Your talk back is the only decent one . This [ hateful] person is dead , and even Shulamit Aloni and Ury Avneri regarded her with disdain . But now that she died , the best thing is to forget her . But please stay decent and human , even with an enemy .

He is responsible for war crimes. He dosnt deserve the prayers he gets. This woman didnt harm anyone. Typical Zionist tacktic to go on tangents and not face the real issue. Their is a difference between this woman and sharon. He was the leader of the state she opposed he is a murderer. What has she done but critisize his and other Israeli leaders actions. How can you people justify your words.

could confirm she had a valuable scientific work in linguistic. Also, that she was a muslim soul trapped in a jew body. She is now in ALLAH paradise.

I knew you would respond this way. One persons hero is anothers bad guy. Sharon have fought for his country all his life while this woman have tried to destroy it all of her life. As for the accusation of Sharon beeing a war criminal and murderer i want you to prove this. I cant remember him beeing convicted of murder. And one more thing. There are a lot of leaders with more blood on their hand than Sharon. Let me just name one:Arafat.

Perhaps now she will be at peace with herself and no longer able to claw at Israel.

Did this woman kill anyone? NO. So where is your point. She used words sharon used bullets and bombs. Thier IS a difference. You are right their are people with more blood on their hands but that dosnt make sharon a good guy. Hitler had more blood on his hands than Stalin but you dont see people defending stalin. Israels policies in the occupied territories are illegal. Its settlements are illegal. It occupies 3 countries if she disagrees with this (like the rest of the world dose) and dosnt use violence to achieve her goals (unlike sharon) then i will side with her any day. Sharon was a hero to radical zionist but to the whole world he is a douch. Oh you might remember he was found to be responsible for the Sabra and Shatila Massacre by the Kahan Commision and was dismissed from his defense minister position. (today in democracies their is no such thing as going to jail for a war crime you just lose your job only to come back on Fox news or PM)

What da h... is wrong with us?

Reinhardt & Chomsky are two examples of what happens when weak minds tackle tough subjects. Theoretical Linguistics is about understanding of the components of language. Not how we communicate, but what language is, what's semantics, etc. There's a lot of ambiguity in comprehending linguistics both in practical and theoretical terms. People who either have problems with ambiguity or extend it to the rest of their lives, not just their field of expertise, run into trouble. R&C began to think that the ambiguity meant they could interpret history anyway they liked in order to support a specific cause. They took the ambiguity of some Arab/Muslim statements, ignored the clearly unambiguous language of jihad, and created a fantasy world of linguistically tortured and warped logic. They are great examples of how theory often does not bring itself to practice.

I studied it, Mr/Ms anonymous. I noticed that you, however, were incapable of defining it. All you can do is either, as a Muslim, foment jihad, or as a non-Muslim, wrap yourself in the cloak of dhimmitude and imagine you'll be protected.