Opinion

Dad defends cheating child

Cheating rule number one: if you’re going to do it, don’t get caught. Rule number two: when you do, don’t deny it and make yourself look worse, or make a big deal about your punishment. Accept the consequences of your actions, and move on.

Okay, so not the best advice someone can give, but nowadays, cheating is so common that it’s become the norm. Most of us have cheated at least once during our lifetime—there is no point trying to deny it or make excuses.

Rarely does anybody get caught, but when we do, we’re overwhelmed with feelings of guilt and shame, so much so that we don’t really try to fight a teacher’s or school’s punishment because we know it’s well-deserved.

Expectedly, our parents will ground us—take our phones away, give us the death glare—or worse, the cold shoulder and “I can’t believe I raised you” speech.

So when a parent sues a school district over taking action against a student who cheated, we can’t help but raise our eyebrows.

In Northern Carolina, a parent has decided to sue his son’s school district after the sophomore at Sequoia High School in Redwood City was caught cheating in an Honors English class. Consequently, the school took steps to kick the student out of the Honors English class; however, according to the San Mateo County Times, the student will be allowed to enter the school’s advanced International Baccalaureate program in the fall. Additionally, the cheating incident will not appear on his records when he applies to colleges.

Honestly, what more can this student want? Sure, he might not be able to list “Honors English” on his transcript to whatever university he wants to apply to, but at least the universities would not be aware of his immoral behavior. With the incident making national news, his father has only done him more harm than good by making the cheating a public matter.

The bottom line is, the student risked cheating and got caught. Nobody, not even those who cheat regularly, can expect to consciously act immorally and not expect to face the consequences of their actions.

The father of the student asks that his son be allowed to make up for the cheating by helping out a teacher after school rather than getting kicked out of the program, but if the courts and district agree, then they will only be condoning unacceptable behavior.

Students cheat, yes, but those in charge of upholding policies should not let us get away with it—we’ll only take advantage of the fact and cheat more.

The fact that a parent is willing to take this issue to court, when his son is so clearly to blame, only sheds light on the reason why so many young adults have a hard time growing up and facing the real world.

UCSD is kicking and screaming

In a country that was built on revolution, being rebellious and anti-authoritarian makes a person somewhat of a hero. But when law enforcement officials abuse their power, it gives people all the more reason to lose their trust in individuals who are supposed to be enforcing the law.

On April 20, 23-year-old UC San Diego student Michael Chong was arrested by the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) for suspected drug use. He was taken in during a house raid where agents, according to the LA Times, found guns, ammunition, thousands of ecstasy pills, and other drugs.

The agents were right to suspect that Chong and the eight other individuals at the raid were part of an ecstasy distribution operation; however, the question isn’t over Chong’s drug use, but the DEA’s treatment of Chong after he was arrested that has people up in arms over the entire incident.

After he was released, Chong told a San Diego TV station that the DEA held him in a cell for five days without food or water, leading him to drink his own urine to survive. According to Chong’s lawyer, Gene Iredale, the 23-year-old also suffered from hallucinations, and Chong described himself during those five days as being “completely insane.”

The DEA has since apologized and claimed that Chong being held up in the cell was a “complete accident.”

Excuse us if we don’t buy that sorry excuse.

Sure, accidents happen, but how life-threatening accidents by professionals at an agency notorious for its meticulous and selective hiring process happen is a wonder to us all.

Chong admitted to getting high and using methamphetamine, but his guilt did not call for such a brutal punishment. If Chong was using and selling illegal substances, there is no objection on our part that he be tried and punished appropriately, but by resorting to such tactics, the DEA made itself look bad while simultaneously making Chong a victim.

The DEA’s dedication to cleaning our streets of drugs is commendable, as are the many risks they take and the sacrifices they make while on the job. But incidents like the one with Chong turn a blind eye on all the good they have done. Police brutality is nothing new, but seeing somebody like Chong who is so close to our age and at a UC school where many of us plan to go makes the incident so much more real.

Though we are absolutely disgusted with how Chong was treated and condemn police brutality on any and every level, we don’t think now is the time to put oil to the fire and jump on the bandwagon attacking law enforcement. Sure, there are cops who abuse their power, like the DEA agents involved in Chong’s case, but there are bad seeds in any group of people.

Let’s not forget the good that often times overrides the bad and generalize all law enforcement as being corrupt and brutal. That’s just not the case. It feels good to rebel against authority, but keep in mind the thousands of officers and agents who died on the job standing up for the law and protecting the public.

Every tree has its rotten apple

By: Agnessa Kasumyan

I’m a sucker for sad but ultimately motivational stories. Give me a documentary about cruel child labor, orphans having to face this harsh world alone, or genocides taking place on the very same planet we’re on, and I’ll probably be bawling my eyes as shamelessly as somebody watching “Titanic” for the first time.

Cheesy, I know, but it keeps me sane and humble. When I realize how easy most of us have it here in the States in comparison to people from other countries, I don’t know whether I should feel thankful or guilty. I don’t mean to take away from the difficult conditions and circumstances that many Americans have to live with today, but in this land of opportunity, we have one thing that foreigners don’t, and that’s hope.

At least, that’s what I used to think until I realized that our opportunities and easily obtained pleasures oftentimes result in or stem from the disadvantage of others, i.e., people who work in factories for pennies a day only to be treated harshly and never guaranteed that they can feed their families.

You know that company with an apple that has a chunk bitten out of it as its logo? Apple is undeniably one of the most successful companies in history, with its spiffy iPods, genius iPads, smart iPhones and lofty Mac computers. The company, its machines, and the people who work behind the scenes are no doubt revolutionaries in the Age of Information and Technology, but who are our revolutionaries when it comes to simple, human decency?

I guess that’s the bitten off chunk of the famous Apple.

Do you own a pair of Nikes? You know, the shoe brand named after the Greek goddess of victory? Nike shoes may help you run faster and reach sporting victories, but let me tell you, there is nothing vitorious or godly (pun intended) in a company using child labor to manufacture their shoes.

