In his rebuttal to Bob Schaible’s March 21 piece (“Angus King: ‘Good faith negotiations’ needed in Israeli-Palestine conflict,” March 24), Sen. King claims he will continue to “oppose Israeli settlement expansion, and similarly oppose economic boycotts against Israel.”

This sounds “reasonable” and “balanced” until one stops to think of two things. First, settlements are a theft of Palestinian land and in violation of international law according to the fourth article of the Geneva Conventions, and their expansion is in violation of the Oslo Accords, rendered dead and void by the settlements.

And second, the economic boycott is a nonviolent, time-honored (Gandhi, King, South Africa, Cesar Chavez) expression of free speech, which the senator should be protecting instead of jeopardizing through his backing of legislation that would put Mainers at risk when they actively support the boycott.

That Sen. King would equate these two activities strikes me as a sleight of hand device he often uses when trying to rationalize his support of Israel’s refusal to recognize the real grievances and rights of Palestinians.

Abigail Fuller, Portland

Related Headlines


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.