posted 23 February 2003 10:38 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chu:
Thats why its called a Stereotype CommonSense

---

I know but what I'm trying to say is that Most stereotypes are towards "ARAB" Muslims while most "ARABS" in America are Christian.

posted 23 February 2003 02:11 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by egyptmed:
thank you, common_sense for that valuable info ion arab-americans, i saw a similar list on the adc website. i would also like to add that it missed an influential billionaire Egyptian financier, Fayez sarofim. on the whole, arab-americans are better than the avergae american economically and educationally. in terms of per-capita, arab-americans probably add more to the american economy than any other minority, perhaps tying with asians, but surely in line with white america

---

posted 23 February 2003 03:45 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CoMmOn_SeNsE!!:
Well I'd say that "Arabs" do better then white America, if they did'nt lump Egyptians, arabs etc in the White category & made a mid-eastern/ARAB/N.African category then they would be ahead of "White" America.
Then America is something like 80% white so with such a big group there is going to be a wide range of income.

---

As I and many other Americans have stated before, Arabs and Egyptians or any such people from that part of the World aren't considered WHITE. The only TRUE white people in America from a Societal perspective are anglo-saxons and Nords..

Sorry to burst your bubble..

Also I found your article from the pro Arab website amusing. Going by your post, you make it seem that Arabs contribute more to the American economy than any other minority; which is clearly false because Arabs make up a very minor segment of the American population compared to other minorities such as Asians, blacks and latinos..

All minorities have given much to America and not just a few. Black Americans have unquestionably shaped the face of American culture with music, art, sports, literature and Science for hundreds of years.. This was all done under a system that repressed black Americans rather than encourage them..

Asians dominate the hard Science fields and Latinos are now the largest minority in America.. Everyone has a place in America and to say that Arabs contribute more to America than whites, blacks, hispanics etc is just plain ludicrous..

Carfax>> To travel in silence, by long and circuitous route, to brave the arrows of misfortune and fear neither noose nor fire, to play the greatest of all games and win, foregoing no expense, is to mock the vicissitudes of fate

posted 23 February 2003 06:10 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CoMmOn_SeNsE!!:
I know but what I'm trying to say is that Most stereotypes are towards "ARAB" Muslims while most "ARABS" in America are Christian.

[This message has been edited by CoMmOn_SeNsE!! (edited 23 February 2003).]

---

people are ignorant and think arab=muslim, thats what the media tells us, thats what TV tells us and America is a TV nation

posted 23 February 2003 11:48 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by egyptmed:
carfax, u ignorant rascist, we are sayong that per-capita arab-americans have contributed more to the economy than any other american ethnic groups, and probably even more than asians. r u trying to deny that. have u ever heard of fayez sarofim or the foudner of kinko's who is arab......

---

LOL just because I disagree with you, that makes me an ignorant racist? Believe what you want to Pelyas, because I hardly care what you think of me as I have already labeled you an inconsequential moron in my mind long before.

Saying that Arabs per capita contribute more to the American economy than any other minority is practically impossible to quantify..

Common_Sense's info comes from an extremely biased viewpoint and thats plain to see for anyone who has a discriminating viewpoint.

Arab Americans are no more special than African Americans, Latin Americans, European Americans or any other immigrant peoples.

Everyone contributes in their own way.

I believe you and Common_Sense lack self confidence because you are always telling yourselves that you're white or considered white (when you're not), and how the Ancient Egyptians were Mediterranean caucasian or some other unproven made up label..

It is obvious that the fact that the Ancient Egyptians were closer culturally to Africa disturbs you greatly; because it interferes with your already weak self esteem..

Carfax>> To travel in silence, by long and circuitous route, to brave the arrows of misfortune and fear neither noose nor fire, to play the greatest of all games and win, foregoing no expense, is to mock the vicissitudes of fate

posted 24 February 2003 02:17 AM            

Manorites prefer to call themselves Phonecians instead.

posted 24 February 2003 11:04 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Carfax:
As I and many other Americans have stated before, Arabs and Egyptians or any such people from that part of the World aren't considered [b]WHITE. The only TRUE white people in America from a Societal perspective are anglo-saxons and Nords..

---

I agree

quote:

---

Sorry to burst your bubble..