On hot, summer days, don’t you just love quenching your thirst with a nice, cold can of Coca-Cola, your worries momentarily drowned in the gassy liquid? I did once, too, but the next time you indulge in the poison, just think about how Coca Cola, according to globalissues.org, intimidates its workers around the world, and hires paramilitaries to keep up the intimidation tactic and kill union activists who work against them.

Despite the success of many industrialized companies, they are not above using cheap and cruel labor in order to guarantee maximum profit. Companies like Nike, Coca Cola, and Apple may be successful when it comes to their net worth, but their exploitation of cheap, foreign labor and violation of basic human rights only takes the advancement of society several steps back.

Protests against Coca-Cola’s reign of terror have arose in several countries, including Colombia, El Salvador, India, Mexico, Guatemala, China, and Turkey. The company buys materials from companies in places like El Salvador that practice child labor, despite having claimed to be against this kind of cruelty. According to naturalmatters.net, most of the children work as harvesters, requiring them to use machetes and other dangerous tools.

Some children even have to carry herbicides on their backs, spraying cans with handheld nozzles thus exposing them to dangerous chemicals.

Shortly after a lawsuit was filed by union activist Adolfo de Jesus Munera against Coca-Cola and accepted by Colombia’s Constitutional Court, Munera was found dead.

Munera was a former employee for Coca-Cola and a Sinaltrainal food industry workers’ union activist, protesting against harsh working environments, cruel labor and intimidation techniques, and shockingly low pay.

According to counterpunch.org, prior to his death, seven union activists had been abducted, tortured and killed.

Maria Engqvist of counterpunch.org stated that after the attacks against union workers take place, Coca Cola employees are warned to quit unions if they belong to one.
In the 1990’s, Nike was placed under close scrutiny for its utilization of child labor in Cambodian and Pakistani factories. Vietnam Labor Watch, an activist group, claimed that Nike violated minimum wage and overtime laws.

Though Nike took several steps to extinguish the growing controversy over the issue, it maneuvered its way around certain laws so that the changes made did more for the company’s own interests rather than that of its employees’.

For example, Nike was pressured into paying its foreign workers more sufficient wages; however, stanford.edu states that though the company agreed to meet the local minimum wage laws, the problem was that foreign governments set minimum wages laws extremely low in order to attract foreign investors like Nike itself. Therefore, the “higher wage” Nike agreed to really made no difference at all in their so-called humanitarian efforts.

Likewise, Apple has been faced with allegations of labor abuse in Chinese factories that manufacture the company’s products, with reports of violation of minimum wages laws, forced overtime, and poor working conditions, as well as the use of child labor, emerging as early as 2007. Though it seemed that Apple took several steps to reform working conditions and investigate the allegations, the company’s reputation with sweatshops has yet to improve.

According to the New York Times, 1,237 workers at an Apple supplier in China were injured after they were forced to clean iPhone screens using a toxic chemical in 2010. Seven months later, two explosions at iPad factories killed four people and injured 77. To make matters worse, Apple had been warned of the hazardous conditions its employees were working in even before the events had taken place.

Though Apple’s actions are inexcusable, it would be unrealistic to hope or expect the company’s sales to be slighted. Were Apple to manufacture its products in the United States, production costs would be significantly more expensive.

The Atlantic Magazine states that the average worker in China makes $185 to $350 a week. The average blue-collar American makes around $800. Okay, so not exactly filthy, Carlos Slim rich, but definitely a lot better than what most people make in other parts of the globe.

Naturally, Apple would have to pay American workers more wages in order to accommodate minimum wage laws, whereas it can easily get away with underpaying employees abroad.

Additionally, according to Forbes Magazine, it costs Apple $10 to make an iPad 2 in China. If the same product were to be made in the U.S., it would cost $292.77, almost 30 times more than what it costs now.

But, hold your horses. Before we start pointing more fingers at Apple and corporations, let’s think about what this means for the consumer.

If it’s going to cost Apple 30 times more in manufacturing its products in the U.S., then it’s going to cost us, the consumers, more to buy them. A “Made in USA” iPad 2 would cost over $1,100, whereas the current “Made in China” ones cost less than $600.

Similarly, in a 1998 speech, co-founder and Chairman of Nike, Phillip Knight, said that if Nike were to manufacture its products in the U.S., prices for their products would skyrocket. At the time, a pair of Nikes cost somewhere between $70 and $75, but if they were made in the U.S., they would cost about a $100 more.

Are Americans willing to pay more for a U.S. product, if for nothing but patriotism?

Highly doubt it.

Are we more likely to pay the moral costs, or the material ones?

No doubt, the former wins.

When we’re at the store, contemplating over which item to buy, we’re obviously going to go for the cheapest product, regardless of patriotic duty or moral obligations.
So many of the products that give us pleasure and hydrate our thirst for luxury are a reflection of our apathy toward other individuals who suffer for our hedonistic benefit.

Sure, they get paid to do it, but with what they’re getting, they might as well not get paid at all.

Ever heard of the saying “excuses are like backsides—everyone’s got one and they all stink?” Yeah, well, this seems to apply to every single one of us. Most people are aware of the cruel conditions under which these products are made, yet we continue to use them, encouraging companies like Nike, Coca Cola, and Apple. I’m sure they figure that most of us forget about their actions after a while because their products are too good to resist. They can go on and continue with their harsh methods of gaining profits because in the long run, it seems like we really don’t care as long as our consumer impulses are satiated.

One person’s effort may seem not much, but it takes only a few people to make more people listen. The next time you go to buy a cell phone or upgrade an iPhone contract, ask if you can get a different phone, maybe even a downgrade. If they ask why, tell them you’re not too happy with Apple these days. Trust me; they’ll want to know why you don’t want their overpriced product.

