Islamist Gate, by Azza Radwan Sedky
The last few days I received a barrage of tweets; a 140-character response wouldn’t have cut it. But before I delve further into the root of the onslaught, I must tell Twitter followers and the followers of followers that I never resort to flagrant insults or even insinuative ones. Once a conversation gets out of hand, I detach myself from the scene and remain quiet. This is how I deal with uncalled-for insults and erroneous accusation.
In one of my tweets, while discussing the loss of life in Gaza, I must have hit a nerve with some. I discovered that many followers, because of my aversion to the Muslim Brotherhood, assumed that I must be against not only Hamas but also Gazans.
Some saw Israel as the victim, “Why do you approve of a terrorist firing 2700 rockets at your neighbor? Egypt wouldn’t stand for it if it were you!” Others believed that Hamas started this round, broke all ceasefires, used its own children as human shields, and, surprisingly, bombed the Shifa hospital, “It was a Hamas rocket that hit the hospital the other day.” Shockingly, the outcry labeled Palestinians as occupiers. “Then that would be destroying Israel's land. Palestinians are occupiers.”
The attacks turned personal; after all, Twitter is where the absoluteness of free speech presides. I was branded a lover of the Muslim Brotherhood, “Oh look, a university professor whose contempt for Israel is only rivaled by her love for the Muslim Brotherhood”; an anti-Semite, "You antiSemites are so incredibly blind it's unbelievable”; and a person who lacks exposure, "Uh, she obviously doesn't get out much.” The tweets wondered how a university professor could be ignorant enough to be against what is happening in Gaza: “Oh, I dunno, perhaps you thought professors are supposed to be wise, and moral, and not shills for terror groups?” and “Is Hamas propaganda working THAT well that reasonable people are ignoring who the terrorists are?”
The tweets compared the happenings in Gaza today to the happenings in Rabaa Square: “Didn’t [you support] killing hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood members including children who were used as human shields, too?” That Egyptians destroyed tunnels used only for smuggling purposes versus tunnels used for attacking Israel. “She's not aware that the Egyptians destroyed smuggling tunnels. These are attack tunnels.” I was also considered neither wise nor moral and basically a spokesperson for a terrorist group.
Here is the deal. I’m against the Muslim Brotherhood and all its affiliates—Hamas, Ansar Bayt El Maqdis, the Islamic Jihad Group, etc. I believe that Egypt rid the world of the core of terror in its cutting off the Muslim Brotherhood life flow. But I was also against how Rabaa was dispersed because life, everyone’s, is precious. I can be both: against MB and against killings.
I’m also against the horrors that are taking place against Mosul Christians and Iraqis in general. If we were living in the dark ages, such actions would be considered immoral and barbaric, and yet we live in the 21st Century, and the world is watching passively. Along the same lines, I hope that Egyptian Copts never again experience what they experienced during Morsi’s short term.
I’m also totally against Hamas and its unconcerned attitude towards its own people. Overcoming the Israeli siege on Gaza is critical, but one cannot simply give one’s children and civilians up, and then parade their torn bodies on social media. I’m against Hamas for continuing with a war that will bring more devastation to the Gazans than anyone else. I can be both: against Hamas and against the killings taking place.
I do understand why Hamas is resorting to such measures though. As it is, Gaza is neither livable nor viable; Gazans cannot access essentials to lead normal lives: food, fuel, and work—the Israeli siege cuts the flow of such basics. Most Gazans, though hating the loss of life, desire decent lives, and since this isn’t one, death becomes a better alternative.
I’m not against Jews, or followers of any faiths: to everyone his/her own, but I’m against apartheid and distinctions made between human beings for their religion or colour as seen in Israel and Iraq today.
I’m not against Israelis as a people; I’m against Netanyahu’s desire to suppress the Palestinians until they exist no more. An even modestly improved life for the Palestinians is not in the works.
And this is what Hamas is fighting against. If things quiet down, the Palestinian cause will no longer exist, and the people called Palestinians will exist no more, either. According to Noam Sheizaf, in “Why do Palestinians continue to support Hamas despite such devastating loss,” the choice is between occupation by proxy in the West Bank and a war in Gaza. Both offer no hope.
But most importantly I am against bloodshed. Whether it is spewed by Israelis, Hamas, ISIS, Libyan militias, or Muslim Brotherhood members, it doesn’t matter. Yes, I am a pacifist. A nonbeliever in violence, I shudder every time an innocent child dies on the beach, in a UN school, or a hospital. So if the term pacifist is considered derogatory by some in today’s world, all be it.
Note: all names have been removed from tweets. This is not a flame war; quite the contrary, it is a means of clarification.
The theme in this article is to express a pacifist view of the current terrorism in war with Israel and Gaza. This war has stirred emotional outrage on Twitter misunderstood from main stream media and personal beliefs leaving Twitter users confused and attacking other users. This is what terrorism is about confusion and chaos. Looking at the facts humanity is a grave concern with the large number of children, families killed from shelling in Palestine. If there is a end to this war with Palestinian citizens still alive it is destiny but Israel will continue to be in Gaza.
Thanks great article from a humanitarian standpoint.
Nancy Onyett, FNP-C
Posted by: Pyramidmedicine | 08/03/2014 at 01:44 PM