A firm stand ought to be taken towards former Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mohamed Habib's declarations. These declarations are considered to be a valuable criticism directed to the group since his dissidence. It pertains to what may constitute hard evidence against the group, for which some of their leaders may be impeached. Habib revealed in ‘Al Masry Al Youm' newspaper with what appeared to be self-criticism. He declared that he feels that he has fallen short of what the public opinion deserves to know. The public opinion should have been cautioned as to where to place a foot. He also said that he could have remained silent, had the group not lied to the public opinion, or refrained from taking possession of everything. He even added an accusation, which denotes that the group has damaged, destroyed and collaborated with terrorist groups. The group also cooperated with foreign countries to harm the higher interests of Egypt. That the state as people, homes, government and institutions is, by far, greater than any group. He talked about his previous colleague Mohamed Ezzat Secretary-General of the group, and who is also related to Mahdi Akef the Previous Murshid. Mohamed Ezzat became took control of the group despite his very modest limited capabilities. He mentioned that Akef was in full support, with all his might, to hinder interrogating Ezzat, and conceal his grave mistakes. Habib didn't quite specify such mistakes. This special status that Ezzat held was the reason many surrounded him, as Habib said. Those around him were profiteers such as Morsi, Badie, Al Katatny and many others. He said that Morsi has never ruled as a President and was not but responsible of the Supreme Guide's office, in other words, Mahmoud Ezzat and Khirat El Shater took the full ruling responsibility. Some of these accusations are actually the reason for impeachment of the highest Brotherhood leaders, in court of justice. There are also other additional accusations that maybe reconfirmed through the trial, says Habib. Facing those very strong accusations, we should not take a personal stand against Habib, taking in account what his recent stand is, and what he used to back when he was with the group. He may have accepted the ideology which has lasted throughout the Brotherhood's history, without objection. These doctrines were accepted and adopted since the forties, and are undeniable to any follower, let alone a leader such as Habib. Criticizing ferocity with Brotherhood adversaries, is not the main aim. These opponents were members from the same group for quite a long time. This reminds us of a whole history of deadly disputes with dissidents or those dismissed from the group. The latter point can justify the recently seen sternness of Brotherhood members against everybody, be that June 30th, responsible figures, thinkers or even general public, should they insist on abolishing their rule. Analyzing Habib's initiative is not really required, yet its motives should be looked into. Is he actually passing through a life existentialism phase? Or, is he trying to revenge the assault he received a few years back from his fellow Brotherhood? In case of the existentialism phase, he may be reviewing his flaws for vindication, or he could be trying to retaliate for the assault against himself. However this is only a personal issue, he is the one most aware of his motives, even in a general important case like this one. What we are most concerned about in this context, is the core of his words, not his motives that only he himself can identify accurately. What matters now the most is an official response towards those serious allegations. The Attorney General must hasten to subpoena Habib. He will then be able to get information as Habib used to be a leader in the group, and still has relations with many of the present cadres and leaders. Every word that Habib utters should be subjected to a comprehensive scrutiny performed by specialists. Greater attention ought to be given to those allegations related to partnership with terrorist factions, and cooperating with foreign countries to damage the general welfare of Egypt. These very serious words should never be taken lightly. If Habib were to give his testimony in a court of law, certain conviction for the Brotherhood may become just around the corner. Habib mentions in his article one point he's in conflict with the group at, and it is the one pertaining opening-up to others. He claims that some members have dismissed that because it can expose group affairs. The idea of opening-up was also declined on account that it is not right for public opinion to be informed about internal group matters. The slogan that was used was, ‘not all that is known should be said, and not all that should be said is now due.' This is only a single indicator of the intellect that governs working in darkness. This was the intellect ruling Egypt under the mask of Mohamed Morsi. They made inexplicable decisions, with no one knowing how or why. General Attorney needs to be informed as to who said these words, and what impact did this attitude have on ruling Egypt during this whole dreary year of the Brotherhood rule.