Schools should close on April 24

We know the story. Turkey committed genocide, Armenians have been furious and grieving for almost a century, and every year, on April 24, they gather to protest.

The cold-blooded murder and crimes committed against over one million people should never be forgotten, no matter what century we are in.

The second most closely studied genocide after the Holocaust, the Armenian Genocide has been recognized and repeatedly acknowledged by the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS). The IAGS continues to assert that the atrocity took place and calls for Turkey to acknowledge the brutal actions against not only Armenians, but other Christian minorities that had fallen victim to the Ottoman Empire, including Pontian and Anatolian Greeks, as well as Assyrians.

Although the United States has yet to recognize the genocide, despite its repeated yet unfulfilled promises to do so, many Armenians take the day off from work or school on April 24 in order to honor their ancestors and give them proper commemoration, hoping that Turkey and the United States will finally acknowledge the atrocities committed against their people.

Glendale has the largest population of Armenians outside of Armenia itself, with about 30 percent making up the city’s population. With so many students absent from school due to the anniversary of the genocide, we can’t help but wonder why the district does not just give students the day off.

According to school board member and California State Assembly candidate Greg Krikorian, the district has contemplated the idea due to the large Armenian population, having already accommodated school calendars to work around Eastern Orthodox Christmas celebrations on January 6 and 7, during which many Armenians celebrate the holiday. He predicts that students should have the day off soon, as the district creates its master calendar every two years and only just completed the 2012-2013 years. The main “hurdle” that stands in the district’s way is that, under federal law, schools must be open for an “x number of days,” and once they organize the schedule to work around the Armenian Genocide anniversary, they will have to get the date approved by the teachers union.

Though we understand there are many students at the school not tied to the Armenian Genocide, a great majority of students are absent on that day, anyway.

In fact, by recognizing April 24 as Armenian Genocide Day, the district promotes cultural awareness among the diverse cultural groups in our schools. After all, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa dubbed April 15 “Mariah Carey Day” after the release of her album, E=MC², so why not dub April 24 as “Armenian Genocide Day?” It will no doubt bring more awareness to the issue and be another stepping stone in bringing the perpetrators of the genocide to justice.

LA Times faces moral conflict

Let’s be realistic. This is a cold, harsh and disgusting world. Seeing violent photos and videos of people being bombed and shot to death is nothing new. In fact, it’s become so normal, that no matter how bad the photos are, they never seem bad enough to hold our attention for long.

Starving children with swollen bellies? Sad. More soldiers dead because of an IED? Bummer. An entire village massacred? Oh, well, that’s life.

However, there is one set of photos that has taken the media world by storm.

In 2010, American soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division and several Afghani officers took photos of themselves with the body parts of suicide bombers who blew themselves up.

During times of war, nobody expects peace; however, we do expect those serving our country and representing what we stand for—freedom and justice—to carry themselves with dignity and respect. Taking photos with decapitated body parts is far from what we would call “respectable.”

Despite their despicable actions, it’s not the soldiers who are receiving criticism from the public, but the Los Angeles Times (LAT) for publishing the photos.

Though United States officials asked the LAT not to publish the photos for fear of retaliation against U.S. Soldiers, no official news embargo had been placed; therefore, nothing but a moral conscience could keep the newspaper from making the photos public.

We have to admit that by publishing the photos, the LAT made it seem as if it was choosing to exploit this opportunity for a catchy headline. After thinking about all of the consequences involved, including the possible retaliation against U.S. soldiers by the Taliban, we came to the conclusion that, as a news source, the Times was obligated to report something so mind-boggling.

These photos go against everything that we stand for as a country. True, nobody would have known had the LAT not published them, but is that really the course that we want journalism to take? For news sources to only report news stories that are “convenient?”

The LAT had every right to publish the photos. They decided to take the objective, not subjective, road, and we stand by their decision.

Although the body parts belonged to terrorists, it doesn’t justify the behavior of the soldiers involved. At the end of the day, we’re all human. There is no glory in war, whether or not we win.

We have no right to judge the men and women who serve our country and sacrifice so much for us to be able to live the comfortable lives we do, but what the soldiers did is pretty low, and is unacceptable.

Political comedy educates

By: An Uong

When walking through the exhibition hall that is mass media, on the right, there are scandalous photos of various celebrities on the downhill ride to the loss of their dignity.

To the left, there appears to be piles of adorable, fuzzy animals ready to be gawked at for hours. A bit further down is the nonsensical chatter of faceless online strangers.

A cobwebbed corner is specifically reserved for legitimate news, something many of America’s youth miss when wandering through a space saturated with popular culture.

One cannot miss, however, a growing stage dedicated to political comedy shows, namely Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show” and Stephen Colbert’s “The Colbert Report,” which are both hosted on Comedy Central.

Stewart and Colbert ingeniously satirize political happenings, usually with a searing hilarity that offends the more conservative population of viewers. After all, for as many people as there are who sincerely enjoy their political witticisms, there are just as many who wince at the borderline-crudeness with which they highlight the faults of society.

Government teacher Catherine Duggan supports “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report,” noting that the hosts are comics first, political pundits second. Duggan is known to share with her Government class notable clips from the shows to help the students understand certain political concepts. Unfortunately, there is strong opposition against using clips from these shows in classrooms.

Several months ago in Eureka, Illinois, high school teacher Rhett Felix was suspended for showing segments of “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report” to his Government class. He was fired based on claims that he was exposing students to material involving obscene and sexual references to Herman Cain’s affairs. In that case, perhaps Government teachers, whose roles involve helping students stay updated, should not assist students with that endeavor at all. The parents’ reactions are no surprise, given that the allegations came from a highly conservative town.

There is nothing objectionable with using these sources as a minor supplement to the curriculum. All of the scandal-affiliated information that Colbert and Stewart pick at are often already plastered across broadcast channels, newspapers, and websites. Besides, one could easily read about Bill Clinton’s sexual harassment charges and extramarital relations in our own American Anthem textbook. If others are worried about the bias in the shows, they must remember that comedy is only as serious as one makes it out to be.