---

LOL you have'nt I don't think Arabs or Egyptians should be classed as White & care to point out where I have stated it. What I said is there should be a different box for people of North African/ Middle eastern origin rather then white.

quote:

---

Also I found your article from the pro Arab website amusing. Going by your post, you make it seem that Arabs contribute more to the American economy than any other minority; which is clearly false because Arabs make up a very minor segment of the American population compared to other minorities such as Asians, blacks and latinos..

---

No this whole thread is about streotyping, all I did was show that as a group of people Egyptians or Arabs are not poor, stupid & most are not even Muslim.

quote:

---

All minorities have given much to America and not just a few. Black Americans have unquestionably shaped the face of American culture with music, art, sports, literature and Science for hundreds of years.. This was all done under a system that repressed black Americans rather than encourage them..

---

This is not relevent, this thread is about "Arab" stereotypes all I have said is that Arabs are quite opposite to how they are portrayed in the Media.

quote:

---

Asians dominate the hard Science fields and Latinos are now the largest minority in America.. Everyone has a place in America and to say that Arabs contribute more to America than whites, blacks, hispanics etc is just plain ludicrous..

---

quote:

---

It's not a question of size, for a group of people that number well below 5 million they achieved a lot, they do have incomes on average & are educated on average.

Carfax>> [b]To travel in silence, by long and circuitous route, to brave the arrows of misfortune and fear neither noose nor fire, to play the greatest of all games and win, foregoing no expense, is to mock the vicissitudes of fate

---

posted 24 February 2003 11:18 AM            

quote:

---

I believe you and Common_Sense lack self confidence because you are always telling yourselves that you're white or considered white (when you're not), and how the Ancient Egyptians were Mediterranean caucasian or some other unproven made up label..

---

Care to show me where I have stated that Egyptians where white or even where I have ever discussed myself as white? However what I have stated is that i'm only half Egyptian & I'm also half "NORD" as you say.

Though if he is considered "White" why should'nt I if my hair is lighter my eyes are light & my skin seems to be lighter then his Since "NORD" = White to you an all

posted 24 February 2003 12:51 PM            

Kemet Writes: But since ALL North Africans aren't Arab how would this take place. Would a Tuareg from Algeria be labeled different than a Tuareg from Nigeria?

posted 24 February 2003 01:38 PM            

By the way Common Sense,which part of Egypt are you from ??

Daimetta???

posted 24 February 2003 05:28 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
Actually the founder of kinko's is a Lebanese man. Most Lebanese christains the manorites donot consider themselves to be arabs.

Manorites prefer to call themselves Phonecians instead.

---

posted 24 February 2003 05:31 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kemet:
kimo_the_maniac Writes:And by the way why are you guys not discussing all these racial issues in your new asylum called the "Egyptology" forum?

Kemet Writes: The whole point, Kimo is that there is no such thing as a race. I have allready demonstrated this. Anyone who practices this belief would therefore be ignorant or a "racist". Humans are variable, one can be physically black and still ge genetically closer to non-blacks than they are to other black people. You seem to have a problem with the fact that many modern Egyptians have sub-saharan ancestory:
http://www.promega.com/geneticidproc/ussymp10proc/abstracts/69Parr.pdf

---

posted 24 February 2003 05:37 PM            

Kemet Writes: How would you classify a Beja Egyptian? How about a Nubian? How about the countless Egyptians from the south who have greater genetic relationships with the Sudan, southern Libya or Chad?

posted 24 February 2003 05:39 PM            

Kemet Writes: I guess American anthropologists have it wrong and you have it right:

American Anthropological Association
Statement on "Race"
(May 17, 1998)
The following statement was adopted by the Executive Board of the American Anthropological Association, acting on a draft prepared by a committee of representative American anthropologists. It does not reflect a consensus of all members of the AAA, as individuals vary in their approaches to the study of "race." We believe that it represents generally the contemporary thinking and scholarly positions of a majority of anthropologists.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the United States both scholars and the general public have been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences. With the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in this century, however, it has become clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them. In neighboring populations there is much overlapping of genes and their phenotypic (physical) expressions. Throughout history whenever different groups have come into contact, they have interbred. The continued sharing of genetic materials has maintained all of humankind as a single species.

