctors and the American people?

Two, why do you favor expanding the military budget which is replete with waste, fraud and abuse?

And three, why don’t you come out and support an immediate increase of the minimum wage to $10 an hour?

This all stemmed from this exchange:

Obama, responding at a press conference Wednesday in Chicago, said: “What’s clear is, Ralph Nader hasn’t been paying attention to my speeches,” and offered his view of Nader’s motivation for making such remarks.

“Ralph Nader’s trying to get attention,” Obama said. “He’s become a perennial political candidate. I think it’s a shame, because if you look at his legacy … it’s an extraordinary one. … At this point, he’s somebody who’s trying to get attention, whose campaign hasn’t gotten any traction.”

Nader, in turn, maintained his stance – “Sen., Obama said earlier today that I haven’t been paying attention to his campaign.,” Nader said in a statement issued last night. “Actually, I have.

“And it’s clear from Sen. Obama’s campaign that he is not willing to tackle the white power structure,’ he said, “whether in the form of the corporate power structure or many of the super-rich — who are taking advantage of 100 million low-income Americans who are suffering in poverty or near poverty.”

http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2008/06/nader_v_obama_gets_pays_attent.html

Go Nader!

Israeli ministers: Attacking Iran… the question is when, not if.

There is a scary article in Spiegel Online.  In it a different Israeli cabinet minister is heard to say that diplomacy with Iran is dead and that a military solution is going to happen whether we like it or not.

Yatom, 63, has spent most of his life in the military. He was a military adviser to former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and, in the mid-1990s, was named head of Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency. Nevertheless, Yatom, a member of the Labor Party, is not some reckless hawk. Unlike most Knesset members, he flatly rejects, for example, a major Israeli offensive against the Islamist Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

But Yatom’s willingness to strike a compromise ends when he is asked what he considers to be the best response to the Iranian nuclear program. “We no longer believe in the effectiveness of sanctions,” says Yatom. “A military operation is needed if the world wants to stop Iran.”

The article goes on to discuss the recent Mofaz statement that says that military action against Iran is inevitable and introduces a statement from another minister who paints a pretty bleak picture:

In truth, however, there is now a consensus within the Israeli government that an air strike against the Iranian nuclear facilities has become unavoidable. “Most members of the Israeli cabinet no longer believe that sanctions will convince President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to change course,” says Minister of Immigrant Absorption Yaakov Edri.

 

The one question over which Israel’s various political groups disagree is the timing of an attack. The doves argue that diplomatic efforts by the United Nations should be allowed to continue until Iran is on the verge of completing the bomb. That way, Israel could at least argue convincingly that all non-military options had been exhausted.

The hawks, on the other hand, believe time is running out. They stress that there is now a “favorable window of opportunity” that will close with the US presidential election in November, and that Israel can only depend on American support for as long as current US President George W. Bush is still in charge in Washington. They are convinced that the country cannot truly depend on any of the candidates to succeed Bush in office. Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic candidate, has already said that he favors direct negotiations with Tehran. And even if Republican John McCain wins the race, politicians in Jerusalem do not expect him to be ordering an attack as his first official act — despite his performance, at a campaign appearance last year, of the Beach Boys’ song “Barbara Ann” with the lyrics: “Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran.”

Bruce Riedel, a Middle East expert who spent many years working for the CIA, says:

“An Israeli attack will be seen as a US attack. Iran will retaliate against both Israel and the US.” The consequences, says Riedel, would be fatal. “We will see a Middle East in flames.”

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,559925,00.html

The US government pays obeisance to the Jewish lobby at the AIPAC convention

The AIPAC meeting with everyone who is anyone in politics in attendance is truly a disgusting sight.  It is there that all politicians go to sell their souls to the devil if they haven’t already done so.  McCain opened the meeting today speaking of how weak Obama is on Iran and how he’s naive and so forth.  He called for tougher sanctions on Iran and showed that he would be the toughest candidate when it comes to Iran.  This, of course, to numerous standing ovations:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/06/02/mccain-calls-for-tougher-sanctions-against-iran-in-aipac-speech/?mod=googlenews_wsj

You can read here about the vast power of AIPAC over US politicians:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIPAC#Criticism

And you can check here on the power the Jewish lobby has over US foreign policy here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Israel_Lobby_and_U.S._Foreign_Policy

Pepe Escobar has written a really nice piece here though that outlines a basic history of AIPAC and gives a summary of what is happening right now at their annual meeting as nearly the entire US government bows down before their power.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JF03Ak01.html

Warning:  Don’t read this stuff after a large meal.

Bush to attack Iran by August?

Well, now I can’t vouch for the truthfullness of this article, but it bears posting.  The author claims that he has a source, a retired US career diplomat and former assistant secretary of state still active in the foreign affairs community, who says that the Bush administration is planning on attacking Al Quds in Iran by August.  He also claims that Diane Feinstein and Richard Lugar are privy to the plans and are planning on going vocal in a generalized opposition to the attacks via an op-ed in the NY Times.

The source, a retired US career diplomat and former assistant secretary of state still active in the foreign affairs community, speaking anonymously, said last week that that the US plans an air strike against the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). The air strike would target the headquarters of the IRGC’s elite Quds force. With an estimated strength of up to 90,000 fighters, the Quds’ stated mission is to spread Iran’s revolution of 1979 throughout the region.

Targets could include IRGC garrisons in southern and southwestern Iran, near the border with Iraq. US officials have repeatedly claimed Iran is aiding Iraqi insurgents. In January 2007, US forces raided the Iranian consulate general in Erbil, Iraq, arresting five staff members, including two Iranian diplomats it held until November. Last September, the US Senate approved a resolution by a vote of 76-22 urging President George W Bush to declare the IRGC a terrorist organization. Following this non-binding “sense of the senate” resolution, the White House declared sanctions against the Quds Force as a terrorist group in October. The Bush administration has also accused Iran of pursuing a nuclear weapons program, though most intelligence analysts say the program has been abandoned.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JE28Ak01.html

Take this with a grain of salt since so many reports of upcoming attacks have been reported before, and watch for Seymour Hersh to pick up on the story if it really has any truth to it.  Of course the report could be true the way we are constantly drumming up the rhetoric against Iran, keeping all options on the table etc.