World News

Both are bad but for different reasons.

English education has one core problem: It focuses too much on vocabulary and grammar, and not enough on production. Your average Egyptian student should know a decent amount of vocabulary (until they forget it after their exams end anyway), but they have next to no idea how to create a natural sentence or actually write a passage or essay because while we do have essay writing on the exams (I think it was removed in favor of MCQ questions a few years ago, though) it's taught as a second thought or not at all. There's also a (heavily abridged) novel taught with every school year, but rather than treating it as a vehicle of language learning teachers (and exams) focus on the actual contents, so you end up with questions like "What was character X wearing in situation Y" that make just reading Q&A summaries a much more efficient way of tackling the exam than actually reading the novel. Also almost nobody does listening or speaking unless you're lucky or rich.

As for Arabic, it's a different situation but the outcome is similar. The Arabic curriculum in Egypt is massive. There are about 5 sections, each with a ton of content that you need to memorize because the exam focuses more on content than the skills you're supposed to learn. For example in reading you have 5 or so passages whose contents (including metaphors the author used, for example) you have to memorize and regurgitate in the exam. Grammar is a little better, but it also has some issues. There's also a story but like in English the focus is on the contents and for some reason it's abridged. Writing is, like in English, an afterthought that is barely given any care in the classroom. The end result is that the curriculum does little to give students the ability or desire to read or write Arabic literature. I'm pretty sure you could get Al-Mutanabbi to take the Egyptian Arabic exam and he'd fail unless he studies about the same amount as a normal Egyptian student because of the amount of fact memorization that's unrelated to actual mastery of Arabic. Edit: If it sounds like I'm salty that's because I am.

Another way of saying I do not have the information that the various countries have is not denial.

You can be a skeptic as much as you want. But, the funding countries aren't. The UN having already fired personnel aren't.

Yeah, or about Russia invading Ukraine! Wait.

If you look at documents at the time, intelligence agencies said there was a possibility he had WMDs, but there was no conclusive evidence nor assurances.

The Bush Administration lied to Congress and said we knew for sure they had them.

Edit: It's good to have healthy skepticism -- it hasn't escaped my notice that the majority of evidence behind this claim is coming from Israel. I don't think it's wise to deem it automatically false however, and pulling funding is premature. There should however be a serious internal investigation. And if they already have smoking guns, the UN should release them in the interest of transparency.

Apologies for starting out my comment as a bit of a jackass.

Random insult back atcha.