I would only do that if I wanted to collect anecdotes-- something you seem to be fond of. But anecdotes aren’t how one determines facts, scientifically. Please don’t think you are going to score points on this MB for advocating anecdotes over real, scientific data.
You read second comment but not further down from Amir and rest of posters
I have no idea what you are talking about 
Can you understand coming from people like me who have no direct experience as you gave must go by the facts that are available to us. And what I am trying to convey to you in order to improve dialogue among two widely different cultures if that we must first state that we see that an election was held and Morsi won the election and took office.
Although I believe you that many violations of normal democratic elections took place the fact remains, right wrong or indifferent, that Morsi was elected by a democratic process, perhaps an extremely flawed process, to become the first President elected in that manner.
So after explaining what I mean when I say Morsi was democratically elected, now I can begin to discuss the violations that you have listed.
I believe I wrote about my friend and co-worker who is from Egypt that he told me of the buying of votes by providing food for the peasants. It’s on the other thread that was going on last summer,
If you get a chance please read through it and let me know what you think,
You report is aligned with what my friend told me. That’s a start. Lets continue.
To me this is what this forum and this thread should be about.
We can disagree on much buy I think you and I agree on quite a bit,
That does not surprise me.
Excuse us if we’re having trouble getting info here. It’s tough to do when your beloved military is so busy arresting journalists during these “free elections”.
- a short account of a particular incident or event, especially of an interesting or amusing nature.
- a short, obscure historical or biographical account.
Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words
Mace is correct that individual or even a few anecdotes or personsal stories are not a reliable source for determining facts about an issue. But that is not precisely what ‘asking the man on the street what they think’ is about when we are talking tens of millions of people expressing their opinion.
I believe a quick review of J.Mace’s commentary shows that his frame of politicsl scientific reference on the revolution in Egypt is based upon comparing 2010 thru present Egypt’s elections to current elections in the USA. That is not scientific or fair to start with so Mace’s point of view on much being discussed is not conducive to scientific or factual discussion anyway.
I do try my best to stick with facts and verify them as much as possible. Anecdotes can give a human touch to supportable facts. That the elections held in Egypt must be held to our standards this early in your revolution is not what I would consider a fact.
This is why posters are always asking you if English is your native language. Where have you argued the election is invalid (i.e. not valid)? Did you read your last sentence after you typed it?
I even provided definitions of the word election to help you out. You seem to be using different definitions of the word election without clarification. In effect: I’m not saying the election was invalid, but the election was invalid.
But, I’m sure everyone here knows what you are trying to do after being caught in a contradiction, and I’m sure no one is surprised by it.
I wrote this last July:
Evaluating a political process lies in the realm of philosophy and values. It’s not a matter suited to science. Sure, there are some scientific tools one can use to determine the facts of the situation, but ultimately we are concerned with issues related to human values and assumption.
There is no scientific answer to whether or not an election should be considered valid or not. If you think you have one, you are deluding yourself.
As John Mace mentions, locking up those who campaign against one side of a referendum is not a good indication of a free or fair election.
Anyway, here is the Carter Center’s report (pdf) on the Presidential elections. Obviously they have reservations, but the report says things like
and
So I will need something more than your word for it that the Presidential election should be considered invalid but the referendum should not.
Regards,
Shodan
I am using the same definition of election. I am saying the election itself (if I have to add ‘process’ I will) was valid. It was valid because Morsi became President and was president for about a year. By then Morsi was acting different than promised and was perceived by millions as a threat to democracy, the economy and the goals of the revolution in general. Because of that threat Morsi was forced to step down and is under arrest.
Let me ask you this. Is the valid election that Morsi won now guaranteeing that Morsi will be able to serve the full term that he was elected to serve? Your answer must be no. Is the election that Morsi won valid today? I say that election has been voided. It is meaningless. If you wish to claim that a voided, overturned election is valid that is fine. But don’t tell me that my summary is not correct.
Morsi may yet believe that his election victory remains valid but he is sitting in jail. Some validity that is.
Are you saying the referendum vote must or should be considered invalid?
And by the way Marmite Lover stated this: “You cannot possibly call this democratically elected by my meaning of the term?”
I am trying to build a bridge of understanding over issues such as that - you know - what we mean by certain terms and phrases.
There was a democratic process under Mubarak. BUT no one can agree that he was elected democratically is what I mean.
Dictionary:
Democratically Elected - An individual or group of individuals brought to power by a majority vote of the electorate.
If you say that Mubarak bought votes and used threats against voters and closed polling stations, and harrassed voters outside polling stations and had no International or any other people monitoring the polls, and CCTV was banned, and all Government workers were given day off and driven in buses to his elections and told if they were found to have voted No in their ballot paper they would be fired etc etc etc Then Mubarak was Democratically elected.
No one in their right mind ever believed Mubarak was elected by the people though.
Democratically elected is just English words. We speak Arabic and to us voting must be fair and just and democratic. The referendum was the closest Egypt ever saw in her history to being democratic. The rules were followed.
Your friend if he is in Egypt would know what happened. He would be the best judge.
I also live here. I saw what happened in all elections. We both saw the vote rigging. The buying of votes. Trucks of oil and rice and lentils and pasta and sugar in boxes handed out in the streets.
Loudspeakers right outside the schools during voting telling voters they would go to hell!! if they did not vote for Morsi. Simple peasants terrorized.
People cannot compare it to what they know in their own countries. We lived it.
Your friend speaks the truth. We both saw what happened.
There is no lack of information for you. There are still plenty of the Western journos operating. Very few were arrested during referendum. Your problem is they all have an agenda. I would think the only reliable one was Lyse Doucet of BBC. She just reports facts and doesn’t add her own versions and lies. If you follow her then you can probably get the best accurate information in an event.
how many of the polling stations was Carter Org in? let’s have some scientific data here.
So, by using this logic, Nixon’s election was retroactively invalid because he was forced to step down and did not finish his term of office? Or, is Nixon’s election now voided–a new distinction from you now. At least he got to retire to California and protected from arrest by Ford’s pardon. I guess, we should have forced Bush Sr. out, too, because he broke his “No new taxes” pledge. C’mon, they’re Republicans. They must have been evil.
“But don’t tell me that my summary is not correct.”
I think you wouldn’t believe you’re incorrect about anything, even if the rest of the world sees things differently and told you so.
No I don’t. Why would I?
Anyway, could you please tell us what they say.
Thank you.
The illiterate were told to circle a symbol not a name. They got a box of food and told to circle a camel or a bicycle or a sunshine or whatever. Most had never in their life been to an election. No one voted in Mubarak 30 years. Simple poor farmers were conned.
Referendum was on TV for months so they could follow it and know about the articles. The illiterate could see instead of read. They just had to tick yes or no if they agreed with it.