posted 15 February 2004 05:28 AM            

Basically all of North Africa is classified as Caucasoid. There are traces of other groups they have mixed with over time but basically they are called Caucasoid.

There are genetic traces of European, Asiatic and Black African among the north African population to varying degrees depending on the group sampled, but the general perception of the North African population at it's core is Caucasoid.

The group sampled is important because in most north african countries the southern area's have populations that shift to black african.

The classification of caucasoid is really representative of groups living close to the north african coastline where the majority of people are found as u head southward to the interior of north African countries the popoulation gradually begins to appear mixed and then black african.

posted 15 February 2004 08:26 AM            

The whitest Northern Africans I have been tend to be ones living mostly around Magrebian countries like Algeria,Morocco,Tunisa,and Libya. Although,a black minority population lives in each of these countries like the Haratin and Tuareg;majority look very Medditerean. We can debate wheather these people migrated into Northern Africa during the Neolithic or came in later periods. A general theory back some years ago was that the entire Northern African Neolithic was conprised of Khoisan type people.

The neolithic cultures of Northern Africa are Iberian-Maursian,Capsian,Tarifrit,and Metch-Aflou. Most of these cultures existed along the costline in Northern Africa but never ventured too far into the Sahara area which was mostly negriod.

posted 17 February 2004 09:50 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by multisphinx:
why is it, that the other north african countries are mostly all white, than todays modern egyptions, should'nt they be simular to the egyptions since they are on the boarder of euro and africa. why were the libyans white during the AE time period as the egyptions showed in their paintings. Could the reason be that they have came from itlay and other euro countries formed small kingdoms and did not allow other races to mix, what is the reaon?

---

I'm going to try to avoid opening up a can of worms, and thus another bunch of topics that just repeat old posts for the 115th time. But I think you're assuming a few things here. First, AE's were never uniform, and not all of them were black, particularly the northern AE's. The delta region was more of a mixture of people, some of whom would not be considered black today. The borders that exist today did not exist back then. Asian and possibly southern Europeans settled in a number of areas of north Africa, not just Egypt.

These migrations continued throughout history. Considerably large migrations of Asians and Europeans into Africa occured particularly when large civilizations like Egypt and Carthage fell under the control of foreigners.

So to answer your question (as best I can), many modern Egyptains, like many modern north Africans, would not be considered black today. Times change and people move.

Similarly in ancient times, some AE's also would not be considered black today. Modern data would suggest that in ancient times, most of them were situated in the south and probably were closer to modern Upper Egyptians. But a look at Egyptians today shows clearly that they're very diverse, and probably more so today than in ancient times.

posted 18 February 2004 05:21 AM            

http://goredsea.com/EN_gallerypage.aspx?doc=bedouinportraitspage1
http://goredsea.com/EN_the-magazine-photo-gallery-bedouin-life.aspx

Agabee ...

"Their hybridism is well shown by their great divergence of color, fellahin in the Delta being sometimes lighter than Arabs, while in Upper Egypt the prevailing complexion is dark brown. The average fellah is somewhat above medium height, big-boned, of clumsy but powerful build, with head and face of fine oval shape, cheek-bones high, forehead broad, short flattish nose with wide nostrils, and black but not woolly hair. The eyebrows are always straight and smooth, never bushy. The mouth is thick-lipped and large but well formed. The eyes are large and black, and are remarkable for the closeness of the eyelashes. The women and girls are particularly noted for their graceful and slender figures and their fine carriage, due to the custom of carrying burdens, especially water-jars, on their heads. The men's heads are usually shaved. The women are not as a rule closely veiled: they generally paint the lips a deep blue, and tattoo a floral device on the chin, sometimes on the forehead and other parts of the body."
http://98.1911encyclopedia.org/F/FE/FELLAH.htm

posted 18 February 2004 05:40 AM            

But majority is rather mediterrean:
http://www.pbase.com/image/24618108
http://www.pbase.com/image/24618036
http://www.pbase.com/image/24618109
http://www.pbase.com/image/24618145

posted 18 February 2004 07:24 PM            

These migrations continued throughout history. Considerably large migrations of Asians and Europeans into Africa occured particularly when large civilizations like Egypt and Carthage fell under the control of foreigners.

