HOME/ARCHIVES http://www.kazooweb.com/textes/
Merci de choisir un ou plusieurs textes plutôt que d'imprimer la totalité... Les arbres vous sont reconnaissants...
********************************
J'attire votre attention vers certains textes touchant vos/nos métiers ou intérêts : (2) Hélicoptères AgustaWestland

********************************
Week 25, 2004
THE REGULARS: Summary
A) Song of the week: We're having a heatwave! [C'est la canicule !]
B) Le texte plus abordable de la semaine/Kidzworld: Father''s Day [C'est bientôt la fête des pères !]
C) CNN/Global Office: Formal warning for casual dressers [Un retour vers des tenues moins décontractées dans les bureaux.]
D) The New York Times/The Ethicist: Discreditable [Conseils sur l'éthique et la déontologie : Mon mari ne veut pas faire la promo de la carte de crédit du magasin où il travaille auprès de clients peu aisés. / Un ami profite du fait que je dirige une oeuvre de charité pour obtenir un certificat, dont il m'en a caché le véritable but.]
E) Slate/Dear Prudence: Checks, Please [Conseils sur la vie sentimentale et la vie tout court : Des connaissances ont fait un scandale au restaurant lorsque nous avons proposé de payer des additions individuelles. /J'ai l'air triste mais j'en ai marre qu'on le remarque. / Je suis jaloux de la nouvelle copine de mon récent ex. / Je crois que mon compagnon me trompe.]
F) Washington Post/Miss Manners: Information, Please [Conseils sur les bonnes manières : Comment se comporter au téléphone.]
G) WNYC/On the Media: Lies and the Lying Leaders Who Tell Them [Bush est un menteur. AUDIO : Vous pouvez écouter l'entretien en ligne.]

Ethel Merman - 1938
Marilyn Monroe - 1954

The Marilyn Monroe version from "There's No Business Like Show
Business" (1954):

Oh! We're having a heatwave, a tropical heatwave
The temperature's rising, it isn't surprising,
She certainly can can-can
She started a heatwave by letting her seat wave,
In such a way that the customers say
That she certainly can can-can

Gee,gee! Her anatomy makes the mercury rise to 93!
Having a heatwave, a tropical heatwave, the way that she moves,
That thermometer proves that she certainly can...
(What's your name honey? Pablo).Certainly can..
(Chico, Miguelito, Pablo, Chico, Miguelito)...oh, can-can.

Pablo, it's saying here in the weather report,
It's saying a fairly warm air is moving in from..(Where?) Jamaica
Moderately high air pressure will cover the NE and.. (where else?)
The Deep South. Small danger of (what?) Fruit frost!
Hot and humid nights can be expected.
Vincent 95, Guadeloupe 97, Santo Domingo 99. Pardon me? 105?
We're having a heatwave, a tropical heatwave,
The temperature's rising, it isn't surprising,
I certainly can can-can

I started this heatwave in such a way
That the customers say that I certainly can can-can
The man who need makes the mercury rise to 93
We're having a heatwave, a tropical, a tropical heatwave
The way that I move, that thermometer grooves
She certainly certainly certainly can
I certainly, certainly, certainly can can-can

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
B) Le texte plus abordable de la semaine/Kidzworld: Father's Day [C'est bientôt la fête des pères !]
http://www.kidzworld.com/site/p864.htm

Father's Day - In Honor of all Dads

Father's Day isn't just a day for dads to get more ties. It's celebrated on the third Sunday of June to honor dads, grandfathers, step-dads and all men who act as a father figure. Like most holidays that go way back, the origin is hard to trace but most people will agree that Sonora Dodd played a big part in starting the holiday.
A Little Father's Day History
Sonora Louise Smart Dodd first brought up the idea of a father's day in 1909. She wanted a special day to honor her father, William Smart. When Sonora's mother died in childbirth with her sixth child, William was left to raise the newborn and five other children by himself on a farm in Washington state. As an adult, Sonora realized how strong and unselfish her dad had been raising his kids as a single parent.

Sonora wanted Father's Day to be celebrated on the first Sunday in June, because it was close to her dad's birthday. Instead, the first Father's Day celebration took place on June 19, 1910 in Spokane, Washington. In 1966, President Lyndon Johnson made the third Sunday of June, Father's Day. It wasn't until 1972 that President Richard Nixon made Father's Day a national holiday - about 60 years after Mother's Day had been made a national holiday.

-*-*-*-
Favorite Sayings by Dads:
Go ask your mother!
Just wait until I get you home!
When I was your age....
My father used to tell me...
I used to walk to school in the snow!
Be home early.

