The campaign to speed up the Egyptian military's transfer of power and the political conundrum facing the Al-Assad regime were highlighted by Doaa El-Bey and Gamal Nkrumah Newspapers monitored the results of the fact-finding committee investigating the Port Said football massacre together with the outcome of the calls for civil disobedience which was supposed to start early this week. Al-Ahram on Monday had 'Four parties behind massacre: security, FA, Masri club and stadium officials'. Al-Akhbar on the same day wrote 'Fact-finding committee condemns security and FA in Port Said massacre'. Al-Wafd on Sunday bannered 'Egypt declares disobedience to civil disobedience' and Al-Masry Al-Youm on Monday headlined 'Military council thanks the people for rejecting disobedience'. Salah Montasser wrote that the call for civil disobedience had failed, saying the governorates were calm on Saturday. He ascribed the failure to the fact that the simple citizen does not accept disobedience. On the other hand, the majority were not convinced by the reason behind the call which was to press the ruling military council to immediately hand over power to an elected authority. Some people argued that the military council would hand in authority by the beginning of July, making it of no point to launch strikes for such a demand. Others asked who should the military hand power to, before the election of the president, Montasser explained in the official daily Al-Ahram. The writer stated that he was against strikes and civil disobedience because he wanted people to work, and blamed those who used religion or issued fatwas -- religious decrees -- that whoever would take part in these acts was an atheist. Wagdi Zeineddin wrote that those who called for civil disobedience disregarded the results of last March's referendum which identified the steps by which the military council would hand power to an elected authority. However, by calling for disobedience, protesters are encroaching on the only democratically elected authority in the country, the parliament. And that indicated, Zeineddin added, that they are not willing to establish a sound democracy. Instead, they insist on spreading disorder. Although the military council declared that the door would open for the nomination of presidential candidates on 10 March, the calls for civil disobedience continued. "As we approach the end of the transitional period, the calls for strikes and disobedience are louder. Thus we should not rule out a surge in disorder towards the end of the transitional period," Zeineddin wrote in Al-Wafd, the mouthpiece of the opposition Wafd Party. Driving a wedge between Egyptians and igniting differences are the only weapons that the US possesses. Thus, the wiser people of the country should explain that to the people. Those who are trying to abort the 25 January Revolution are working to bring Egypt down, and that would be in Israel's interest, Zeineddin concluded. As the fact-finding committee reveals more details about the Port Said tragedy, writers looked at lessons to be learnt. Osama Khalil wrote that it was silly to deal with the massacre as a crime related to sports violence in which footballs fans, hooligans and security bodies took part. "After punishing the perpetrators, we should look at the historic roots that led us to this kind of integration with a sports club that pushes fans to hate other sports clubs and inflict harm on them." Khalil acknowledged that the former regime rooted fanaticism among youth and that its remnants are still following the same policies. The decision taken by Al-Ahli club to boycott all sports activities in Port Said was raised by the writer to prove his point since he said it would pave the way for another wave of violence and killing among people who belong to the same country. It is a repetition of previous mistakes. Al-Ahli, Khalil explained, took another wrong decision years ago when it adopted the slogan "Al-Ahli is above everybody" in an election campaign. That slogan found fertile ground among "youth who were denied an identity and a strong bond with their nation. In search of an identity, some found it in religion which led to the emergence of religious fanaticism and others found it in football. They united with their fan club and considered it a substitute to their nation," Khalil wrote in the independent daily Al-Tahrir. Writers also focussed on the impact of the rift between Egypt and the US and the US threat to cut aid to Egypt. Reda Mahmoud wrote the Americans started using aid to force the Egyptian government to drop the case of foreign funding in which various civil society organisations are involved. After clear evidence showed that these organisations are involved in receiving foreign funding in order to carry out a plan to destroy the state, Mahmoud explained, the ruling military council was subjected to blackmail and pressure. Some may argue, Mahmoud added, that the timing was not right for Egypt to start differences with the US and that it is in dire need of aid from any party. However, the official Egyptian reaction, supported by a popular rejection to any form of humiliation, confirmed to the US and other states that no country can be forced to submit, even if its people live on little food and water, Mahmoud wrote in the official daily Al-Akhbar. The death of Galal Amer, Egypt's satiric writer who died on Sunday, was mourned by many writers. Amer's regular column in Al-Masry Al-Youm was left blank on Monday. Hassan Nafaa paid tribute to Amer. He wrote in his regular column in the independent daily Al-Masry Al-Youm that although he met Amer in person just once in his life, he used to enjoy meeting him daily through reading his regular column called Takhareef, or blabbing. Amer was not only a talented writer or the founder of a school or writing, but a well-informed and patriotic man. "With Amer's death," Nafaa wrote, "the Egyptian and all Arab press and the family of Al-Masry Al-Youm lost a great writer and the founder of one of the most distinguished satiric schools in the Arab world. Egypt has lost a man with a vision that one has no choice except to respect even if one differs with it."