So to answer your question (as best I can), many modern Egyptains, like many modern north Africans, would not be considered black today. Times change and people move.

Similarly in ancient times, some AE's also would not be considered black today. Modern data would suggest that in ancient times, most of them were situated in the south and probably were closer to modern Upper Egyptians. But a look at Egyptians today shows clearly that they're very diverse, and probably more so today than in ancient times.

Keep in mind though that not every Libyan was depicted as white. You normally have to look very carefully when it comes to AE because we sometimes believe things that are simply not true."
quoted by Kem-u

posted 19 February 2004 02:28 AM            

Essaouira, west of Marrakech

shepherdess

Ouarzazate, High Atlas - east-southeast of Marrakech

Taliouine, close to Quarzazate

Taliouine again

posted 19 February 2004 09:26 AM            

This is probally because many of the modern Magrebian countries in Northern Africa share a different history than Egypt. You notice from early on in Costal Northern Africans have more in common with their neighboors to the other Medditerrean countries. Early on in pre-dyanstic Egyptian sites we see the difference between Magrebian and Egyptian samples. Just looking at Mtdna samples from Amazigh[Berbers] reveals that many have a near-Eastern and European origin. This only makes sense many look the way they do. Magrebians have a different ethnicity and culture from Egyptians and this is apparent from early on.

Please serch in the archive for my posts on Libyans and Northern Africans. Gene flow from the near-east to Northern Africa occurs about 20,000 years ago which probally shows why many modern Northern Africans look the way they do.
Multisphinx said:
''. why were the libyans white during the AE time period as the egyptions showed in their paintings. Could the reason be that they have came from itlay and other euro countries formed small kingdoms and did not allow other races to mix, what is the reaon?''

In ancient Kemetian paintings two kings of Libyans are depicted:The Tehennu are shown around the Middle Kingdom as being dark brown as the other Egyptians;however there is another Northern African group called the Tamahou that are shown with reddish hair and white skin. Possibly either these two coexisted with each other in different parts of Magreb or the Tamahou possibly came over time repalced the Tehennu. Understand there was two distinct phenotypes for Libyans.

Multisphinx said:
i never said modern egyptions were black, what i am saying is that they are a mixture or multi racial. i know modern egyptions are diverse, so what race would u give a diverse country, caucaisian i don't think so, eventhough their are some does not mean the other 60 70 million are. i am not trying to say we are black, we are not, but we are not white either. But we are a mixture of African, berb, lib, euro, etc... what i am wanting to know is rest of North Africa the same. form some of ur posts i the awnser seems to be yes and no. to be more clearer about my argument, if u were to go around Egypt and look at the people u would motice phyisical charcteristics of many different races, from head to toe.from the nose hair, jaw, bone structure everthing.
Knowing this might have been posted in the past or is not really related subject of AE, I am just trying to find an awnser and i believe this is the right forum to do that. do ya feel me.

You would notice that many modern Egyptians especially those in Upper Egypt even have facial features and skull types that are similar to negriod people. Even some of the more lighter Egyptians in the North have some non-white facial features that look rather unusual. Many Egyptians have a protrusive jaw that usually defines people as Negriod.

I will agree with you that modern Egyptians cannot be categorized as one racial ethnicity. What I will point out though is that many modern Egyptians from Assuit to Aswan in America's definition of blackness be called black. Majority of the people around these places have wavy to kinky hair texture with dark-brown skin. Even if you did cranialmorphical indexes on Egyptians living in these areas you would get definitions of a negriod person.

What is clear to me is that people in Upper Egypt are black;while people in Northern Egypt are a mixture between Medditerean,Western Asian,and some African elements. Even in the Delta you will get people like Nawal Alsaadawi who was teased about being a Nubian slave because of her dark complexion.
Here are some examples:

http://www.urbansmarts.com/interviews/images/4th2.jpg
http://www.4th-district.com/Images/4th-mind.jpg

Notice that this Coptic rapper from Tronto is very light brown yet he pocesses non-white hair texture and also non-white bone structure.

