"according to Israel Foreign Ministry -"
Come on now. if D* is going to provide background and useful info on groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, ... groups that are antagonistic vs. Israel, then we can't provide definitions presented by the Israel Foreign Ministry -- this stinks. Whatever you may think of Hezbollah, they are not only an armed group but a political/social and military group. With much sacrifice they managed to boot out the Israelis from their land.
As such, i urge a complete rewrite, with other sources, or otherwise might as well delete the current rendition of this definition/background.
PS: As far as I know, Lebanese newspapers use the term Hezbollah (not Hizbollah) -- if so, then i think this should be the main term for the definition.
--PaulR 04:41, 21 Jan 2005 (EST)
Having the statement of the Israeli foreign ministry doesn't necessarily invalidate the article, and it is noted that, yes, this ic oming from a source that one look would tell you is probably not impartial. Israel is a touchy subject, and one which has to be kind of dealt with kids gloves, so as not to come as either conspiracy nut bar sounding or a white wash of the event ala the mainstream media.
contributing to disinformation
But Sib; If there were other info on the page i would agree with yuo, but taht is all the info that is up!! If it were part of a mosaic of info i would understand it, not as the only reference. This was the same problem with (Hamas, PFLP, Sharansky...) I understand that D* is meant to counter disinformation... isn't using these hostile definitions/backgrounds etc. contributing to disinformation?
Kind rgds PaulR