“It doesn’t matter whether they are liberal or not,” Duggan said, “[They] stay on top of issues and talk about [topics] kids would be interested in, with a cool sense of irony.”

The convenient part about this characteristic is that the political information they present piques the interest of viewers, leading the audience to develop a desire for awareness. Even though most of the jokes are purely funny due to their clever delivery, to understand the depth of the commentary requires knowledge of current events.

The greatest benefit of political comedy shows would be that “they make politics fun” Richard Campbell (’13) said. Teenagers, who are fixated on school-affiliated duties, need for the material to be delivered cleverly, in an understandable manner.

When criticizing Political Action Committees (PACs), groups that raise money for the campaign that they support, Colbert and Stewart collaborated to emphasize the plentiful amount of loopholes that leave a big gaping hole for politicians to cheat through.

The hilarious skit involved a fantastical ritual in which the duo held hands to transfer leadership of Colbert’s “PAC” over to Stewart. Throughout the process, they kept mentioning that it would not be affiliated with Colbert, and that the unlimited amount of money donated would be used without bias. Of course, anyone who can register satire would understand that they were making it very clear how affiliated and biased PACs really are.

As insulting as some might find these late-night shows to be, they have drawn attention to political events that would otherwise be looked over by apathetic Americans.

With so much humor injected into these shows, many fear the trivialization of politics. Every faulty step, even if minute, is highlighted mercilessly, such as Herman Cain’s infamous “third-person” diction used when he defended himself against sexual assault claims. It was mocked by Colbert, and in all honesty, I laughed quite heartily at it.

These shows are outspoken about the flaws in our government, which makes many individuals fear negative repercussions. If one were being fed jokes about conservatives and the failures of our system, the logical assumption would be that the person would then develop a very biased perspective.

With extremely leftist commentary, given the rather interesting set of Republican candidates, and the immense power that these two men alone wield, it makes sense as to why some would feel threatened by their influence. Perhaps there would be a better balance if there were sincerely humorous right-wing comics, but as Duggan points out, “there aren’t any.”

Even though people have a tendency to be swayed one way or the other, it still remains an individual’s responsibility to develop his or her own views, without letting these shows dictate their political beliefs.

They are the shameless comedic voices of our cynical society, and that is why so many of us continually go to them for both updates and entertainment.

Playing the college game

By: Michael Yapujian

Standing ground for Trayvon

If a woman kills a man as she is about to be raped, one can say it’s justified murder. If someone kills a burglar that has a gun pointed to a child’s head, one can say that it’s also justified.

But what about a 17-year-old who is shot to death by the neighborhood watch captain, who’s walking from the drugstore to visit his father’s fiancé in a gated community?

There has been a lot of controversy surrounding the murder of Trayvon Martin, the Florida teenager killed by George Zimmerman.

The issue over his unexpected and seemingly unjust death has been escalated because Martin was black and wearing a hoodie, which many people say led Zimmerman to racially profile Martin as a hoodlum.

Zimmerman was never charged with Martin’s death, due to Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law which stipulates that if a person feels threatened, he can take action against someone before they are harmed.

This isn’t the Wild West. States should not have a law that easily gives criminals an excuse to kill.

Checking out the librarians

Libraries are as old and ancient as many civilizations, the world’s first dating back to 2600 BC. Similarly, librarians can be traced all the way back to ancient Sumer, where they were specifically trained to keep records and were referred to as “Masters of the Books” or “Keepers of the Tablets.”

Every library has a librarian, the two just come hand in hand. Nowadays, librarians, like the ones in ancient Sumer, are trained for their jobs. Not only do they have teaching credentials, but a credential called the Teacher Librarian Service Credential, which prepares individuals in coordinating libraries in compliance with district guidelines and supervising library programs.

So why, after having required librarians to get credentials in order to be fully prepared, is the district contemplating replacing them with regular desk clerks?

The answer is simple: lack of green paper.

The Glendale News Press states that though the decision is not final, the district is trying to organize a new design for school libraries, in which “low-level support staff” administers the facilities while being managed by an assistant principal. In turn, the current librarians at Hoover, Crescenta Valley, Glendale and Clark Magnet High Schools will be transferred to classrooms.

Although the proposed change will ease the strain on the district’s evanescent budget and allow school libraries to be open for longer hours after school, is replacing librarians with desk clerks really the best solution to keeping libraries open?

It may seem like all librarians do is check in and check out books while collecting fines, but it goes beyond pink collar, or bookkeeping, work. Lisa Parrish reads over many books to decide which are worth keeping and which she needs to toss out to make room for more reading material. Despite meager funding, she does her best to run the library, constantly applying for grants from various sources and writing up reports about the library’s functioning and financial concerns.

Wouldn’t you rather have somebody at the library who knows how to work the computers, has experience dealing with the government and private sectors for funding, and can guide you in the right direction when it comes to conducting research?

Libraries shouldn’t be put on the back burner when it comes to funding. If librarians need special credentials in order to do their job, there must be a reason. The more a person knows about the job and is trained in it, the more he can help.

We get rid of librarians now, what’s next? Libraries?

Take it easy on Mr. S

There are always those special people who can brighten your day up with a smile or their courteous hellos and goodbyes, leaving you to wonder why there couldn’t be more people like them in the world.

At our school, that one person can always be seen rushing about the halls for no apparent reason, always stopping to say hello and wishing you a great day or a great weekend before rushing off again, his twinkling blue eyes reminiscent of Santa Clause and his elbow pads always intact.

George Stasuc, popularly known as Mr. S, is probably one of the most loved substitutes ever. Ask alumni who graduated seven, eight years ago about this man, and even they will light up at the mention of the quirky man with the Eastern European accent and friendly disposition. Until now, they too always wonder and guess what the famous “S” stands for, as he always politely declined telling us.