Physical variations in any given trait tend to occur gradually rather than abruptly over geographic areas. And because physical traits are inherited independently of one another, knowing the range of one trait does not predict the presence of others. For example, skin color varies largely from light in the temperate areas in the north to dark in the tropical areas in the south; its intensity is not related to nose shape or hair texture. Dark skin may be associated with frizzy or kinky hair or curly or wavy or straight hair, all of which are found among different indigenous peoples in tropical regions. These facts render any attempt to establish lines of division among biological populations both arbitrary and subjective.

Historical research has shown that the idea of "race" has always carried more meanings than mere physical differences; indeed, physical variations in the human species have no meaning except the social ones that humans put on them. Today scholars in many fields argue that "race" as it is understood in the United States of America was a social mechanism invented during the 18th century to refer to those populations brought together in colonial America: the English and other European settlers, the conquered Indian peoples, and those peoples of Africa brought in to provide slave labor.

From its inception, this modern concept of "race" was modeled after an ancient theorem of the Great Chain of Being, which posited natural categories on a hierarchy established by God or nature. Thus "race" was a mode of classification linked specifically to peoples in the colonial situation. It subsumed a growing ideology of inequality devised to rationalize European attitudes and treatment of the conquered and enslaved peoples. Proponents of slavery in particular during the 19th century used "race" to justify the retention of slavery. The ideology magnified the differences among Europeans, Africans, and Indians, established a rigid hierarchy of socially exclusive categories underscored and bolstered unequal rank and status differences, and provided the rationalization that the inequality was natural or God-given. The different physical traits of African-Americans and Indians became markers or symbols of their status differences.

As they were constructing US society, leaders among European-Americans fabricated the cultural/behavioral characteristics associated with each "race," linking superior traits with Europeans and negative and inferior ones to blacks and Indians. Numerous arbitrary and fictitious beliefs about the different peoples were institutionalized and deeply embedded in American thought.

Early in the 19th century the growing fields of science began to reflect the public consciousness about human differences. Differences among the "racial" categories were projected to their greatest extreme when the argument was posed that Africans, Indians, and Europeans were separate species, with Africans the least human and closer taxonomically to apes.

Ultimately "race" as an ideology about human differences was subsequently spread to other areas of the world. It became a strategy for dividing, ranking, and controlling colonized people used by colonial powers everywhere. But it was not limited to the colonial situation. In the latter part of the 19th century it was employed by Europeans to rank one another and to justify social, economic, and political inequalities among their peoples. During World War II, the Nazis under Adolf Hitler enjoined the expanded ideology of "race" and "racial" differences and took them to a logical end: the extermination of 11 million people of "inferior races" (e.g., Jews, Gypsies, Africans, homosexuals, and so forth) and other unspeakable brutalities of the Holocaust.

"Race" thus evolved as a worldview, a body of prejudgments that distorts our ideas about human differences and group behavior. Racial beliefs constitute myths about the diversity in the human species and about the abilities and behavior of people homogenized into "racial" categories. The myths fused behavior and physical features together in the public mind, impeding our comprehension of both biological variations and cultural behavior, implying that both are genetically determined. Racial myths bear no relationship to the reality of human capabilities or behavior. Scientists today find that reliance on such folk beliefs about human differences in research has led to countless errors.

At the end of the 20th century, we now understand that human cultural behavior is learned, conditioned into infants beginning at birth, and always subject to modification. No human is born with a built-in culture or language. Our temperaments, dispositions, and personalities, regardless of genetic propensities, are developed within sets of meanings and values that we call "culture." Studies of infant and early childhood learning and behavior attest to the reality of our cultures in forming who we are.

It is a basic tenet of anthropological knowledge that all normal human beings have the capacity to learn any cultural behavior. The American experience with immigrants from hundreds of different language and cultural backgrounds who have acquired some version of American culture traits and behavior is the clearest evidence of this fact. Moreover, people of all physical variations have learned different cultural behaviors and continue to do so as modern transportation moves millions of immigrants around the world.

How people have been accepted and treated within the context of a given society or culture has a direct impact on how they perform in that society. The "racial" worldview was invented to assign some groups to perpetual low status, while others were permitted access to privilege, power, and wealth. The tragedy in the United States has been that the policies and practices stemming from this worldview succeeded all too well in constructing unequal populations among Europeans, Native Americans, and peoples of African descent. Given what we know about the capacity of normal humans to achieve and function within any culture, we conclude that present-day inequalities between so-called "racial" groups are not consequences of their biological inheritance but products of historical and contemporary social, economic, educational, and political circumstances.

