As far as assassination of foreigners and other covert actions and overt military strikes against them (short of wars) are concerned, I'm not sure if there was any active opposition to them among Americans before the hit in Yemen. Political assassination is still prohibited on paper, but "Presidents since Mr Ford have often been accused of sidestepping the executive order by launching targeted military attacks primarily to kill leaders" (@ <http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story/0,7369,773574,00.html>). "Covert actions" have not been really covert, regularly discussed in the corporate media, with no loud objection from Americans excepting confirmed leftists (and even leftists couldn't mount any sizable protests against them). The US government conducted well advertised military strikes that ostensibly targeted its enemies as well: e.g., "In 1986, after a bomb killed two Americans in a Berlin nightclub, the U.S. charged that Qaddafi was behind it and conducted major air strikes against Libya, killing dozens of civilians, including Qaddafi's daughter" (@ <http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Sept_11_2001/ConsequencesEmpire_MEast.html>); and "Following bomb blasts at the US embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam in August, President Clinton ordered missile strikes against targets in Afghanistan and Sudan" in 1998 (@ <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1998/08/98/us_strikes/155347.stm>). How do such attacks differ from the rocket attack in Yemen, except that the latter used a drone, which is a new technical development? -- Yoshie
* Calendar of Events in Columbus: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html> * Anti-War Activist Resources: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/activist.html> * Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osu.edu/students/CJP/>