^RETURN TO TOP^

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/06/07/go.casual.dress/index.html
Formal warning for casual dressers
By Nick Easen for CNN

(CNN) -- The trend towards informal workplace environments and the onset of warm weather in the northern hemisphere might encourage employees to dress for the beach rather than the office.

However, UK and Canadian businesses are rejecting casual dress codes and moving back towards more formal work attire, according to new research. Thirty-seven percent of British directors now require staff to wear formal outfits at all times -- an eight percent increase on last year.

"Many (companies) in fact believe that (employees) are less effective in their jobs when 'dressed down'," says Khalid Aziz of Aziz Corporation, the executive communications consultancy who conducted the survey. "As long as management provides clear guidance and shows a degree of flexibility in warmer conditions, office dress codes need not be a matter of dispute."

The poll of 100 company directors from predominantly blue chip companies found that casual dress is starting to fall out of favor. Only 31 percent of UK businesses now allow staff to dress casually at all times, down by 10 percent from 2000. Finance companies topped the poll, with 80 percent saying that staff should be formally dressed at all times, even when they are not meeting clients -- an increase of 38 percent on last year.

The survey also found that male directors look more favourably on short skirts; 37 percent said they were perfectly acceptable for work, compared with just 15 percent of female directors.

Cover up
Recently, a poll among 155 Canadian companies found that 84 percent of firms that have a casual outfit code said that they do not want employees to dress even less formally during the summer. According to Hewitt Associates, the human resources firm who conducted the survey, some employers are now tightening up office dress codes, as the boundaries are pushed further during the warmer months.

Casual dress codes were hailed as a new trend for the post dot.com era, and a way to reduce office inequality and shirk off stuffy office attitudes. To retain employees, some major firms that had always held traditional business-dress standards, adopted business-casual dress codes to meet with the changing times. Back in 1999 in a U.S. study by Ceridian Employer Services on "work perks," 82 percent of employees said that casual dress was the best perk employers could offer.

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
E) Slate/Dear Prudence: Checks, Please [Conseils sur la vie sentimentale et la vie tout court : Des connaissances ont fait un scandale au restaurant lorsque nous avons proposé de payer des additions individuelles. /J'ai l'air triste mais j'en ai marre qu'on le remarque. / Je suis jaloux de la nouvelle copine de mon récent ex. / Je crois que mon compagnon me trompe.]
http://slate.msn.com/id/2101279/
dear prudence: Checks, Please
Is it rude to ask for separate bills at a restaurant?
Posted Thursday, June 10, 2004, at 6:00 AM PT

Dear Prudence,
My husband and I were invited to meet some friends and acquaintances (including three gentlemen from New York City) at a downtown Memphis restaurant. Eight of us were seated when the New Yorkers called to let us know that they would be late and we should go ahead and eat. Our group asked the server for separate checks. As we were finishing our meals, the men joined us. We relaxed and conversed while they ate. One of the New Yorkers ordered two $50 bottles of wine during the meal for the three of them. He did not offer the wine to the rest of us, though we were not offended, having already eaten. The server arrived with one bill at the end of the meal. Several of us asked the waiter to separate the checks as we had previously requested. The New Yorker who had ordered the wine raised his voice, made a scene, and insulted all of us. He claimed that we were ignorant and petty to insist on separate checks. He said that we should just divide the bill evenly. We couldn't believe that he would insist that we pay for his $100 worth of wine—wine we did not order, and wine we did not taste. Our evening was ruined because of this man's outburst. He was so loud, the manager came to our table to see what was wrong. Finally we paid separate checks, but the evening was a bust. Are there different "rules" in New York than in Memphis? What would have been the proper thing to do?

—Southern Belle

Dear Suth,
First of all, y'all, there's nothin' wrong with Memphis manners. There are not different "rules" in New York from elsewhere, but the wino from New York is definitely a boor. The proper thing to do is what you did. Three guys who come late, polish off two bottles of wine, then expect other people—who were not even offered the wine—to pick up the bill are way off base. Forget it, forget them, and don't blame New York.

—Prudie, equitably

-*-*-*-*-
Dear Prudence,
Apparently my face seems to have a serious or sad demeanor. Not that I feel this way all the time, but I guess that's how it appears because men keep walking up to me saying things like, "Why are you so sad/serious?" So I say something like, "None of your business," or "I don't want to speak to you." People close to me say that I am being too blunt, but personally I think that they are rude and out of place. To me it's just a lame pickup line, and they just want one thing (most men do anyway). It's also insulting, and on my bad days, when I am really not in a good mood, it drives me close to cursing. If I were a man, I swear it would lead to a lot of fist fights. Am I wrong?

