joke statement about changing the english language?

Here is one version I received last week:

The new Euro-English

The European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby English will be the official language of the European Union rather than German, which was the other possibility.

As part of the negotiations, the British Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a 5- year phase-in plan that would become known as "Euro-English".

In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c".. Sertainly, this will make the sivil servants jump with joy.. The hard "c" will be dropped in favour of "k". This should klear up konfusion, and keyboards kan have one less letter.

There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced with "f".. This will make words like fotograf 20% shorter.

In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse 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 horibl mes of the silent "e" in the languag is disgrasful and it should go away.

By the 4th yer people wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" with "z" and "w" with "v".

During ze fifz yer, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vordskontaining "ou" and after ziz fifz yer, ve vil hav a reil sensi bl riten styl.

Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi TU understand ech oza. Ze drem of a united urop vil finali kum tru.

Und efter ze fifz yer, ve vil al be speking German like zey vunted in ze forst plas.

If zis mad you smil, pleas pas on to oza pepl.

Actually the joke your looking for came online in 1998 - 99. The version above is okay, but the original one is the best ever. The joke is about the coming together of the European Union and how the Germans would lose ground on their currency. In exchange for this loss the Germans wanted to implement some restrictions and changes before joining the European Union.

English To German Joke

For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/avlCU

There must have been a time, in prehistoric times, before language was invented, when most human mating took place by means of rape. The strongest, healthiest males would seek to impose their will on the most attractive females---especially the ones who put up resistance, for this was a sign that they hadn't been putting out for every Tom Caveman, Dick Caveman, and, well, Hairy Caveman that came along. Eventually, we evolved, and developed language, but shadows of the prehistoric mating dance remained. Fast-forward to the generation of our parents. The fittest guys still seek, and get, the best looking girls---especially the ones who put up resistance. Girls said no, and guys wanted them to, as long as he could overcome that resistance. Everybody understood that "no" really meant "yes". And a good time was had by all. Fast forward to our generation. Society, influenced by the feminist movement, has elevated "date rape" to the same criminal status as stranger-rape. With no room for error or misunderstanding, the burden of consent shifts directly onto male shoulders. ACTIVE consent is now required. For the woman to not have said "no" is no longer enough. She has to have said the word "yes", explicitly. But how many men become rapists during this transition to active consent? How many men have had sex with a woman without her uttering the word "yes" ? Doesn't matter if she married you. Doesn't matter if she initiated the sex. Doesn't matter if she experienced continuous multiple orgasms from start to finish. You still meet the definition of the new rapist. Please register as a sex offender immediately. And if she said "NO", then forget about it, even if you THINK she meant yes. What was once a running joke on the "G"-rated TV show Happy Days (her lips said "no, no", but her eyes said "yes, yes") is now laughable for a different reason: That anyone could possibly have ever believed that a woman would say "no" when she meant "yes". Now, fast-forward to the next generation. The idea that "no" could mean "yes" is ancient history. Passive consent isn't enough, either. The woman must actively say "yes". Preferably on video tape. But at least in writing. In triplicate. But as long as there is room for more rapists in prison, it's still not good enough. The feminists are still seeking greater victories: What if a woman said "yes", but meant "no"? Don't laugh. That IS the next logical step in the progression. The man-haters have not been called upon to explain why, if a man and woman are drinking, both get drunk, and consensual sex takes place, it's still rape. (And just so there's no misunderstanding, they didn't mutually rape each other. No. The drunk MAN raped the drunk WOMAN.) And the feminists have sent up yet another "yes means no" trial balloon. Susan Estrich, a law professor from a university in California, writes "viewing a 'yes' as a true consent is misguided... Many women who say yes to men they know, whether on dates or on the job, would say no if they could... Women's silence sometimes is the product not of passion and desire but of pressure and fear." Let's recap. In prehistoric times, when there was no "no", rape was the norm. Then, for a while, "no" meant "yes". Then "no" meant "no", and so did not saying anything. Then saying anything other than "yes" meant "no". Then saying "yes" sometimes meant "no". This evolution is no accident. It's an agenda. It's an anti-male agenda. Whereas the final goal is to completely neutralize men. Already, any woman can have any man arrested at any time, for any reason. The next step is to keep him in prison. And to do that, the feminists will stop at nothing short of insisting that "if we say it was rape, then it was rape." Life in prison. No need for a trial. THAT is the goal. And as men, it is now we who must say "NO".