Ted,

"The two (Hamas and AQ) are philosophically allied because they share the same ideological parent, the Moslem Brotherhood".

You are either confused or seiousley mislead. None of the three are related ann any Muslim or non-Muslim who examined political Islam cannot confuse the three. Muslim brotherhood is an anti-secular movement that strived during the time of Nasser in Egypt to combat secularism in Egypt, Syria and Iraq (Bathism is secular).

AlQaeda appeared as an immediate geographic movement to resist an obvious occupation (ie Soviet Union in Afghanistan) then emerged as an ideology and later targeted US, US interests and Dictatorships in the Middle East and Muslim countries.

HAMAS 's sole aim is the establishment of a Palestinian state although their and your defintion of borders is still a long way out.

Even though they come from the same, the three ideologies will end as follows: HAMAS ideology will end with a Palestinian state, AlQaeda ideology will end with democracy in the Middle East & Muslim world. Muslim Brotherhood will transform will remain in a secular democratic Middle East as the 'right wing' equivalent in Israel or Western countries.

Food for thoughts,

Morning, Ted: From "Hamas and AQ are in overt alliance" to "The two (Hamas & AQ) are philosophically allied." From the horse's mouth. Thank you. "The creation of a new Caliphate...includ[ing]...Spain and E Timor." The last time you mentioned Hamas/global caliphate/Hamas Charter it didn't compute. Can you supply a reference in the Hamas Charter to Hamas' alleged designs on Spain and E Timor? Also, can you explain how you managed to derive an "operational alliance" between Hamas and AQ from Gutkin's article which suggests no such thing? For example, "Mideast watchers warned against overstating the al-Qaida presence because the issue is easily manipulated for political ends. Israel has a lot to gain by portraying its local conflict with the Palestinians as part of the war on terror...said Israeli security analyst Dan Schueftan." Now, here you go again with that "overt alliance" nonsense, just when I thought we'd sorted it out. To save you time, choose between your authoritative (A) "Hamas and AQ are in overt alliance" or your speculative (B) " [It] seems like an overt alliance to me." (A) or (B) Ted?

Ted? Are you there? My unanswered questions await. Cheers

Ted
A few facts in your article would be welcome.
Locking people up for years without trial is supposed to have gone out with the Magna Carta. I guess that george has not read about that.
The definition of democracy certainly needs a rewrite.
It is a form of government found in a country whose declaration of indepdence and bill of rights were drafted and signed by slave owners.
The people who were governed under the laws then set about killing off most of the indiginous population.
When they finished them off then they moved on to the rest of the world in a series of wars such as the Spanish American war,Viet Nam and Iraq. These wars do have something in common in that they were all started on "faulty intelligence" (ie. lies).
Your article is part of the war on truth.