—Live and Let Live

Dear Liv,
You are not "wrong," exactly, but you sure are angry. There are clearly underlying feelings of discontent and distress manifesting themselves on your face. That you choose to interpret the concern of others as rude behavior or lame pickup lines validates, for Prudie, the dark cloud you are living under. (Some people might actually welcome the inquiry and, perhaps, the opportunity to vent a little.) You should bear in mind that most men do not select a girl who looks like she's on her way to a root canal as the ideal candidate to hit on. It is possible that you are antisocial, misanthropic, or in need of a good shrink. The crux of the matter is that the problem lies with you, not the people (men?) who are wondering why you look so sad or serious.

—Prudie, analytically

-*-*-*-*-
Dear Prudence,
My husband and I separated in early January after almost 25 years of marriage. I decided to move out and give him one year to get all of our finances together before we would contact a lawyer. We are civil to each other, but we have our moments. I just found out he has a girlfriend who is at least 10 years younger then he is, and I saw a picture of her, and she is beautiful. I haven't slept in days, and all I want to do is scratch her eyes out, and I don't even know why. I certainly don't want to get back with him, but just knowing that he is with someone else is driving me crazy. My question to you is: Why do I feel this way?

—Confused

Dear Con,
You feel this way because every woman who gets divorced feels this way. It is an irrational kind of jealousy that comes with the territory. It is not that we want them back; it's just that when we are through with them, the baby emotions wish for them to have no life at all ... because, of course, without us, how good could life be?! No woman wants to be bested, so of course we want the successor to look like Rosie O'Donnell. We would also like it if the new woman were not bright, charmless, and talked through her nose. Do try to calm yourself, my dear, knowing that what you're feeling is perfectly normal and will go away. A nice counterbalancing fantasy, for now, is that the younger beauty will soon find your castoff old and boring and will, in the meantime, wreak havoc with his credit cards.

—Prudie, mischievously

-*-*-*-*-
Dear Prudence,
I have been with my boyfriend for five years, and we have one child together. Recently he started acting strangely. First he tells me that at his new job his hours are 7 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Then all of a sudden the hours change, and he says they're going to be 5 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.—and he will be off on Fridays. He called me yesterday morning at 6:30 a.m. from his mom's house, but he leaves home every morning at 4 a.m. He refuses to let me see his check stub that has his hours and days worked on it. He constantly accuses ME of cheating and always has to know where I am. When I ask him if HE is cheating, he looks away and denies it. I know in my heart he is cheating. Is there any way that I can catch him without him knowing that I know?

—Miserable in the Southwest

Dear Miz,
Prudie is surprised your boyfriend hasn't told you he is whisked away, periodically, by UFOs. If you put together his "acting strangely" with the inaccessibility of his pay stubs and the allegedly changing schedule, what you get is a no-good bum who is doing exactly what you think he is doing. As for his accusing YOU of running around and needing to know where you are, this is an interesting combination of his projecting his behavior onto you and trying to put you on the defensive. Skip trying to "catch" him. Based on reason and deduction, you have already caught him. It will be good enough, for your purposes, to tell him that the jig is up and you are outta there. You don't need some floozy's address or a stakeout to show you the state of this relationship. At least you won't have to monkey around with a divorce, though of course he is legally obligated to pay child support.

—Prudie, rationally

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
F) Washington Post/Miss Manners: Information, Please [Conseils sur les bonnes manières : Comment se comporter au téléphone.]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19065-2004Jun5.html
Information, Please

By Judith Martin
Sunday, June 6, 2004; Page D02

"Isn't it shocking the way telephone manners have deteriorated?" Miss Manners is often asked.

How's that? Can't hear you. Someone here is shouting. Now someone else is complaining that this is too loud. Oh, she supposes they have. The truth is, however, that they were terrible from the very beginning.

Miss Manners would not dream of saying a word against dear Alexander Graham Bell or dear Thomas Edison, to whom we have such reason to be grateful. But they might have stuck to what they knew and refrained from trying to invent etiquette. You don't see Miss Manners messing around in their areas.

It was Mr. Bell who established the principle that people should drop whatever they are doing and attend immediately to whoever happens to be calling them on the telephone. Understandably, he was somewhat overexcited at the time. Not only had he invented the telephone, but he was in the middle of testing whether it could carry speech when he made a mess spilling battery acid.

It was enough to rattle anyone, but he should not have forgotten to say "please" when he called to his assistant, "Mr. Watson, come here. I want to see you!" And he should not have taken it for granted that anyone on the other end of a telephone has nothing better to do than to rush to its summons.

His later choice of the proper word with which to answer the telephone was also unfortunate. It was "Ahoy!" But the amendment proposed by Mr. Edison, "Hello," is not much better, although it is now familiar to us.