Here are some more pictures of various Egyptians with various shades of brown.

http://www.sat7.org/photos/photo008.jpg
http://www.sat7.org/photos/photo010.jpg
http://www.sat7.org/photos/photo017.jpg
http://vimad3.viewimages.com/wm/LS007154.jpg
http://vimad3.viewimages.com/wm/LS007148.jpg
http://www.copts.net/Images/kosheh/p18a.gif
http://www.copts.net/Images/kosheh/p9a.gif
http://www.egyptology.com/reeder/egyptart/photo5.html
http://www.egyptology.com/reeder/egyptart/photo6.html
http://www.egyptology.com/reeder/egyptart/paint4.html
http://www.worldtrek.org/odyssey/africa/110699/monawafaa_bg.html

Multisphinx,when you study Egyptian culture what is important to note is that ancient and Modern Egypt has always been a hetrogenous place,but culturally Egypt is Africa. To the ancient Kemetians what culture you were mattered to them and not so much color in the modern sense we see it. So Egypt is an African culture despite the hetroegenity of the population. I hope this is clear. If you have any more questions please ask them.

posted 29 February 2004 09:52 AM            

quote:

---

Hamites
African people of caucasoid descent who occupy the Horn of Africa (chiefly Somalia and Ethiopia), the western Sahara, and parts of Algeria and Tunisia. They are believed to be the original settlers of N Africa. The Hamitic cradleland is generally agreed to be in Asia—perhaps S Arabia or possibly an area farther east. The Hamites entered Africa in a long succession of migrations, of which the earliest may have been as far back as the end of the pluvial period. They are commonly divided into two great branches, Eastern and Northern. The Eastern Hamites comprise the ancient and modern Egyptians, the Beja, the Berberines, the Oromo, the Somali, the Danakil, and most Ethiopians. The Northern Hamites include the Berbers of Cyrenaica, Tripolitania, Tunisia, and Algeria; the Berbers of Morocco; the Tuareg and Tibu of the Sahara; the Fulbe of the Western Sudan; and the extinct Guanche of the Canary Islands.

The Columbia Encyclopedia, Fifth Edition Copyright 1994, 1995 Columbia University Press.
http://www.slider.com/enc/23000/Hamites.htm

---

posted 29 February 2004 01:19 PM            

The full pdf file is here
http://batzerlab.lsu.edu/Publications/Comas%20et%20al.%202000%20Hum%20Genet.pdf

Here are a few exerts, which may be of interest in the current topic.

“In order to place NW African and Iberian Alu insertion
genetic diversity in a global frame, we compared our samples
with other European and African groups: French,
Bretons, and Swiss, and !Kung, Nguni, and Bantu speakers
from the Sotho/Tswana branch. The Alu insertion frequencies
for the eight loci analyzed by Stoneking et al.
(1997) were compiled, and the three remaining loci
(HS2.43, HS 3.23, and HS4.65) were typed as described
with the same samples. The Alu insertion frequencies for
the six samples used for comparison are shown in Table 3.
Genetic distances were calculated and represented in an
NJ tree (Fig. 5). The tree clearly separated first sub-Saharan
populations from the rest with strong bootstrap support
(96.9%) and subsequently Europeans from NW
Africans (85.8% of bootstrap support). The Iberian samples
clustered together with the rest of European populations,
and no robust branches existed between them, suggesting
a high homogeneity within European populations.
NW African populations clustered together; however, it is
also interesting to note that the two samples that presented
unique characteristics in the previous analyses (Saharawi
and Southeastern Moroccans) were closer to sub-Saharan
Africans, and the branch linking them together showed
strong bootstrap support (82.9%). This affinity suggested
a certain degree of gene flow from sub-Saharan Africa
into NW Africa.

It has been suggested that the Arabization of
the Maghreb (NW Africa) was the result of a cultural replacement
with limited demographic impact (Hitti 1990).
In the present study, Berber populations are represented
by samples from the Rif mountains (Northern Moroccans)
and the Atlas mountain range (Southeastern Moroccans),
whereas Arab populations are represented by Western
Moroccans, Algerians, and Tunisians. The shortest genetic
distances among all the samples tested are those between
Northern and Western Moroccans, and, on the contrary,
the genetic distances between the two Berber groups
(Northern and Southeastern Moroccans) are larger. The
cultural and linguistic differences shown between Arabs
and Berbers are not correlated with the present data on
Alu insertion polymorphisms and agree with other genetic
data (Bosch et al. 1997, 1999) supporting the view that
Arabization in the Maghreb was the result of a cultural replacement
with little demographic impact.