His courteous and loved reputation along with his mysterious name is almost a living legend at the school, so when one behaviorally problematic and attention-seeking student claims that Mr. S pushed him, was it really fair for administration to consider firing him while keeping him on probation for three weeks?

Students and teacher alike were outraged at the possibility of his dismissal, both bodies starting petitions in order to fight for this beloved man. Honestly, since when have students cared about substitutes who have lost their jobs or even been fired? We’ve already seen a few long-term teachers who’ve been fired over the past few years, and none caused so much controversy and anger as the mere possibility that Mr. S might be taken from the school and his proud students.

According to two eye witnesses, about ten students from Bruce Galli’s freshman English class were stirring trouble and refusing to cooperate as Mr. S told them to settle down. As most of us have had Mr. S as a substitute, we know that his way of telling students to be quiet is polite, sometimes too much so for undeserving students. For heaven’s sake, the man holds out the seat for you to sit in, he doesn’t rattle or push you in.

The two eyewitnesses say that though Mr. S pushed a table over, the students were not in their seats and nobody had been physically touched. The student then pushed the table over again and Mr. S. called security to escort seven to 10 of the hooligans downstairs.

In all of our years at high school, we’ve had Mr. S as a sub too many times to keep track. In order for him to resort to calling security, a student must be way out of line, for he has always avoided stirring unnecessary trouble for students. Most of the time, students, even those who talk too much, goof around and are usually troublesome still like and respect him enough not give him a hard time.

Student and teacher petitioners all banded together to vouch for Mr. S’ character on the very first day that they heard of the ordeal, determined to let school officials know that they would not let Mr. S lose his job without a fight.

AP Spanish Literature teacher Martha Cooper says that she has used Mr. S as a sub “for years and years and years,” which is saying something because she is very choosy about which substitutes she lets into her classrooms, and the injustice of it all just “saddens” her.

Thankfully, Mr. S has his job back, but were it not for the efforts of the student and teacher bodies, there was a possibility that he might not have been able to return. Despite the administration’s familiarity with Mr. S, there is only so much they can do when it comes to a student claiming physical abuse.

Push comes to shove, if you want to make a difference in just one person’s life, make sure your voice is heard. It took one student, senior Dahn Kim, to unite all students and gather support for Mr. S in large numbers, but like American anthropologist Margaret Mead once advised, “never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens” can make a difference because “it’s the only thing that ever does,” whether it’s a sub who never fails to brighten up your day or a student who tries to stand up for him.

Why isn’t everybody acing the CAHSEE?

By: Josh Briggs

It’s the “most important test” you will take in high school—the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE). Every spring, thousands of sophomores across the state are required to take the CAHSEE, which is comprised of two sections: English-Language Arts and Mathematics. To some, the test is a breeze and somewhat of a joke, but to others it jeopardizes the likeliness of walking across the stage come June of their senior year.

According to the California Department of Education’s records, the school had a pass rate of 85 percent in English and 89 percent in math during the 2010-2011 school year. Although these scores are solid “B” grades, the CAHSEE has another category above just passing – proficient.

In order to pass the CAHSEE, students must score 350 on both the English and Math portions of the test. But to reach the level of proficient, students must score 380 on both sections.

Of the 85 percent passed in English, only 63 percent of the students reached proficiency. Math scores seem to be very similar, with only 65 percent proficiency. Why is it that so many people can pass without being proficient? And why is there still a 15 percent failure rate on a test perceived to be so simple?

I’d like to divide the group of failing students into two categories. One group of students consists of those who choose not to participate in the educational system. There is a small minority of students who just do not care about school and throw the test away, completing it without any real thought. This group will likely pass the test the next time it takes the CAHSEE, realizing that it’s required in order to graduate.

The second group of students are those that try, but do not exactly have the capability to pass. This group would include English Language Learners and students in Special Education. How can the state expect those who have been speaking English for less than a year to pass a comprehensive English exam?

Last year alone, only 61 percent of all English Language Learner students passed the English section of the exam and of those, only 25 percent were proficient. Their math scores were better with a 76 percent pass rate and 43 percent proficiency.

Special Education students are an entirely different situation. For starters, any accommodation they need (large print, extra time, etc.) is met. The ending result last year was an unfortunate 58 percent pass rate and 16 percent proficiency rate in English and a 44 percent pass rate and 20 percent proficiency in math.

Although it seems that certain ethnic and economic factors have an effect on the success of a student, the majority of the problem does not seem to be the students. I am in no way trying to make the excuse that students from particular backgrounds are at a disadvantage, but the content of the test itself is unfair to the students that take it. All students are on a different learning curve. It is not reasonable to have universal standards for all students across the state.

There are a large majority of factors that could also play into tests like this. A student could be a bad test taker, experiencing family problems, too tired to stay awake through the whole exam, or simply having a hard time focusing on the task at hand.

English teacher Deborah Fox says that “the CAHSEE is a test of cumulative knowledge,” so there is “nothing to worry about.” But, if you begin to lose focus, Fox advises you to “remember your reading strategies.”

When the test rolls around on March 13 and 14, there are a lot of easy ways that students can ensure that they do the best on this important test. Avoid those social networking sites that keep you up for hours on end, get plenty of sleep both nights so you are not struggling to get through all the problems, and be sure to eat a decent breakfast because no one has good mental functions on an empty stomach.

But the question still remains—how do we fix the problem of students who continue to fail? One solution could be to completely redraft the test. It should be administered more like the standardized tests by having certain difficulty levels for different students.

Another possibility would be simply to allow extensions to English Language Learners so they have at least a year of instruction before being forced to take the exam.

It just seems to be a fact of life that not everyone passes all the time. Not all hope should be lost though. In the last ten years, both English and math scores for the school have increased significantly.

With the help of the state, teachers and students can work towards reaching goals of higher pass and proficiency rates.

