I'm not the kind of person who enjoys using dictionary definitions as parts of my arguments, but when I hear people like U.N. second-in-command Malloch Brown say that Hezbollah is not a terrorist organization, I can't help but wonder if perhaps my idea of "terrorism" is incorrect or if people like Malloch Brown are simply off their rockers.

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, "terrorism" is a noun that means "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons." So far so good. Seems like it's right in line with my understanding of terrorism after all. And for good measure, apparently a "terrorist" is "One that engages in acts or an act of terrorism." Yep, it's confirmed. U.N. pinhead Brown is simply off his rocker.

Because, you see, when Hezbollah fires rockets into populated areas of northern Israel, they are, in fact, using "force or violence...against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments (in this case, Israel) for ideological or political reasons." What is Hezbollah's ideological or political reason? Why, the full and complete destruction of Israel of course, as outlined in their publicly stated goals.

So how can Mr. Brown have any doubt in his mind that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization? Doesn't he see Hezbollah firing rockets filled with ball bearings into populated Israeli areas? Didn't he notice when 241 U.S. marines died in Hezbollah's 1983 suicide bombing of their barracks in Beirut? Did he just fail to notice the hijacking of TWA Flight 847 in 1985?

Mr. Brown would probably say that those are all simply allegations, since Hezbollah was smart enough to deny their involvement. And if Osama bin Laden hadn't publicly taken credit for the 9/11 attacks, then he'd be apologizing for al Qaida too.

It's pretty obvious to anyone who isn't blinded by their anti-American and anti-Israeli agenda that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. Thing is, the U.N. and our European "allies" (Britain notwithstanding) aren't going to call them terrorists. I suppose we could continue trying to convince our good friends of the facts, but let's face it, they are committed to apologizing for terrorists.

All we can really do is accept the fact that the rest of the world is against us, that is, that they are with the people they claim aren't terrorists. The U.S., Israel, and Tony Blair (let's face it, he's pretty much the only pro-American voice in all of Britain) need to realize that consensus with terror apologists will not be in our best interest--our best interest being protecting our citizens from murderous thugs who fire rockets at civilian areas in order to terrorize them.

Diplomacy has increasingly become a masochistic exercise in futility. It makes no sense to ask America-hating apologists to help disarm an enemy they believe is no more malignant than the Democratic Party. Just ask Mr. Brown at the U.N. He'll be the first to tell you that Hezbollah is simply a political organization, nothing more.

Absolute rubbish.