The Islamist Pyramid Scheme

Washington Times, July 10, 2012

Radical Muslims want to tear down Egypt’s pyramids and take over the world. The least the rest of us can do is take them seriously.

Islamist political victories in Egypt have invigorated the debate in certain circles over what to do with the country’s historical sites, or as the extremists call them, the symbols of pagan idolatry. The most pious Muslim theologians do not see the ancient statues, carvings and pyramids as important tourist destinations so much as affronts to their beliefs. Bahraini Sunni leader Abdal-Latif al-Mahmoud called on the Egyptians to “destroy the Pyramids and accomplish what [Egypt’s Muslim conqueror] Amr bin al-As could not.” Abdel Moneim Al-Shahat, a leading member of Egypt‘s radical Nour party, suggested that should the pyramids be too difficult to dismantle, structures that have stood for five millennia ought at least be covered in wax to hide them from view.

Others plan to bring this same degree of common sense and tolerance to the rest of the world. This week a group called the United Muslim Nations International released a 23-page pamphlet entitled “The Global Islamic Civilization: The Power of a Nation Revived” which outlines a plan for Islamic world domination. The group’s leader, Sheik Farook al-Mohammedi, writes in the plan that “Christianity should be destroyed and wiped from the face of the earth,” along with all faiths other than Islam. He maintains that “submission to Allah” will be the future of the “Islamic State of America” and “Eurabia” and other parts of the world not currently under the sway of Shariah. This type of grandiose vision is certainly nothing new in radical circles, as al Qaeda has been pursuing its global domination plan for years. Although Sheik Farook al-Mohammedi is a lesser-known extremist with a miniscule following who is unlikely to surmount the Caliph’s throne, he’s still dangerous. The best and the brightest likewise scoffed at misfits like Hitler, Lenin and Mao—until the secret police arrived.

{snip}

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Not bad, not bad at all. I have the same idea of Wash., D.C.

  • frank pucillo

    The Islamist are very Marxist in their thinking.Destroy the past so no one will see anything but Islam.At least the Christians did not destroy pagan beliefs.They just turned some old pagan customs into christmas and the Easter bunny.

    • well you make a flip response, but there’s a deep point there.  Catholicism is *not* about destroying all pagan systems.  It is about orienting the natural instinct of the good there, toward God, which is, therefore, toward reason.  St. Paul was quite unabashed in saying the truth was written in the human heart, even among nonbelievers.  Catholics have always honored the truth as it is contained in pagan forms.

    • Guest

      “At least the Christians did not destroy pagan beliefs”

      Sure they did. They waged a vicious culture war against paganism that went on for centuries, demolishing their shrines, destroying their books, banning their cults and institutions and public celebrations. This has been described in detail in a lot of different sources, the most famous being The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire by Gibbon. And while they were suppressing paganism, they were also busy suppressing each other. It’s a mind-boggling story.

      • JohnEngelman

        Without monks copying ancient Pagan manuscripts much of what we know about the pre Christian religion of the ancient Greeks and Romans would be lost. 

      • Well gee, why did they never dismantle the pyramids then?

        Besides, what had the pagan Romans done for centuries against their fellow Christian citizens?

        • Guest

          I don’t know what the early Christians thought about the pyramids, but they couldn’t have dismantled them even if they’d wanted to. Christians back then didn’t have tanks and high explosives.

          There were anti-pagan riots in Alexandria, though. Pagan worship and rituals were banned, their books burned, their temples destroyed or turned into churches, etc. etc. The Christian war against paganism was part of what I would call the secret history of the west. It’s not exactly a secret, but most people don’t know anything about it.

          As for the Romans, they didn’t trust the Christians for several different reasons and none of them had anything to do with religion. There’s a good book about this called “The Christians As The Romans Saw Them,” by Robert Louis Wilken.

          Religious intolerance was alien to paganism, which was centered around ritual practices rather than dogma. The fanatical, dogmatic intolerance of the early Christians was just as alien to the classical world as the intolerance of these radical Muslims is to us today.

          • Early Christians were an apocalyptic lot.  There is an outside chance that Nero was right about the genesis of the fires that burned Rome.

            This is why today’s Israeli officials get really nervous about visiting Christians.  Most are there just to take in the history, but they always have to be on the lookout for eschatologist fanatics getting tired of waiting for God and taking matters into their own hands.  

            That’s always the problem with anyone who believes any sort of millenarianism or ordo ab chaos ideology.  To wit:  Charles Manson.

          •  And so, when the Christians took power through honest combat (Battle of the Milvian Bridge), they began to look at the pagans likewise as a potential threat. I have not heard of any substantial violence by Christians against pagans within the Roman Empire prior to the ascension of Emperor-Saint Constantine I.

            Political violence was not an anomaly in Roman society: Roman Christians were still Roman, and so were raised in a culture where political mayhem and civil war were very often the norm.

          • Guest

            I’ve always found it hilarious that Constantine I was named a saint. Constantine was a pagan. He converted to Christianity for political reasons. When he dedicated the Arch of Constantine after his victory at the Milvian Bridge, sacrifices were made to Apollo, Diana, Hercules and other pagan gods. There are apparently no Christian symbols on the arch and the stories that Constantine’s troops had the emblem of the cross on their shields is apparently a myth.