Do’s

- Eat a good breakfast

- Get a good night’s sleep

- Pace yourself; skip questions that are too hard and come back

Don’ts

- Don’t cheat off of others

- Don’t take the test lightly: it may be easy, but it is still important

- Don’t stress out over the test

War on Journalists

By: Agnessa Kasumyan

If you ever see a journalist, I urge you to turn and walk the other way. Walk slowly at first, just to confuse them, and then make a break for it—run far, far away and don’t you dare look back. These people are scum—they will get your number and harass you over and over again just for a single quote that may, in fact, give them headlines but ruin your reputation for years to come. If so much as a single word of what you say goes onto their blood-stained notepads, consider yourself done for.

For as long as I can remember, journalists have had a bad reputation. Even as a kid eating tater tots while my parents and relatives watched the news, I remembered hearing that journalists are biased, one-sided, money-hungry low-lives who contribute to the ultimate form of propaganda and brainwash through the media.

As I grew older, this stereotype lived on—not only among my own family, but my growing circle of friends and acquaintances. On TV and social networking sites, celebrities are constantly complaining that reporters and paparazzi stalk their every move, twist their words, and manipulate photos to make them look bad.

I won’t deny that paparazzi and entertainment “reporters” do this; however, let’s keep in mind that these people aren’t journalists, they’re entertainers. It’s like calling Reality TV stars thespians. Can you imagine comparing Meryl Streep to Snooki? It’s blasphemy, it just shouldn’t happen.

When a reporter like CNN’s Anderson Cooper pokes fun at certain celebrities, at least he does it in a classy way to show viewers that their often outrageous behavior isn’t acceptable and shouldn’t be considered part of the norm. It’s not like he dedicates his entire program to bashing Snooki’s book, “A Shore Thing,” about hard-partying ways.

It’s definitely “a shore thing” that every profession has the few bad seeds that ruin it for the rest. If one actress makes a sex tape and posts nude pictures online, does that make all actresses foolish and sleazy? If a few cops work with drug dealers to make some extra cash, does that make all cops corrupt?

Don’t get me wrong, journalists aren’t perfect. As a young journalist myself, I’ve had moments where I’ve wanted to shove pie in my face like several people did to Rupert Murdoch, a media mogul who founded News Corporation, one of America’s largest media conglomerates, while he was on trial for several of his newspaper outlets, most notably “News of the World,” hacking the phones of public citizens and celebrities alike.

To say that the News of the World scandal is one of the most embarrassing in journalism history would be an understatement. At first, it was believed that celebrities and royalty in the United Kingdom were the only victims of the phone-hacking scandal; however, according to “The Guardian,” a national daily newspaper in Britain, it was later revealed that Milly Dowler, an English girl who was abducted and killed at the age of 13 back in 2002, was victimized, yet again when News of the World reporters hacked her voicemail while she was still reported to be missing.

As if this wasn’t bad enough, the Guardian states that the “journalists”—as much as it pains me to call them that—deleted some of her messages, which could have served as evidence in her case, to make room for more messages on her voicemail as it was already full.

With News Corporation’s headquarters in New York, they also hacked into the voicemails of several 9/11 victims.

Murdoch’s minions represent the worst of journalists. This phone-hacking scandal took the media world by storm, further contributing to the bad reputation that journalists receive.

But let’s not forget the journalists who have worked tirelessly to bring the public hard-nosed facts that sometimes result in changing history.

During the infamous Watergate Scandal, it was Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein that revealed the involvement of Richard Nixon’s administration in the scandal through extensive investigative research and Deep Throat, their secret informant. Their journalistic efforts actually contributed to the downfall of the former president.

Love defines marriage

Love is said to have no boundaries. It does not discriminate with age, race, or even social status, but what about gender?

In the battle of legalizing gay marriage, or worded in a more fitting way, the equalization of marriage, a United States Court of Appeals in San Francisco found that Prop. 8 violated the civil liberties of same-sex couples.

Prop. 8 was a voter passed legislation in 2008 that banned the marriage of same-sex couples, which quickly led to appeals all over the state.

How is the marriage between two men or two women wrong? Twenty states, including California, allow first cousins to marry each other, when we have been enlightened with inbreeding and other biological risks of marrying close to your kin. What will a happy, same-sex couple do to harm you?

One can argue that “gay” marriage is immoral as per their religious belief, but most if not all religious beliefs advocate one to be good to one’s neighbor. Hate has and always will be a sin and the spite expressed by many “religious” people constitutes hate.

Although the Court of Appeals found it unconstitutional to ban same-sex marriage, marriage ceremonies won’t begin until the Supreme Court decides on whether they are going to take on the matter. (And by the looks of the situation with the backlog in the Supreme Court, this won’t be until next year.)
Straight. Gay. Black. White. We’re all people. We all deserve happiness and it is downright wrong to say that two people who love each other cannot marry one another just because they are of the same gender.

CV Suicide Opens Eyes

Life is short and beautiful, not in the rainbows, sunshine and unicorns “kumbaya” kind of way, but with a sense of chiaroscuro, a brilliant fusion of light and dark.

Unfortunately, some of us lean more toward that darker side where it’s difficult to see clearly.

On Feb. 10, 15-year old Drew Ferraro from Crescenta Valley High School committed suicide. Administrators and students alike had to witness the ordeal as it unfolded before them. Within seconds, he was gone forever.

In recent years, there has been an increase in teens and adolescents who have put an end to their own lives. According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, suicide is the third leading cause of death among people within the 15- to 24-year-old age group, usually due to bullying, drug abuse, depression, and personal problems.

In a survey taken by The National Violence Youth Prevention Program, it was discovered that in the past year, one in five teens contemplated suicide, one in six planned it, and more than one in 12 actually made an attempt. Almost half of teens who succeed in killing themselves have attempted to before.

Suicide is a cry for help.When someone takes his own life, people need to realize that he has reached a hopeless state.

People react differently to suicides: pity over lost years, anger over a selfish decision, or sympathy.