[Note: For further information on human biological variations, see the statement prepared and issued by the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, 1996 (AJPA 101:569-570).]

posted 24 February 2003 08:12 PM            

[/QUOTE

posted 24 February 2003 08:43 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by egyptmed:
i bet u wannna classify egyptians and lebanese as african-americans instaed of arab-americans.

---

posted 24 February 2003 08:49 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by egyptmed:
to say there is no such thing as race is stupidly ignorant. there is race and you know it and dont try to deny it. although, in the scheme of things, the best race is the human race.

---

How hypocritical of you to say that when you are so determined to seperate black Egyptians from mediterranean caucasion ones. If race doesn't exist then they are all Egyptians regardless of whether they look negroid or caucasion.

posted 24 February 2003 08:51 PM            

Lots of Egyptians have wide noses and wooly hair too.

Here are two different Egyptians. The first one from Lower Egypt the second from Upper Egypt:

He has nappy hair, full lips, and a wide nose. But he lacks prognathism so I wouldn't call him black although he definately has some black ancestry.

This one is brown skinned but has wavy hair, thin lips, and an aqualine nose. If not for his prognathism, which is a characteristic exclusive to blacks, he might be considered a caucasion.

posted 25 February 2003 12:27 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by pelyas:
the alexandrian's nose is not wide, his lips not full, and his hair is wavy.

---

You, my friend, are in denial. His hair is the same as my father's who is half-white/half-Afro-American. Nappy, wooly, tightly-curled, whatever you choose to call his hair, it is as much a visable sign of black African ancestry as his green eyes are a sign of white European ancestry.

quote:

---

Originally posted by pelyas:

by the way, many many asiains have flat noses and full lips, even more so than some africans but i highly doubt their african ancestry

---

It is not those traits alone but a combination which helps anthropologists make conclusions about the racial/ethnic background of an individual. Tightly-curled or nappy hair, and prognathism are traits which are definitive signs of black African ancestry.

Ma a salaam

posted 25 February 2003 10:39 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kemet:
Common_Sense Writes: LOL you have'nt I don't think Arabs or Egyptians should be classed as White & care to point out where I have stated it. What I said is there should be a different box for people of North African/ Middle eastern origin rather then white.

Kemet Writes: But since ALL North Africans aren't Arab how would this take place. Would a Tuareg from Algeria be labeled different than a Tuareg from Nigeria?

---

posted 25 February 2003 11:08 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
Or better yet a haratin from southern morocco,who does not fit the streotype of what Northern Africans are suposed to look like.

By the way Common Sense,which part of Egypt are you from ??

Daime

---

posted 25 February 2003 11:28 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun:
Egyptmed - For the sake of ending this pointless argument I will repost these pictures of two different Egyptian males. One is from Alexandria the other is from Aswan:

Lots of Egyptians have wide noses and wooly hair too.

Here are two different Egyptians. The first one from Lower Egypt the second from Upper Egypt:

He has nappy hair, full lips, and a wide nose. But he lacks prognathism so I wouldn't call him black although he definately has some black ancestry.

This one is brown skinned but has wavy hair, thin lips, and an aqualine nose. If not for his prognathism, which is a characteristic exclusive to blacks, he might be considered a caucasion.

They are both Egyptian but the show the diversity of Egyptian genes.

---

Well posting two pics is hardly a representation of a whole country.

Posting a pic of miss Egypt does not mean all Egyptian's look like this. ofcourse Egyptians have "Black" genes but that hardly makes them unique. Saudi's & the portugeuse have it around 7-10%. But since middle &Northern make up over 80% of Egypt's population & "black" Dna is around the same as it is in porugal saudi etc then 7% black or less does not mean you are Black. Southern Egypt ofcourse has a stronger "Black"

posted 25 February 2003 11:35 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CoMmOn_SeNsE!!:
Well. all I'm saying is that North Africans & the people of the middle East should not be classed as white & there should be a seperate category for them. I personally Would like to see things done on nationality, eg Egyptian, lebanese etc but to do that on a census would be far to complex so there has to be some kind of grouping apart from white.

