The European commission has just announced an agreement that English will be the official language of European Community (EU) rather than German (the other possibility). As part of the negotiations, Her Majesty's Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement, and has accepted a 5-year phase-in of new rules that would apply to the language and reclassify it as EuroEnglish. The agreed plan is as follows:
In year 1, the soft 'c' would be replaced by 's'. Sertainly, this will make the sivil servants jump with joy. The hard 'c' will be replased by 'k'. This should klear up konfusion and keyboards kan now have one less letter. There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year when the troublesome 'ph' is replased by 'f'. This will reduse 'fotograf' by 20%. In the 3rd year, publik akseptance of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters, which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also al wil agre that the horible mes of the silent 'e's in the language is disgrasful, and they should eliminat them. By year 4, peopl wil be reseptiv to lingwistik korektions such as replasing 'th' with 'z' and 'w' with 'v' (saving mor keyboard spas). During ze fifz year, ze unesesary 'o' kan be dropd from vords kontaining 'ou' and similar changes vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters. After zis fifz year, ve vil hav a reli sensibil riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubls of difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi to understand ech ozer.
ZE DREM VIL FINALI KUM TRU!!!
Juan Cole, president of the U.S. Middle East Studies Association (MESA), described the Taheri article and its appearance first in Canada's Post as "typical of black psychological operations campaigns", particularly in its origin in an "out of the way newspaper that is then picked up by the mainstream press" - in this case, the Jerusalem Post and the New York Post. A former U.S. intelligence official described the article's relatively obscure provenance as a "real sign of (a) disinformation operation".
Is this the part of the article, reprinted above, that led you to the conclusion that the story did not come from the intelligence community?
If so, while saying it did, you read it and concluded that it said it didn't and therefore I, the guy who posted (not wrote) the article was lying.
Once again, I would just like to know what color the sky is on your world.
"A former U.S. intelligence official described the article's relatively obscure provenance as a "real sign of (a) disinformation operation".
You fell for that. HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
A real sign of of a disinformation campaign.. Or just the fact that it's the era of the internet and stuff like lexis nexis. I mean in the last few years how many times has the AP wire picked up a weekly world news article?
I can think of at least a couple.
There is no evidence it was from the intelligence community, it's merely one person's speculation. Could just as easily have been fabricated by some high-quality journalist aspiring to work at the times that felt they needed to brush up and making stories up.
True enough, but even if that were so, how would that make ME a liar?
Enough of the trolling already!
cathykocksucker
gee, the story didn't come from the intelligence community
that means someone else lied
like u