all three formed from affiliates of venerable nonviolent radical islamic organizations, hamas from the [muslim brotherhood] and the taliban from the jamiat-e-ulema-islam (jui) in pakistan, and hezbollah from the clerical culture of the shia holy cities in iraq and iran. all three movements arose in environments with weak local public good provision by government and responded by providing local public goods. each developed into extremely effective insurgent organizations which produced specific local public goods (security) using violence. all three received generous subsidies from abroad, whether for geopolitical reasons, out of ideology, or in return for services. younger members undergo some costly personal sacrifice in the case of the taliban and hamas (we know less about initiation of hezbollah fighters). all three groups changed their ideologies drastically: hamas in choosing armed conflict, the taliban in deciding to protect bin laden and hezbollah in shifting from a rebellion against israeli occupation to an ethnic militia/political party after israel's withdrawal from south lebanon in 2000. there are differences: hamas view most palestinians as potential members, as hezbollah regard lebanese shia, while the taliban treated most afghans as a conquered people. yet the common elements, and especially the common puzzles, seem to justify analysis in parallel.