Yes, the seed company catelogue does, indeed say that.
However, I do NOT use blurbs in seed company catelogues as any form of proof. (Since they often have tons of bullshit in them. I have even found very reputable seed company catelogues, which have such errors, so that is no slur on the quality of the company)
I could be wrong. If anyone has as copy of Robert Connell Clarke's, book called "Hashish", then I would accept his word.
There is no doubt that the hash produced in Aghanistan, Pakistain, and Northern India, are all produced using Indica plants.
However, my understanding was the Moroccan hash was produced using sativas. (i.e. that the plants native to Morocco, were, in the main, Cannabis Sativa Sativa, as opposed to Cannabis Sativa Indica.)
Perhaps when the person who told me that Moroccan cannabis was sativa, he left out the indica part, of the whole taxonomy. (That is, he might have meant Cannabis sativa indica (which we would, colloquially, shorten to "Indica"), but instead said Cannabis Sativa, which I then took to mean Cannabis Sativa Sativa (which we would, colloquially, shorten to "Sativa")
On the other hand, the Moroccan plant structure (as seen in many photos)certainly exhibits a sativa phenotype in its structure. That is, they are long, lean, and lanky, producing somewhat airy buds. If this were a sativa-indica hybrid, then such a divergence in phenotype and genoptype would NOT be that uncommon, since both both sativa and indica genes contribute to the hybrid. However, the plants in Morocco are land-race inbred lines, so it would be rather uncommon to see such a "pure indica", with completely sativa phentoype, NO?
Look at typical pure indicas (i.e. Afghani, Pakistani, and North Indian plants. ) They are realtively short, squat, with very small internode distances. They produce dense, hard buds.
I could be wrong, but, until I hear back from Mr. Robert Connell Clarke, I'll go with Moroccan plants as being sativa.