There is no evidence of a Hyskos presence in Egypt before the 14th dynasty.  Egypt was already well establish, advanced civilization long before the Hyskos came along. The Hyksos were completely driven out by the 15th dynasty.Ramses II had nothing to do with driving them out  because his reign was in the 19th dynasty, about 400 years after the Hyskos disappeared from Egypt, and it was the Pharaohs of the New Kingdom who established the monetary system, not the Hyskos.Mesopotamians invented the chariot c. 3000 BC (if your information is from Wikipedia, which states that the Hyskos introduced the chariot in Egypt, that is very debatable and likely incorrect). Egypt had contact with Mesopotamians and Hittites before the Hyksos came along.  There is more solid evidence that suggests it was the Hittites who introduced the chariot to the early Egyptians.

That is a problem when aliens to a land interpret history. Asking a chinese to write about Rome. What can one expect ?Again, if you had read my previous post about how Isralite hebrews became slave in egypt NOT in MISR, it should have been clear to you. True, original Hykos were defeated 400 years prior to Ramses II. But eastern delta was NEVER truely under Pharaoh's control.That is a historical fact. Every egyptian historian would agree to that. Zuhi Hawas and other Egyptian historians believe, there was still residue of "FORIEGN" elements in the easteran delta even during the time of Ramses II "The Great". Remeber, to Egyptians any foreigner was considered Hykos ! Just the same way, any alien is called immigrant in many countries, irrespective of their ethnicity.Many Egyptian historians argued right or worng that, these foriegn elements were remnants of original hykos.However, other historians argue, they were NOT hykos but other SEMITIC tribes from Mid-East. Both sides are in some way right. If one considers from Egyptian point of view, Foreigners = Hykos, then yes these could be called hykos, even though ETHNICALLY they may be totally different from the original Hykos.I never said, Hykos established monetary system. You are saying that. They introduced new land reform/distribution in MISR (Not in the western delta).Again, there is debate who introduced Chariots in MISR and later in EGYPT(western Delta). There are two camps here as well, Hittites or Hykos. Either way, chariots came to Nile delta from outside i.e. Foreign lands. Again, this is the argument forwarded by many, since to egyptians anything foreign meant Hykos, even if they were Hittites or others.

If we got right down to it, I probably completely disagree with you as to whether the Jewish people demonize their opponents or not.  But that is my opinion and nothing more.

I totally diagree with you too, that anti-semitism is NOT a political tool. Rather this is a political tool used to not only demonize opponents of jews but to blackmail as well. EU, America is literally scared even to utter simple truths. You can go and critisize the pope, presidents of any nation and anyone in the whole wide world, but NOT any acts by jews. Question acts of Nixon, thats perfectly ok, ask about Kissinger, thats a NO NO.They are always the victims, always the good guy !  Anyway that is my opinion.

I'm sensing another Anti-Zionist thread brewing.  Doesn't the internet have enough of these floating around now?  Sigh....

I'm going on record as saying the Hyksos were actually Hittites.  There is som archaelogical evidence for this and other scholars have made the supposistion.  Do a Google for Hyksos and Hittites and you'll start seeing some books discussing it.

The Hyksos were Semitic-speaking while the Hittites were Indo-European speaking.  So unless there was some major language split that developed over the span of only a few centuries, I am not sure how the theory that the two groups were the same could be reconciled.

Just watched a show last night on History channel that makes the claim the Hyskos were the Jews.  Something with the timing of a volcano/the plagues of Egypt/crossing the Red Sea. (the claim was standard consensus has it off by about 100 yrs or so)  Don't know if it makes any sense, but it was interesting.

So since the Hyksos invaded and occupied Egypt c. 1700 B.C., that means that the Jews conquered the Egyptians?  I dunno about that...sounds like they'd have to rewrite the history books if that theory were true.

How long does it take to assimilate into a culture?  Could not the Hyksos have assimilated first and then conquered later?  I'm just throwing that out there for thought as I don't really know myself.