In addition to the Mediterranean Sea, the other geographical
barrier constraining Northern Africa, the Sahara
Desert, seems to have been more permeable to human
movements in its northwestern part. The finding that, in
the past, the Sahara Desert was much wetter than it is
nowadays might explain why the Sahara appears to have
been a less significant genetic barrier than the Mediterranean.
Even in northeast Africa, where the Nile could
have functioned as a highway between north and south,
Krings et al. (1999) have found a steep gradient of genetic
differentiation in mtDNA sequences along the Nile. The
shorter genetic distances observed between either Saharawi
and Southeastern Moroccans and sub-Saharan
populations can be explained by some admixture through
the Sahara Desert. These results agree with previous genetic
data (Lefranc et al. 1979; Rando et al. 1998; Bosch
et al. 1999, 2000), suggesting that the admixture across
the Sahara could have been achieved by continuous gene
flow between both groups of populations, thus creating a
cline of sub-Saharan admixture in NW Africa, which is
stronger in the southern part than in the north. Nonetheless,
even if the genetic influx is patent, there is a very
sharp genetic differentiation between African populations
north and south of the Sahara Desert. In summary, our
study with Alu insertion polymorphisms shows that the
Gibraltar Straits, which are only 15 km wide, have acted
as a much stronger barrier to gene flow than the 2000-kmwide
Sahara Desert.”

Ozzy

posted 29 February 2004 04:20 PM            

I have noticed that the first impression of most when referring to Caucasian is the color of the skin and general racial traits (White) and Europeans.

You will notice in some of the PDF files I have posted they use the term, but it s not in relation to any classification other than the generally accepted origin for the mtDNA lineages U haplogroup, which is around the Caucasus Range, an ancient marker dated of 39,0000 to 55,000 years old. It is found as mentioned in Europe, Asia and North Africa, although they are different lineages, and by no means indicate a white Southern European origin. Consider the date for Berbers! Haploogroup U6, regardless of the origin and they can truly be called African. They outdate many native populations world wide.

Many publications on the subject incorrectly misrepresent the use of the word Caucasian as representing European, when in fact it is not. Read the below PDF file and you will see what I mean..

You will see that the word is used for the geographic area of the origin of the Haplogoup not the racial afinity.RE: European.

http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2156-2-13.pdf

I think most of the threadis based on an incorect defenition of the use of the word:

posted 29 February 2004 05:45 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ozzy:
I would like to mention also tha although as metioned that the Guanche of the Canary Islands although no longer exist as a ethnic group, many recent studies have shown that a great number of Canarians retain the genetics of the Guanche as opposed to the Spanish occupiers. Another example of invasion not geneticaly replacing the natives.

---

posted 01 March 2004 07:02 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by multisphinx:
Add to Keino questions are the black people you find in Italy and Greece and France also have to mark caucasian if they were to move to the US, because i know someone who is from France and is black, his parents and grandparents are also French does that mean he is to also put down that he is Caucasion?

---

I feel sorry you have to put down you are anything. I cant think of anything except my Nationality that I have had to indicate in any country I have lived in, including residancy, employment or education. Again I think it is an American problem that is being superimposed on the rest of the world. I think England was the only place I can remember any question of color or race was asked but that was a question regarding imigrant benifits. Which unfortunatly I was not entitaled to.

Ozzy

posted 01 March 2004 07:11 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Keino:
Ozzy I got to give it to you. You really find some interesting genetic studies. You are right about the misconception of the term caucasoid, but many scientist still use it and I think they intend for it to mean white connotatively with an implicit denotation as well. Maybe there should be a more clear term used to define, represent this genetic marker that we call caucasian. What do you think? Wouldn't this clear up many current arguments and misconception about race? Its a good chance that I have strong "caucasian" genes, but I look african/black. Should I start going around saying that I am caucasian?

---

Keino, you are right when you say a new word or clasification would solve the misconceptions, but unfortunatley there will always be those who distort the term to mean more than is intended. The term caucasian will continue to be used the same as many other non scientificly accepted words are used. If you take them in context to their reference then there is no problem, if an inference by using one of these words in a report I read is made to a racial group, it simply make the report week, and I for one dont take it seroiusly. You wiil not find many such studies published and suupported. You will only find them posted on extreem boards.