This world is definitely not a place overloaded with rainbows, but teens shouldn’t have to think about killing themselves and they certainly shouldn’t have to see somebody commit the act. Too many people put an end to their lives when it has the potential to be so much better, Ferraro being one of them.

However, he was a young adult with a future full of possibilities. He was a student with teachers and friends. He was a child with parents and a family.

Not only is he gone, but those who loved him most are forever scarred with his absence, forever haunted by the thought that maybe they could have done something to help before Ferrero shouted out his last cry for help.

Maybe his suicide was his desperate attempt to bring attention to himself and the misery that led him to such an act. Maybe he made it public for people to know that he was hurting and perhaps for those who saw him to never forget that he was once alive. Maybe it was his way of making his mark on the world.

His parents blame his suicide on bullying, and since his death have taken an anti-bullying stance.

At his memorial service, they handed out cards with Ferraro’s picture and information for suicide prevention to inspire others to live, and for that, we respect them.

Ferraro shouldn’t have died, but let his death not have been in vain.

Let Ferrero be a beacon of hope for those who contemplate suicide and a reminder for bullies that sticks and stones can break bones, and that words can kill.

French accept Armenian Genocide

Imagine somebody you loved was brutally killed after being tortured for hours, days, maybe even weeks and months. You know this for a fact, but police refused to do anything about it because it required too much work to deal with all the investigation that would take place, or because the killer was a very powerful, very influential individual that nobody wanted to risk crossing. No matter how calm or peaceful of a person you may be, you wouldn’t be able to help but feel gut-wrenching anger as to how such a blatant injustice is possible.

For years, the Armenian community has been fighting for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide that resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1.5 million people by the order of the Ottoman Empire. Every year, on Apr. 24, Armenian youth and elderly alike gather to protest in front of the Turkish Embassy in Hollywood. Though the United States and several other countries have declined to officially accept that massacre ever took place, it seems that years of loud and dedicated protest have finally resulted in a major leap toward the universal acceptance of the genocide.

Last Monday, France approved a bill that criminalizes the denial of any recognized genocide, including the Armenian Genocide. If France’s president, Nicolas Sarkozy, officially makes the bill part of French law, those who deny recognized genocides will have to pay a fine close to $58,000 or even face up to a year in prison.

These measures may seem drastic, but do not even begin to equate to the millions of lives lost to genocides all over the world. What we like in particular about this bill is that it not only bans the denial of the Armenian Genocide, but of any genocide that has taken place.

The acceptance of the mass killings of Armenians in particular has infuriated Turkey, who has been denying that such acts occurred for close to a century.

According to Scott Sayare and Sebnem Arsu of the New York Times, Turkey has pulled its diplomats out of France, refused military cooperation, and suspended mutual agreements between the two countries in response—more like retaliation—to the bill.

Still, French politicians persisted and for that we have to applaud them. They not only risked very poor relations with a very important Middle Eastern ally, but will have to deal with 400,000 angry citizens that are of Turkish descent.

One country accepting the genocide may not seem like much of a big deal, but after working so hard to make the unjust affair known worldwide, it gives Armenians—and those still suffering from genocide in different parts of the world—hope that such brutal acts will not be tolerated in the future, that voicing our opinions in the face of scrutiny and what may seem like a dead end will be worth the time effort if weif we remain ardently persistent.

The websites strike back

There’s nothing more endearing than seeing our fellow peers, who were once indifferent towards politics, suddenly jump at the opportunity to swat down the two pesky flies otherwise known as the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA). These two proposed laws would have directly affected the youth of our generation by making navigating the Internet a wearying experience. Essentially, anything could be deemed as copyright infringement, resulting in a floor filled with sharp shards of egg shells.

Even if that is the only reason behind why Internet users reacted violently, the force created by massive waves of people prevailed, and rightfully so. On Jan. 18, when Wikipedia shut down its English domain and Google blacked out its logo, the commotion was prevalent throughout the Internet community.

Over the span of three climactic days, it became prevalent how unpleased the online community was. Each site that staged a protest asked individuals to sign a petition against the unsettling laws. Keep in mind, this was only what came from those who could not do anything more direct to prevent the passing of the bills.

Naturally, 7 million signatures did not stop the federal government from giving its last, mocking jab. Following the online protests, the FBI readily shut down the file-sharing and video-streaming websites Megaupload and Megavideo, respectively.

At this point, the more potent attacks against the bills were launched. Anonymous, an activist group that was created, as some would say, “by the people, for the people,” allegedly broke into, and shut off, several of the government’s, as well as the media’s, prized websites.

By Jan. 20, the day after Anonymous performed its string of hacks, SOPA and PIPA were immediately dropped by Congress, for the time being.

One cannot stand at the face of what the recent protests have accomplished and say that there is no hope for humankind, even if sometimes that becomes increasingly debatable. As the remnants of SOPA and PIPA are being salvaged by its momentarily discouraged supporters, there is now more need than ever for common residents to maintain a healthy level of awareness. With the activist attitudes that prominent websites have, it must be emphasized that, no matter how influential they are, they would be nothing without the support and endorsement of their users.

Walking the tightrope that separates illegal activity and free speech is tricky, but SOPA and PIPA would have taken the entire ordeal much too far by stripping the simple acts of sharing art and culture of their very purposes. No one can deny that pirating a film is illegal, but everyone can agree that performing a cover of a song does harm to no one, especially not to the artists who wade knee-deep through piles of money on a daily basis.

In the light of all that has been done to capture the government’s attention, and warn it of the people’s capabilities, we are not encouraging you to run outside head-first with flaming torches, but please, do be aware of, and participate in, this society. No one can sleep peacefully yet, since SOPA and PIPA are simply lying dormant until they return with more gusto.

Community College or University, Choosing a Path to the Future

Community College

By: Jeannie Mai

Freshman year: get to know what high school is all about, get the feel of it.

Sophomore year: start taking honors and Advanced Placement (AP) classes, look into the PSAT and so forth.