For one thing, it was probably a misspelling of the British "Halloo," which is considered fit to shout at hounds. More important, it contains no information. Two people who cannot see each other exchange hellos, without enlightening the caller about who has picked up the telephone or the person called about who is calling.

We have lumbered along with these manners from then on, even to the point of resenting and resisting the inventions that came along to solve the problems they created.

The answering machine, which solved the problem of having to be forever on-call, was deeply resented when it first appeared. The idea that people "screened their calls" was considered insulting, as if it had ever made sense not to have any choice about whom to talk to when.

Now the answering machine and voicemail are not only accepted but expected. The same people (Miss Manners suspects) who used to declare indignantly, "I won't talk to a machine!" are indignant if they don't encounter one. "Do they expect me to keep calling back?" they will ask. Or worse, "I don't want to talk to him, I just wanted to leave a message."

Yet the outrageous idea that no one should be out of reach continues to hound people who do not yet have cellular telephones, or, even more provocatively, have them but occasionally turn them off.

Meanwhile, caller identification systems have come along. These not only assist those called in knowing whether the call is one they need to take at the moment, but solve the "hello" problem on one side, at least, by indicating who has called.

This unnerves many callers, Miss Manners has been told. Used to the preliminaries of guessing, they resent being greeted by name. She suggests they get over it. Nobody is more devoted to tradition than she, but there are situations in which a tradition that was originally flawed should be replaced by a sensible one.

People should surely be able to know, before they commit themselves to chatting, who it is who wants to chat. Hello?

********************************
G) WNYC/On the Media: Lies and the Lying Leaders Who Tell Them [Bush est un menteur. AUDIO : Vous pouvez écouter l'entretien en ligne.]
http://www.wnyc.org/onthemedia/transcripts/transcripts_060404_lies.html
Lies and the Lying Leaders Who Tell Them

June 4, 2004

BROOKE GLADSTONE: Truth-squadding, the journalistic practice of vetting political ads for factual accuracy and context, has become quite common. And not for nothing. Political parties and consultants, under the innocent-sounding rubric of "opposition research," tirelessly mine opponents' voting records and public statements, among other sources, for opportunities to smear. The trick: to turn benign facts into toxic sludge. Here, an obscure rider to a 400 page bill on something else; there, a partial quote, lifted out of context to reverse its original meaning. The little truth squad boxes on page A28 or whatever, are newspapers' modest attempts to set the record straight, for all the good they've done. As this fledgling presidential race amply demonstrates, things have only gotten worse and worse, so last week, in an unusual display of display, the Washington Post took the truth squad from inside the paper to the front page, with an exhaustive look at the Bush-Kerry race so far.

BOB GARFIELD: It was a horrifying view, with one example after another of malignant distortion on both sides, although overwhelmingly by the Bush-Cheney campaign. The Post's headline: "From Bush, Unprecedented Negativity." Negativity? Well, yeah. The ads attack Kerry on the economy, on taxes, on the war on terrorism and so on. But negativity is hardly the point. [CLIP PLAYS]

NARRATOR: While wiretaps, subpoena powers and surveillances are routinely used against drug dealers and organized crime, Kerry would now repeal the Patriot Act's use of these tools against terrorists.

BOB GARFIELD: Quite an explosive charge, if it were true, which it isn't. Kerry has simply called for these tools to be subject, as in all criminal investigations, to judicial review. The Washington Post story harvested many such examples, including the president's claim that Kerry would raise the federal gasoline tax 50 cents per gallon. In fact, as the president well knows, though Kerry discussed such an increase in one newspaper quote ten years ago, he is against anything like it now. What do you call that kind of gross misrepresentation? Well, let's look in the dictionary, shall we? What is anything meant to deceive or give a wrong impression? Why, it's called a lie. You can soften it by calling it "misleading," or "stretching the truth," as the Post did, but it's still a lie. [CLIP PLAYS]

GEORGE W. BUSH: I'm George W. Bush, and I approve this message.

BOB GARFIELD: Which makes George W. Bush, the president of the United States, a liar. Oh, so is Kerry, of course, albeit less nakedly and less often. So why are we talking about negativity when the problem is honesty? When consumer advertisers behave this way, as KFC and Anheuser-Busch discovered only this week, they are hauled before the Federal Trade Commission and the federal courts. When the candidates to lead the free world do it, the headlines shrug. Where is the outrage? Credit the Washington Post for unburying the truth. Now it's time, at long last, to call a thing by its name. [THEME MUSIC UP AND UNDER]

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
1) Slate/Food: Eat a peach [Comment choisir les meilleurs fruits d'été ?]
http://slate.msn.com/id/2102005/
food: Eat a Peach
How do you choose the sweetest, ripest summer fruit?
By Jill Hunter Pellettieri
Updated Wednesday, June 9, 2004, at 11:58 AM PT

I am a highly insecure fruit shopper. When at the grocery store or market, I'm convinced that everyone around me knows something that I don't. I watch them tapping, shaking, smelling, squeezing, poking, and prodding the produce. They smugly bag their berries, heave their honeydew into the cart, and wheel their gems away. I inevitably feel dispirited, certain I am destined for their sloppy seconds. The melons mock me—is there sweet flesh beneath their opaque exteriors? The strawberries taunt me: I recently ate pale strawberries that were sweet as sugar and deep red strawberries that were tart and bitter. But then I realized that I could change. With some careful research and by talking to the right people, I could learn the secrets of the fruit sages.