Ozzy

posted 01 March 2004 07:41 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ozzy:
I feel sorry you have to put down you are anything. I cant think of anything except my Nationality that I have had to indicate in any country I have lived in, including residancy, employment or education. Again I think it is an American problem that is being superimposed on the rest of the world. I think England was the only place I can remember any question of color or race was asked but that was a question regarding imigrant benifits. Which unfortunatly I was not entitaled to.

Ozzy

---

I really don't want to open up another can of worms because Keino has basically said everything I could've said. It really doesn't matter what we think. But I can guarantee this problem that gets so much attention is not solely an American problem. Just ask what's left of the aboriginal population in Australia.

posted 01 March 2004 08:25 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kem-Au:
I really don't want to open up another can of worms because Keino has basically said everything I could've said. It really doesn't matter what we think. But I can guarantee this problem that gets so much attention is not solely an American problem. Just ask what's left of the aboriginal population in Australia.

If this were an American problem, we probably wouldn't be having these discussions. There wouldn't be witch hunts in Egypt for people who are simply the same people Egyptians have always been. Black skinned north Africans would not be told to check caucasian on their forms. We could go on and on forever.

---

Black skinned north Africans are told to check caucasion on what forms Kem, In Egypt, in EUROPE; In Australia, or in AMERICA?

and a lot is left of the Aboriginal Australia, there are over 300,000 and the population is growing, there is an indiginouse government responsible for education, health care and Aboriginal land rights. There is Aboriginal culture tought in schools as part of the curiculum, there is colaboration within archeology and anthropolgical with traditional owners, and there is talk of reconciliation not retaliation!

Racism exists in Australia, on both sides of the fence, but it is a small minority.

I am not sure what your reference to Aboriginal Australia was supposed to illustrate? but it is by no means the same as The United States.

And what witch hunts are you refering too in Egypt?

The scentiments and Idealisms that exist in the USA are not consistant with the rest of the world. And this is the very reason we have these discusion, because these perceptions are projected onto Europe, hence the continuued use of the outdated "EUROCENTRIC".

Im sorry Kem but although I can not claim to have a knowledge of American life I can claim to have knowledgee of my own home country and a number of European countries, and these concepts of the European v the black Afican, do not exist as a general perception in the greater population.

And most of my Afican friends have said the same. They have recieved more racal descrimination from other African groups than here on the Islands: Some have moved to the mainland, I would like to know how thy are going.

posted 01 March 2004 10:30 PM            

if australia didn't have racial issues, this site wouldn't exist. http://www.country-liberal-party.com/. and the 300,000 is nothing compared to what their numbers used to be. australia is no better than the u.s. and aboriginals are no better off than the u.s. native americans.

keep in mind the average non-minority american really has no clue of the amount of racism that exists in the u.s. that's why they don't understand why there are so many of these topics (though i'd like to see a little more diversity in the topics myself).

posted 02 March 2004 12:34 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ozzy:
Keino, you are right when you say a new word or clasification would solve the misconceptions, but unfortunatley there will always be those who distort the term to mean more than is intended. The term caucasian will continue to be used the same as many other non scientificly accepted words are used. If you take them in context to their reference then there is no problem, if an inference by using one of these words in a report I read is made to a racial group, it simply make the report week, and I for one dont take it seroiusly. You wiil not find many such studies published and suupported. You will only find them posted on extreem boards.

Ozzy

---

posted 02 March 2004 12:41 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kem-Au:
Ozzy,

if australia didn't have racial issues, this site wouldn't exist. http://www.country-liberal-party.com/. and the 300,000 is nothing compared to what their numbers used to be. australia is no better than the u.s. and aboriginals are no better off than the u.s. native americans.

keep in mind the average non-minority american really has no clue of the amount of racism that exists in the u.s. that's why they don't understand why there are so many of these topics (though i'd like to see a little more diversity in the topics myself).

ask ausar about modern egyptian witch hunts. don't mean to be short, but i'd prefer to not discuss this anymore.

---

posted 02 March 2004 07:29 AM            

Nice pictures,most of these people must be from Upper Egypt. It, seems also other Egyptians admit that people from Upper Egypt are basically "representative" and really original inhabitants of Egypt.

NOVA: Do most Egyptians today feel an ancestral link to the ancient Egyptians?