---

posted 25 February 2003 11:39 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CoMmOn_SeNsE!!:

Well posting two pics is hardly a representation of a whole country.

Posting a pic of miss Egypt does not mean all Egyptian's look like this. ofcourse Egyptians have "Black" genes but that hardly makes them unique. Saudi's & the portugeuse have it around 7-10%. But since middle &Northern make up over 80% of Egypt's population & "black" Dna is around the same as it is in porugal saudi etc then 7% black or less does not mean you are Black. Southern Egypt ofcourse has a stronger "Black"

But is'nt this about "ARAB" stereotypes?

---

posted 25 February 2003 01:21 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CoMmOn_SeNsE!!:

Well posting two pics is hardly a representation of a whole country.

---

I agree. Egyptians come in all colors like all other Arabs I've seen.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CoMmOn_SeNsE!!:

Posting a pic of miss Egypt does not mean all Egyptian's look like this.

---

True. In fact few Egyptians look like her just like few American women look like Carmen Electra. Why post pictures of models who wear tons of make up instead of pictures of commoners to make your point?

quote:

---

Originally posted by CoMmOn_SeNsE!!:

ofcourse Egyptians have "Black" genes but that hardly makes them unique. Saudi's & the portugeuse have it around 7-10%. But since middle &Northern make up over 80% of Egypt's population & "black" Dna is around the same as it is in porugal saudi etc then 7% black or less does not mean you are Black.

---

Well I'm not trying to make a point that people who have even negligable black ancestry are black. I don't apply the one drop rule. Vin Diesel's father is half-black and his mother is white so I would consider him neither black nor white. For example, on that picture I posted of the boy from Alexandria: Even though he has some traits which appear to show he has black ancestry I wouldn't consider him black like the man in the other picture from southern Egypt. The boy from Alexandria definately has mixed ancestry but he is neither black nor white. I was only pointing out that phenotypes vary in Egypt and the "black" genes of Egyptians can't be denied.

Contrary to what egyptmed would like us to believe, all Egyptians don't look like Omar Shariff(who has Lebanese ancestry by the way), and despite all the intermingling between Egyptians with Turks, Greeks, and Arabs in cities like Cairo and Alexandria, I've often mistaken Egyptians for Dominicans who also happen to be a very "multi-racial" population.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CoMmOn_SeNsE!!:

But is'nt this about "ARAB" stereotypes?

---

posted 25 February 2003 02:30 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amun:
Well one of the stereotypes was about the word "sandni99er". Perhaps the labeling stems from Arab intermingling with East Africans. I know white Americans definately don't view Arabs as "pure" white caucasions, whatever that means.

---

I think that word came from People of Middle Eastern or North African descent being seen as people of desert land and being dark skinned. And even just because they are located near Africa. I don't know. Its just such a ignorant term there is no way to make sense of it although I doubt it strikes fear in an Arab like it does a 'Black' American.

posted 25 February 2003 02:58 PM            

She is even lighter than most Lower egyptains,except maybe in the delta.

Hosni Mubarak is from the delta region,and even he is not that light.

If you look at the singer at the miss egypt pagent however you will see that she looks like a aswani egyptain.

Black ancestry for Egyptains in the south is higer than 20 percent,and you are getting this figure form racial myths,which is not a peer reviwed source.

posted 25 February 2003 06:37 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kemet:
Kemet Writes: Pelyas, earlier you admitted that all humans originate in Africa. What route did these "black" humans take out of Africa to populate the rest of the world if not the Nile Valley? If they did migrate out of Africa through the Nile Valley why wouldn't the earliest Egyptians be "black" since they came from equatorial Africa?

---

posted 25 February 2003 06:45 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
I see you keep opsting that same picture of miss egypt. I wonder however which part of egypt she comes from. I have been to egypt myself,and plus I am a native egyptain from aswan. The question is where did she come from ??

She is even lighter than most Lower egyptains,except maybe in the delta.

Hosni Mubarak is from the delta region,and even he is not that light.

If you look at the singer at the miss egypt pagent however you will see that she looks like a aswani egyptain.