As part of my quest, I enlisted the help of reference materials, mainly Aliza Green's recent book, The Field Guide to Produce: How To Identify, Select, and Prepare Virtually Every Fruit and Vegetable at the Market and Alice Waters' beautifully illustrated Chez Panisse: Fruit. Most helpful, however, was a very thorough lesson (who knew you were supposed to eat kumquats with the skin on?) from Vito Latilla, one of three brothers who owns and operates the Manhattan Fruit Exchange in New York's Chelsea Market. (The Manhattan Fruit Exchange provides fresh fruit to countless elite restaurants in New York City. I figured if it's good enough for them, it should be good enough for me. )

Some general tips to bear in mind:

1) First, familiarize yourself with the various fruits' peak seasons. (In this article, I'll look at summer fruits … for obvious reasons.) Our markets deceive us. Every year, growers bring fruit to the marketplace earlier and earlier, before it's truly in its prime. Desperate to bite a fleshy plum and feel the sticky nectar run down our chins, we buy the overpriced produce (thus reinforcing demand and contributing to the vicious cycle). But instead of tasting the sweetness of summer, we find the fruit hard, tart, or mealy.

2) Don't be afraid to sample, particularly when buying berries or other finger fruits—it's one of the most foolproof ways to gauge quality. (Germ-phobes may want to forgo this step.) As Latilla told me, "If they don't let you taste what you're buying, you don't want to be shopping there." Obviously you can't cut open a cantaloupe at the produce stand to taste a slice, but sneaking a blueberry or two should be just fine.

3) Ask for help. A personal lesson from someone who works in the produce department, or the knowledgeable old woman picking out watermelon next to you, can help you discern which melon in an intimidating mound will render the most satisfaction.

4) Beware the olfactory myth: Smelling fruit (all varieties, from cantaloupe to apricots) has long been thought of as a way of determining ripeness. It's not an entirely incorrect strategy, but it won't help much. Today's grocery stores keep fruit cold specifically to prevent ripening, and refrigeration staves off odor. Unless you're buying fruit from a farmer's market or at a roadside fruit stand, sniffing a melon will be an exercise in futility. If you're a convenience mart kind of guy or gal, stick to some of the more specific strategies below to help you choose your fruit.

Strawberries: When picking strawberries, avoid those with white shoulders,as well as those with limp green caps. For strawberries, unlike with blueberries, size makes no difference—both large and small can be juicy and delicious. If you're buying California strawberries, you'll want to look for bright, red berries. (Some Florida varieties can be less intense in color but still have a sweet taste.) Though available all year round, strawberries are at their peak in late May and June.

Raspberries: Raspberries, the most fragile of summer fruits, can spoil in just a matter of days. So the main things you'll want to look for are berries that are free from mold and those with a strong, firm shape (avoid any that lie limp like partially deflated balloons). Another tip: Look on the bottom of the carton for staining; this may indicate some overripe berries within. Raspberries are available all summer long and are harvested in two crops—the first sometime between May and July (depending on climate) and the second usually beginning in about mid-August.

Blackberries: Blackberries are slightly sturdier than their fraternal twins, because their core tends to stay intact in the picking process (raspberries leave their core at the cane, which contributes to their hollow frailty). When choosing blackberries, go for those that look firm and sturdy, and that are bright black in color. Taking a taste test to ensure that they're not too tart doesn't hurt, either. Blackberries are in season through the summer, and are generally at their peak in July and August.

Blueberries: The blueberry has lately become a celebrity fruit, lauded for its high levels of antioxidants (such as Vitamin C), as well as folate, magnesium, and fiber. When choosing blueberries look for those that are large and round with a deep blue-purple or blue-gray color; a reddish hue indicates they're not yet ripe. On the other end of the spectrum, overripe blueberries, like raspberries, will stain or dampen their carton. Perfectly ripe blueberries will have what produce aficionados call a "waxy bloom"—a frosty look that indicates a fine, tasty berry. These are most sublime in July (which is also known as National Blueberry Month).