            Constantine supported Christianity financially and passed the Edict of Milan which was a statement of universal tolerance allowing the free practice of all religions in the empire, but Constantine was primarily interested in maintaining stability.

            Political violence WAS common in Rome, but the Christian war against paganism was something different. It was primarily dogmatic, a war against opposing religious beliefs that the Christians considered heretical. (The pagan gods were considered to be demons, for instance). People have forgotten that the Christian dogma that everyone takes for granted today was the result of a long, vicious struggle not only against paganism, but against dozens of different versions of Christianity that existed back then.

          • Somehow I came back to this comment after many months. It is interesting.

            The Arch of Constantine, firstly, is not definitive of his person but rather reflects the discordant nature of Roman society at the time. Constantine was certainly a Christian. He is not a canonized as a Roman-Catholic saint (though he is canonized amongst Eastern-Orthodox churches). Still, canonization is not a necessity for one to be regarded as a saint (thus how the eternally-controversial Vlad III Dracula is regarded as such by many).

            I consider the sign before the battle at the Milvian Bridge to be an article of faith and thus a fact. As for factual evidence… well there is very little which remains for either side of the argument.

            “Constantine supported Christianity financially and passed the Edict of
            Milan which was a statement of universal tolerance allowing the free
            practice of all religions in the empire, but Constantine was primarily
            interested in maintaining stability.”

            His works were finished by the Emperor-Saint Theodosius, who definitively crushed the Neo-Platonists and solidified the future of Western Civilization.

            Every pagan encountered now is a lefty-feminist pisser, or a toolish “goth” who thinks he is seriously rebelling against society (I.E., his parents). Genuine pagan religion was dead even before Christianity. The only thing that pagans ever could save is the scented-candle industry.

          • Pelagian

            The modern mind can’t comprehend the way the ancients viewed “dogma” as you call it. They saw an intimate relationship between religious belief and public order. No emperor went slaying heretics for the fun of it. Tolerance was okay for a while, and when numbers were small. But, grown too large, the emperor or king knew the kingdom could not exist divided in belief. One belief had to be exterminated.

            It’s the same today, but the destructive effects of heresy are hidden in our social ills.

            “Political violence WAS common in Rome, but the Christian war against paganism was something different. It was primarily dogmatic, a war against opposing religious beliefs that the Christians considered heretical. “

  • loyalwhitebriton

    Islam isn’t going away, and neither will they back down and mind their own business.
    There will be war between imperialist Islam and the West.
    They know it, I know it, you know it.

    • “There will be war between imperialist Islam and the West.”

      I’m pretty sure that war is going on right now.

      •  Nobody told the West though.

  • IstvanIN

    If it offends Allah or Mohamed it must be destroyed.

    • loyalwhitebriton

      Yeah, isn’t it a bit strange; offend a pagan moon-god or a 7th century Arab paedophile and you must be destroyed?!

  • Pyramid envy?

  • Courtnée de l’Alabama

    An army of naked pagan European women, with swords,  scattering pork rinds should dispel these misguided Islamites pretty quickly. 

    •  Yeah, because they’d  become distracted getting their rape on…

  • I’m beginning to think that the only thing that can save us are the aliens.  ET, where are you?

  • IstvanIN

    We have photos, engineering drawings, movies, books, models, etc. of ancient Egypt.  The loss to the west wouldn’t be that great.  I mean, I wish Pennsylvannia Station in New York and Broad Street Station Philadelphia were still around, but life goes on.

  • Sherman_McCoy

    Yo!  We beez egyptians and dis be racis’! 

  • JohnEngelman

    Everything the left hates about the Bible Belt and the religious right is far more true of Islamic societies and Islam. 

    • robinbishop34

       Yeah, but like another commenter said a few days ago.. they fear a few good ole’ boys going on a fishing expedition more than they do an Islamist strapping plastic explosives to his chest.

  • I guess Zeus is a bigot. 

  •  Wrong. The Ottomans repeatedly had suppress insurrections by radical fundamentalist “reform” groups such as the Wahhabi sect. This is not a new story: the Wahhabi have repeatedly destroyed areas associated not only with paganism but even early Islam: at one point they planned to destroy the tomb of Mohammad himself, and blocked pilgrimage to Mecca for all but their supporters. The Ottomans finally put them down around the time of the Napoleonic Wars, but during WWI and with British support they reemerged and now predominate in Saudi Arabia.

    Ottoman Islam was not fundamentalist or strict in terms of internal characteristics. They enjoyed art and portraiture, and other things that made them feel like successors to the ancient Romans. And they often took a hard line against those who would have criticized their loose adherence to Islamic law.

    http://countrystudies.us/saudi-arabia/7.htm
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_early_Islamic_heritage_sites

  •  What is the difference, really, between a belief in a distant, unknowable god and non-god? The end result is the same… the attempt to create utopia here on Earth.

  • I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit… it’s the only way to be sure.

  • Dougie

    It doesn’t matter what this idiot wants, he’s irrelevant and always will be. The Egyptian people collectively don’t want to destroy one of their biggest sources of income, their own heritage and make themselves internationally despised.