fancy-pants graphics and links abound, so I'm just giving the linkage...

http://poac.wordpress.com/2006/08/31/islam...true-appeasers/

If we are safe, but not free, then the ideals of our Constitution and all that has made us a beacon of hope for all oppressed peoples in the world has become a farce.

And right now, our Government fights and walls off immigrants. Even their Republican pundits wish to form a moratorium on immigration. Maybe their doin’ their good ‘ole song and dance; The Freudian slippage.

Liberal Huffington Post blogger RJ Eskow, challenged by some commentators to come up with a better term, suggests "Islamic conservatism."

Why not call the radical Islamist movement "conservative" – in the new meaning of the word? After all, they believe in the following:

1. Opponents are to be killed. No negotiation is permissible.
2. It's acceptable to plunder the resources of a country in pursuit of the Cause.
3. Slandering your opponent is preferable to competing in the marketplace of ideas.
4. War is always the first option, not the last.
5. "We" can't be questioned because we're doing God's will.
6. "We" know it's God's will, because we're doing it.
7. The sacred texts must be selectively read, removing all references to peace, justice, or tolerance.
8. Enemies can be anyone – even people from the same community – who disagree with you.
9. The electoral process is a waste of time. God has already spoken.
10. Only the fundamentalists have "true religion."
11. "We" can do or say anything we want to our enemies ...
12. ... but we treat our friends very, very well.




Just remember that just over the fence from these people sits the Zionist Evangelicals.
(this really needs more airplay before November)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/let...co_b_28415.html

In all fairness, that list isn't indicative of real conservatism. Neoconservatism, maybe, but not real conservatism. Islamic theocrats would be most appropriate, in my opinion.