Peaches and Nectarines: These members of the stone family (fruits with a single stone-type pit) are some of the easiest produce to choose well. Basically, you want a fruit that's firm but yields slightly to gentle pressure. As for color, just be sure to avoid any that are marked with green. You should also pass on fruit that's been over-handled or bruised; this is easy to spot: The fruit below the bruise will be loose and the skin may be broken. If you're shopping at an outdoor market, you'll be able to detect a sweet aroma emanated by these fruits. The season for nectarines and peaches varies slightly from climate to climate, but they are both ripe in summer months, with many peach varieties yielding full flavor in August. (Interesting tidbit: Nectarines and peaches differ by only one gene, according to Alice Waters—the gene that accounts for a peach's fuzz.)

Cherries: Most fruit can now be found at specialty markets all year round: Growers import fruit from around the world, depending on where the fruit is in season. But, according to Latilla, cherries (along with pomegranates, cranberries, and persimmons) are among the few truly seasonal fruits, available just one time a year. Cherries appear for a precious few months, generally from June to September. Seek out cherries that have fresh, green stems and are plump, firm, and free from spots, blemishes, and bruises.

Plums: The skin color of a plum can range from reddish to nearly black, so it's not advised to judge on the basis of hue alone. Instead, look for plums that, like other stone fruits, give gently to light pressure, and avoid those that are either too hard or too soft. The large variety of plums on the market today, from black plums to red plums to pluots (a hybrid of an apricot and a plum), makes this fruit season quite long—from June through October or so.

Cantaloupe: Cantaloupe, the most popular member of the melon family, is also one of the hardest fruits to choose well. You've likely seen people shaking, squeezing, weighing, and smelling them. A ripe, un-refrigerated cantaloupe will emit an earthy and sweet aroma, but unless you're fortunate enough to shop in an outdoor market, this isn't the best identifier. Though some fruit guides attest that a "heavy" melon equals a ripe melon, the lift test is not always ideal when confronted with a mountain of melons at a crowded market. Latilla says the most infallible tactic for choosing cantaloupe is to go for the one with a rosy glow. (Click here for an image: Notice the soft orange poking through the netted skin in the photo in the cantaloupe on the top; the cantaloupe on the bottom, lacking a certain je ne sais quoi, is not yet ready for consumption.) Latilla also notes that a cantaloupe should give ever so slightly to pressure on the blossom end (opposite the stem end). Cantaloupe is at its finest from June to September.

Honeydew: The honeydew is one of the most mysterious melons out there. Though the same rules generally apply as for cantaloupe (a sweet smell when unrefrigerated, a yield to gentle pressure on the blossom end), a honeydew's opaque rind and large size make it more difficult to distinguish the good from the bad. (You should probably resign yourself to some trial and error.) The honeydew's peak season is slightly later in the year than that of the cantaloupe— late July or August rather than June.

Watermelon: Here's a great trick for identifying ripe watermelon, courtesy of Latilla: The area where a watermelon has rested on the truck, or on the ground, or on the fruit stand, tends to flatten out and turn yellow. The wider the spread of this area, and the more intensely yellow the color, the sweeter and riper the watermelon. Though less foolproof (particularly if you're aural skills are subpar), you can also try knocking on the melon—a thud indicates the melon is ripe; a hollow sound indicates it's still got a way to go. Watermelons are in season from May through September.

Pineapple: Chances are your pineapple will be sweet regardless of how well you choose your fruit; pineapples do not continue to ripen after picking and are thus only for sale once fully ripe. You'll still want to double check for deep yellow color peeking through the pineapple rind. Ideally, this color will span the entire length of the fruit, spreading from the base of the pineapple up to the stem area. Many people pluck leaves from the stem, using the ease with which they come free as an indicator of ripeness, but this is a myth. You should, however, look for deep green leaves and avoid those pineapples with brown, dry leaves. The major pineapple growers in the United States are in Hawaii, and their peak season is from March to June.

Author's Note: These notes are general guidelines for choosing the best of the most common varieties of fruits found at a basic supermarket. Specific peak seasons (and even fruit-picking techniques) for countless more unique varieties, from the Casselman plum to the Summer Lady peach, which are found at specialty stores and at local markets, can vary greatly from what is listed here.

The author thanks Vito Latilla of the Manhattan Fruit Exchange for his time and produce wisdom.

Jill Hunter Pellettieri is a Slate assistant editor.

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
4) Traditional Values Coalition: Shrek 2 [Un groupe de droite chrétienne américaine met en garde contre la perversité du film Shrek 2.]

http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1659

Traditional Values Coalition

TVC Weekly News: Parents Beware: 'Shrek 2' Features Transgenderism And Crossdressing Themes

Summary: The DreamWorks' animated film, "Shrek 2," is billed as harmless entertainment but contains subtle sexual messages.

