The controversy

15-12-2011 09:06 AM

Abanoub Emad

WATANI International 19 September 2010

The official spokesman of the Guidance Office of the Muslim Brotherhood, Gamal Nassar, commented that it was not surprising that Wahid Hamed wrote al-Jamaa, given Hamed’s anti-Islamist stances and works. He denied that the MB had attacked the drama, describing the hostile material posted on their website as “an analysis of the work”.
As for their special or secret organisation, Nassar said it was something to be proud of. This remark prompted a retort from political expert Amr al-Shobaki who is member of the Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies, to the effect that the special organisation was a piece of a disgraceful history, more to be ashamed not proud of.
Shobaki pointed out, however, that al-Jamaa ought to be seen and assessed as the work of drama that it was. Drama has ‘poetic licence’, he said, and ought not to be confused with history, and people realise that. No-one was going to join or leave the MB because of al-Jamaa, he said. In full agreement was Salah Eissa, editor-in-chief of the liberal Cairo weekly al-Qahira, who also reminded that Banna’s main fault was mixing up religion with politics. This, Eissa said, bred a full system based on the ideology of jihad, complete with an intelligence apparatus and violent practice.
For his part, rights activist Nigad al-Boraie said that, if the MB wished to be taken seriously as a political movement, it should disown its disgraceful history of violence and assassination.

(Visited 19 times, 1 visits today)