Hawass: Of course, because we are the descendants of the pharaohs. If you look at the faces of the people of Upper Egypt, the relationship between modern and ancient Egypt is very clear. Habits in the villages, our celebrations when we finish a project, are similar to what they had in ancient Egypt. After someone dies, we make a celebration after 40 days, just like the ancient Egyptians did during the mummification process. Everything in our lives is like ancient Egypt.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/pyramid/excavation/hawass.html

posted 02 March 2004 07:53 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by multisphinx:
marcus are you from moracco or something, because in every forum that i read with you having a post you usaully have to post something about morracco, i mean every sigle thread i seen your post it is some how related to Morracco.

---

posted 02 March 2004 09:17 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Keino:
What parts of Europe can be considered "Mulatto" mixed racial heritage?

---

Southern Portugal has about 5 percent black DNA, although there are pockets where the percentages are significantly higher.

posted 02 March 2004 11:44 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ozzy:
I feel sorry you have to put down you are anything. I cant think of anything except my Nationality that I have had to indicate in any country I have lived in, including residancy, employment or education. Again I think it is an American problem that is being superimposed on the rest of the world.

---

I hate to drag this discussion on but I disagree. Every country that has ethnic, racial, or religious minorities has some form of discrimination. America is not pushing this problem on the rest of the world, it existed before the US came to existance. It's just magnified in America because we are a large country with weak nationalism.

What I mean is, in most countries, racial issues are driven underneath the surface by strong nationalism. Cuba is a good example of this. Castro claims to have defeated the pre-Castro era racism in Cuba through nationalism. On the surface it seems true but beneath the surface you see that very few black Cubans get the good jobs or high ranking positions in the Cuban government. This type of thing goes on in any country where racial disparities are smothered by nationalism including Egypt where the dark skinned Upper Egyptians are mostly poor and lack poltical power.

In the US, people identify themselves by their race, religion, or ethnicity first, and nationality second. This also may be the case in parts of Western Europe but they seem to have done a better job dealing with multiculturalism than the US.

Black Americans really seem to be hurt by the politics of race in the US, yet at the same time, they're empowered far more than blacks and racial minorities in other countries.

posted 02 March 2004 12:58 PM            

PARIAH are not even supported by ATSIC and have actualy been at odds over the years. These people are not based in the northern Territory they are American based. I lived in Darwin on and off from my late teens. This is a good case for my points, its the American propaganda machine superinposing itself on other countries.

They are by no means representitve of the state of Aboriginal afairs in Australia. I am afraid such a site is little more than propoganda.

If you would like to realy see what Aboriginal Australia is all about go to the http://www.atsic.gov.au/and see what they are realy about, they are by no means any were close to what you guys describe about the USA. I have worked for ATSIC:

Ohh and gues what even the Northern Territory News articles on this site have been edited, I have read the actual articles and they have nice little word replacements. Absolute crap.

The problem with many people when discussing Aboriginal Australia is that they see Black only and immediatley project the ills of the world on them as well.

PS: Are you actualy aware of the population of Australia before invasion?

PPS: Most Australians are painfully aware of the colonial treatment of the aboriginal, I infact have a family member who has just gone though court regarding her mothers forced removal by the church when she was 6, very painfull for all her family and mine.

The atrocities however do not overshadow the progress Aboriginal government is doing In Australia these days.

Your impressions of Australia are so off base, and based on American perceptions. Read something about Australians by Australians.

Again the fact that you have got information from this site and even post this site proves my point, American influenced, unsupported by the people it claims to represent, and totaly misrepresentitive and damaging to the work Aboriginal Australia is doing.

Ozzy

posted 02 March 2004 12:59 PM            

It upsets me.

Ozzy

posted 03 March 2004 06:14 PM            

Neo*geo said "This type of thing goes on in any country where racial disparities are smothered by nationalism including Egypt where the dark skinned Upper Egyptians are mostly poor and lack poltical power."

posted 04 March 2004 10:40 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by multisphinx:
Neo*geo said "This type of thing goes on in any country where racial disparities are smothered by nationalism including Egypt where the dark skinned Upper Egyptians are mostly poor and lack poltical power."

Maybe but not totally true, remember president Anwar Sadat he was from upper Egypt and he was president. But in some cases you might be right.

---