Parents who are thinking about taking their children to see "Shrek 2," may wish to consider the following: The movie features a male-to-female transgender (in transition) as an evil bartender. The character has five o'clock shadow, wears a dress and has female breasts. It is clear that he is a she-male. His voice is that of talk show host Larry King.

During a dance scene at the end of the movie, this transgendered man expresses sexual desire for Prince Charming, jumps on him, and both tumble to the floor.

In another scene in the movie, Shrek and Donkey need to be rescued from a dungeon where they are chained against the wall. The rescue is conducted by Pinocchio who is asked to lie so his nose will grow long enough for one of the smaller cartoon characters to use it as a bridge to reach Shrek and Donkey. Donkey encourages him to lie about something and suggests he lie about wearing women's underwear. When he denies wearing women's underwear, his nose begins to grow.

An earlier scene in the movie features a wolf dressed in grandma's clothing and reading a book when Prince Charming encounters him. Later, one of the characters refers to the wolf's gender confusion.

TVC's report, "A Gender Identity Disorder Goes Mainstream," explains the transgender agenda and the effort to deconstruct the biological reality of male and female. DreamWorks is helping in this effort by promoting cross dressing and transgenderism in this animated film.

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
7) Deutsche Welle: English at the Eurovision [L'omniprésence de l'anglais au concours de l'Eurovision.]

http://www.dw-world.de/english/0,3367,1441_A_1201637,00.html

English has become the pop music world's chosen language -- a fact that hasn't gone unnoticed by a majority of contestants in Europe's campy Eurovision Song Contest, which takes place on Saturday.

What do Sertab Erener from Turkey, Marie N from Latvia and Tanel Padar from Estonia have in common? They each won a Eurovision Song Contest over the past three years. They also all sang themselves to victory in English.

The last one to take home the Grand Prix d'Eurovision de la Chanson, as the competition was previously known, with a song in their native language was Israel's Dana International in 1998 with "Diva." Her successors all deserted their mother tongue.

That tradition is likely to be continued this year: In Istanbul, where the 2004 contest is taking place, only five out of 24 finalists will stick to their native language. It's not a surprising but rather a logical development, according to Eurovision expert Jan Feddersen.

"They all sing in English because they want to win," Feddersen, who writes for the Berlin daily tageszeitung, told DW-WORLD. Anyone looking for success has to cater to the audience -- and the audience considers songs in English to be young and hip.

However, the language of Shakespeare hasn't taken over everywhere on the continent. While Scandinavians don't mind communicating in English, people in Spain and Portugal still aren't quite as comfortable using ingles. And Turkey will probably long have joined the European Union by the time France decides to go anglais.

English with a personal touch

But singing in English is even controversial in countries that have had Anglophile entries in the past. While Turkey's Erener (photo) may have won with "Everywhere That I Can" last year, many of her countrymen didn't approve of dropping Turkish lyrics.

Just like in Turkey, people in other countries also worry that songs sung in English might speed along a loss of cultural identity. It's a fear not shared by Feddersen. While many of the Eurovision songs are sounding more and more alike and lack local flavor, he believes that each country has still managed to preserve its identity.

"Of course there are still differences, despite the common language," he said. "I think it's wrong to say that it all comes down to lyrics."

Kiddie-techno from the Balkans

Truly successful bands such as Scandinavian groups Roxette and The Cardigans managed to preserve a taste of their roots, Feddersen said. "Turkish entries still sound different most of the time. They are often more physical than Scandinavian songs."

Contestants from the Balkans are another case in point, according to the expert. "They're kind of kiddie-techno-like, with a little dancefloor thrown in."

Even Max (photo), who is representing Germany in Istanbul with a song called "Can't Wait Until Tonight," is typically German, albeit in a very modern way, Feddersen said.

Of shock-frozen Finns and hysterical Italians

Besides, a song contest dominated by English should be seen as a victory for international understanding rather than a loss of identity, the journalist said. Back in the multi-lingual days, a Finnish singer would sometimes raise eyebrows in Europe's south. "The Italians would go: 'Have they all been shock-frozen up there?'"

In turn, the Finns would see a bit of Italian dolce vita as somewhat hysterical. Now, Europeans are slowly coming to terms with the fact that there can be a bit of Greece in Germany and or a bit of Spain in Slovenia.

"English is the mode of transportation," Feddersen said. "It's making sure that Europe, and not the nation state, takes center stage at the contest."

^RETURN TO TOP^

THOUGH there have been serious fallings-out before, this weekend's commemoration of the D-Day landings of 1944 finds relations across the Atlantic at an unusually low ebb. George Bush and Tony Blair, visiting the Normandy beaches to remember the day when Allied troops swarmed ashore to rescue mainland Europe from Hitler, cannot but feel bitter towards the present leaders of France and Germany for their behaviour before and after last year's war in Iraq.

