The recent crisis revealed three important scenes that showed a lack of transparency in society, which we should have been aware of, being involved in this crisis. First: our discussion of the crisis was based on professional background aways from any political tendency. We dealt with the situation as a brutal terrorist attack which always happen in the same way and with the same elements. Some people have been confused between this approach and our political stance which is known for everyone. We are one of the supporters of the Egyptian state authorities, mainly the military and security service. This was the reason of what was called "crisis" by some people who like fishing in troubled waters. Second: some of the enemies and opponents of the June 30 Revolution, who call it a military coup, exploited our professional position in their political conflict with the current regime. Of course, we reject to be involved in this situation. We belong to the major side which pledged to defend the country against those terrorist groups and their allies at home and abroad. Third: we have never opposed the state of emergency. We were the first people to call for imposing the state of emergency, so as to transfer terrorism cases to military courts. We presented many examples, notably terrorist Habbara and ousted president Mohamed Morsy. We were surprised that our position was interpreted as a rejection to the state of emergency, which we actually always supported. Hence, we clearly affirm our rejection to be used as a tool in a fabricated political crisis, in which we have no thing to do with it. So we decided to move forward in our professional coverage, ignore all the repercussions of this crisis, and prioritize our national values.