Black ancestry for Egyptains in the south is higer than 20 percent,and you are getting this figure form racial myths,which is not a peer reviwed source.

---

posted 26 February 2003 10:46 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by egyptmed:
u r so hypocritical u criticize ppl posting poctures than u post some of ur own. also, egyptian black DNA is 20% maximum if it went any higher they would be classified as nubians or african immigrants. by the way, egyptians look much more simlar to lebanese and tunisians than somalis and cranium samples prove that. so, egyptians, lebanese, tunisians, and saudis undoubtedly look VERY simlar, i mean no-0one has confuised an egyptian with an african but its easier to confuse egyptians with saudis. next u know, ull be saying saudis and lebanese are black also. u r a black supremacist. oh and by the way, genetically egyptians of both upper and lower egypt are gentically closer to koreans (30%) or germans (65%) than sub-sahran africans (16%)

---

Where did these percentages come from? I would like to look at the text.

Anyhow

Ausar can you have this thread removed off this board and put back where it was?

posted 26 February 2003 02:02 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ausar:
I see you keep opsting that same picture of miss egypt.

---

Right, you love doing the same thing, with Darkest people you can find, so what exactly is your point ?

quote:

---

I wonder however which part of egypt she comes from.

---

Cairo, She also presents Egyptian TV I suggest you watch it some time!!

quote:

---

gypt myself,and plus I am a native egyptain from aswan. The question is where did she come from ??

---

& again the answer is Cairo,plus it's painfully obvious you are not an Egyptian of any sort, weather it be aswan, El bahnasa, or comb hamada for that matter.

quote:

---

She is even lighter than most Lower egyptains,except maybe in the delta.

---

Females are always lighter them males in all parts of the world weather it be sweden or Nigeria.

quote:

---

Hosni Mubarak is from the delta region,and even he is not that light.

If you look at the singer at the miss egypt pagent however you will see that she looks like a aswani egyptain.

---

Huh? The singer at the miss Egypt pagent was neither an Egyptian nor was HE from Aswan. Yuri Mekredi or something like that is from lebanon & a man. Besides aswan has a population in it's thousands Egypt has 70million people so if a person went to aswan took 500 pics of different people & said that these were the people of Egypt it would be total crap.

quote:

---

Black ancestry for Egyptains in the south is higer than 20 percent,and you are getting this figure form racial myths,which is not a peer reviwed source.

---

prove it, also there is no Admixture material on egyptians, on the Racial-Myths site.

[/B][/QUOTE]

posted 26 February 2003 02:09 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CoMmOn_SeNsE!!:

Well posting two pics is hardly a representation of a whole country.

Posting a pic of miss Egypt does not mean all Egyptian's look like this. ofcourse Egyptians have "Black" genes but that hardly makes them unique. Saudi's & the portugeuse have it around 7-10%. But since middle &Northern make up over 80% of Egypt's population & "black" Dna is around the same as it is in porugal saudi etc then 7% black or less does not mean you are Black. Southern Egypt ofcourse has a stronger "Black"

But is'nt this about "ARAB" stereotypes?

---

posted 26 February 2003 06:23 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kemet:
Egyptmed Writes:
the ones that remained in africa darkened and are kniow known as africans.

Kemet Writes: This is where your faulty logic begins. Why would humans who originated in tropical Africa have to darken? Why wouldn't they be dark/black to begin with if they came from the tropics?

---

posted 26 February 2003 07:38 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by egyptmed:

ur logic is just as stupid who says they were born black. maybe they werent and they tanned as a result. besides i belive that if the theory of evolution is provent true tha that means primates evolved into cro-magnoins all over the world

---

posted 26 February 2003 09:38 PM            

Because you exclude these people,and seem to think they are not ''real Egyptains""

''& again the answer is Cairo,plus it's painfully obvious you are not an Egyptian of any sort, weather it be aswan, El bahnasa, or comb hamada for that matter.''

You are right I donot live In egypt right know,but I was definatley born in a village in Aswan. My mother is Algerian,and I moved to America at a young age. I have mostly grown up in America,so you are right I am not all familar with Egypt in a modern day sense. I do have famil;y however that I go visit on occasian.

I have watched Egyptain television and egyptain soap Opera,and like latin American countries they get the lightest women they can find. You do know what the word asmar Mahelk rouhi means right.