Whatever mistakes of tactics or judgment America and Britain may have made, Mr Bush and Mr Blair saw the liberation of Iraq from Saddam Hussein as an urgent and honourable cause. Rightly or wrongly, they believed the safety of the West itself was at stake. Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schröder did not agree. However, the French president and German chancellor did not merely withhold their support. They worked hard to obstruct what their allies were trying to do. This was a highly unusual departure from the unwritten rules. America did the same thing in reverse, when it forced France and Britain to stop their invasion of Egypt in 1956. But the habit of Europe since the second world war has been to defer to the senior partner. At most, as in Vietnam, the Europeans have abstained, not gone out of their way to thwart American designs.

Appeasers versus warmongers

Following Iraq, commentators have therefore been quick to pronounce the alliance dead. The crude version of the argument from over-excited Americans is that Europeans are happy to be saved by America when the knife is at their throat (remember Hitler, the cold war, the American-led rescue of Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo) but have blinded themselves to the new dangers of rogue states and Islamic terrorism, and can therefore not be relied on by America, which must save the world alone. The crude retort from some no less excitable Europeans is that an America unchecked by the Soviet Union and unhinged by September 11th has lost its bearings, thrown caution and international law to the winds, and is fuelling terrorism by seeming to pursue a crusade against Islam.

Both sides of this argument are unpersuasive. They imply a permanent divergence across the Atlantic on deep questions of how to keep the world safe. But Iraq was not like this. Unlike the invasion of Afghanistan, which Europe supported, it entailed a fine judgment about the balance of risks and outcomes. In some ways, it was a one-off, turning on whether Saddam should be allowed to defy an arms-control regime the UN Security Council had clamped uniquely on him, and on whom the burden of proof should lie. Besides, the war divided opinion within both continents, not just between them. Americans as a whole have seemed readier since September 11th to feel themselves at war, and to hit back accordingly. This separates them from many Europeans. But policies, politicians and intellectual fashions change. In November, America might elect a new president who, even if he will not say that the war was a mistake, is not likely to repeat such an exercise. For good or ill, the less than elegant outcome in Iraq may dampen America's appetite for military solutions in future.

However, the alliance-is-dead argument also comes in a rather more persuasive version. This holds that deep changes had begun to undermine the alliance long before Iraq.

The end of dependency
The second world war left America with a military, economic and moral pre-eminence that made it the natural leader of the free world. Its military power is still unsurpassed. But now Europe is rich too, and—more than two centuries after America's constitutional convention—inventing its own continent-wide system of power in the shape of the European Union. Mr Chirac wants the EU to be a counterweight to America. But even Europeans who do not share the Gaullist horror of a “unipolar” world think differently nowadays about the alliance. Free from the fear of Soviet invasion, they do not feel the same need of American protection, and so are less inclined to defer. Some Germans were ashamed when Mr Schröder found it electorally convenient in 2002 to denounce Mr Bush's “adventurism” in Iraq. Others greeted this as an overdue coming of age.

You do not save a partnership by glossing over such profound changes in interests and attitudes. The transatlantic alliance will probably never again be as strong as it was when the Red Army was poised to storm through the Fulda gap and NATO was poised to repel it. And although a new and common peril has arisen in the form of Osama bin Laden and his jihad against “Jews and Crusaders”, this is not likely to provide the same sort of transatlantic glue. The nature of the new threat is too amorphous, and governments hold too many differing views about the right ways to deal with it. In the meantime, having finished its half-century post-war task of making Europe “whole and free”, today's America has shifted its focus to threats farther afield. Having been let down by France and Germany in Iraq, it may prefer in future to form ad hoc alliances with other countries instead of turning instinctively, as in the past, to a Europe that spends too little on defence and seems allergic to using what little military force it has.

Absent the Soviet Union, an estrangement of this kind need not be fatal to world order. But it would still be a needless loss. When they act in unison, the rich democracies deploy overwhelming political and moral as well as military force. And there is much on which they should still co-operate: securing Afghanistan, sorting out Palestine, spreading democracy to the Arab world, persuading Iran not to build an atomic bomb. Some Americans think they can do all this alone; Iraq did after all show that France and Germany cannot prevent America from going to war if it wants to. But their opposition has made the post-war job in Iraq very much harder. And that is where to start mending relations. For all their pre-war differences, both sides have an interest now in making sure that Iraq enjoys peace and prosperity rather than degenerates into another terror-breeding failed state. The UN this week appointed an interim government for Iraq. What better moment to put aside the recriminations and work together for that?

^RETURN TO TOP^