Meriam-Webster to change pronunciation of 'nuclear' in new edition

[xray s]

Meriam-Webster today announced that the 2005 edition of their popular dictionaries will denote a new pronunciation for the word 'nuclear'.

"Henceforth, the accepted pronunciation will be "newk-you-ler", said R. W. Juhrkov, Head of Definitions and Pronunciations.

Mr. Juhrkov said the offices of Meriam-Webster have been deluged with e-mails complaining that the pronunciation of nuclear as "new-klee-er", as referenced in their dictionaries, was a blatant attempt to denigrate president George W Bush and give aid and comfort to terrorists worldwide.

The 2005 edition will include an apology to Mr. Bush.

:):):)

[kevinhnc]

1. Yet more evidence that Bush is sending this country backwards...nt

[Gothic Sponge]

2. Ha!

What about the other thousands of words he can't pronounce?

[blackcat77]

5. self-deleted reply to the wrong note

[HEyHEY]

3. This better not be true

Is it seriously? IF it is true I'm writing this week's editorial on it

[blackcat77]

6. The person responsible is "R. W. Juhrkov"

So what do YOU think? :)

[Merrick]

4. Merriam-Webster to Change Definition of Terrorist

Merriam-Webster to Change Definition of Terrorist

Webster-Merriam has announced that it will officially change its definition of the word ‘terrorist’ in order to better reflect the subtle changes that have been imparted upon its meaning by major media outlets and government officials in recent years.

The current definition, ‘anyone who systematically uses terror especially as a means of coercion’ will henceforth be replaced with ‘a person who is in disagreement with the principles endorsed by the United States of America or the policies it prescribes’.

A spokesperson for Webster-Merriam indicated that a primary factor involved in the decision to make the change was that the previous definition was ‘insidiously over-general’. Specifically, it was recognized that within the context of the current War on Terror, in which the United States is employing terrifying systematic violence to impose its agenda on whole nations in collaboration with oppressive monarchies and dictatorships, that such a definition might erroneously implicate them as a practitioners of terrorism, which is of course inherently impossible and could cause confusion.

The spokesperson explained, “We at Webster-Merriam apologize for any misunderstandings or anguish that our ambiguous older definition for the word ‘terrorism’ may have caused. We realize that many Americans have a strong emotional investment in the belief that their country is the pinnacle of civilization and can do no wrong, and that this vague, flawed definition wrongfully impugned that. We’re truly sorry. But we believe that with this newly amended entry, someone will merely need to identify whether an individual is in support or opposition of American interests to know whether he or she is a terrorist, and all Americans are categorically absolved of the stigma as long as they remain loyal to the policies of their government.”

http://www.newsmutiny.com/10/merriam.htm

[MasonJar]

7. This is satirical...please tell me that it is.