Junior year: start freaking out about colleges and taking all the SAT classes available, along with stacking up AP classes and doing community service hours on weekends.

Senior year: apply to dream colleges and “patiently” wait for the acceptance (and/or rejection) letters.

When you start off high school, everything is easy and you think that getting accepted to your dream college is just going to be a walk in the park.

By the time you reach junior year, you start to realize things have definitely changed. My first few years of high school, I didn’t even think of applying to a community college (CC) because I figured I would never need to. Unfortunately, people have this mistaken impression that a CC is for people who failed their classes in high school.

I admit, during my earlier years in high school, I was one of these ignorant individuals. It appears that working hard in high school does not always lead to getting into the best universities.

Now that I’m more realistic about my options, I realize that community college is actually a better option in some cases.

For example, if you are a weak test taker, your grades may not reflect your intelligence, thus leading you to a lower GPA than others in your graduating class.

Unfortunately, since the economy is so bad, many more students are applying to colleges in hopes of getting jobs afterwards, meaning the competition to actually get into that certain school has escalated. Thankfully, if you mess up in high school and don’t get those perfect A’s your mother always wanted, you always have a second chance at a community college where you can take the classes you’d like and ace them the second time around. Think of it as a safety net for all the mistakes you made in high school. How often do you get second chances in life?

One of the biggest factors is money. For example, according to admissions.ucla.edu, if you were to go to UCLA and dorm your first year, you would pay $31,544 for the year. According to the College Board, if you were to go to a private university, say, Cornell University in New York, you’d be paying $41,541 per year.

Do the simple math: after four years, you will owe the bank more than $120,000. However, if you were to go to the local community college, you’d be paying roughly $1,135, living at home. And who wants to start their life out of college $120,000 in debt anyway?

If money is tight at home, then clearly community college is a better choice. If you spend your first two to three years at a community college and then transfer to a highly impressive school, you’ll be saving yourself and your parents a lot of money and be doing yourself a huge favor.

UCs and private universities are not easy—especially not the first two years when you’re settling into college. Community colleges are good for getting a solid GPA and then going to a college of your choice, to take classes on what you’re interested in majoring in. Where is the good in going to a school that’s well-known for its science department, if for the first two years you’re struggling to pass your general education classes?

Even if you go to Glendale Community College, as long as you work hard, you’re not going to be stuck there forever. I’m aware of how bad our economy is, and because of that, you may be there longer than the two years planned. It’s true that the classes fill up more quickly and you may have to wait a bit, but if you do well in your classes, you always have the option to transfer to a university afterwards.

If the “college experience” is what you’re worried about missing out on, just remember that college is what you make of it. In fact, this is applicable to any situation, not just college. College isn’t always what it looks like in the movies, and if you really want to have fun in college, you should find a way to do so, even at a CC.

Take my advice and try not to fret over colleges. Even if you don’t get into your dream school, don’t lose hope. A CC will always be there to catch you if you fall, and it’ll save you thousands of dollars.

University

By: Ani Hakobyan

The decision to go to college is a big one. Yet the real question is where? Most students have an idea of where they would like to get a higher education.

Some say UCLA, others say Cal State Long Beach. Wherever they might choose to go, they must first decide whether or not to go directly to a four-year university or to a community college first.

As a sophomore, I already know exactly what I want to do with my life, and none of my plans include going to a community college. It’s not that I have a certain pedigree that prevents me from doing so; it’s just that I have dreamed of decorating my dorm room and pulling all-nighters in the library as long as I can remember. Nothing would make me happier than carrying an armload of books and learning from distinguished professors. You could also do that in a community college; of course, it just wouldn’t be the same.

Besides running around campus with a stack of books in my arms, I just want to attend a university at a different location other than the Southern California area. What could be more amazing than having the liberty of moving to a new city, if not a new state, and start over fresh? Instead of being the same shy girl that you once were in high school, you could be outgoing and opinionated.

Going to a community college is a big mistake. Yes, it is understandable that during these tough economic times, you and your parents want to save some money. But can your happiness really be bought? Don’t you wish to go to Stanford and have huge pep rallies and meet new people from other parts of the world? I really doubt that you are going to go to another state for community college. At least no one in her right mind would travel to New York to attend LaGuardia Community College since it would probably cost more than going to the UC Berkeley.

There is also the problem of time. Community college students take longer to finish their general education because “there are more unqualified people there,” according to Selin Khachomian (’08), who is currently a student at Glendale Community College. “Because of this, it’s harder to get classes, which takes longer to finish.”

Another fact that’s rarely mentioned is that some credits are not transferable. In fact, the classes will be filled with people from broad age groups, with various ideas of qualified education. What is the point of your hard work if you cannot reward yourself by going to a university and enjoying the fact that you finally achieved your dream?

According to nationalreview.com, federal, state, and local governments spent nearly “$4 billion on full-time community college students who dropped out after their first year” from 2004-2009. This figure is not surprising, considering that most students attending these community colleges often feel discouraged to continue with their studies at an environment filled with people from all sorts of educational backgrounds. Some use the “not being able to find a parking” line as a reason to discontinue their education.

We Americans are constantly complaining about money and how expensive everything is, which leads to complaining about the government and its so called “lack of skills” at managing money. Think again. Aren’t we the ones wasting the nation’s money? Applying for financial aid yet dropping out just because the times got tough? What kind of hypocritical person does that? No self-respecting person would drop out, at least for no good reason other than the classes are too big. As hard as it is, you must continue your education at the community college of your choice. After all, you’re the one who chose to save money remember?

So please, next time you have to make a decision regarding your educational future, be careful. You never know, you might not end up getting that Bachelor’s degree you always dreamed you would.

Penalizing Penn State

By: Jeannie Mai

Jerry Sandusky: former defense coordinator of the Pennsylvania State University football team for 31 seasons.

Jerry Sandusky: 67-year-old man charged with more than 50 counts of sexual abuse for molesting eight boys over a span of 15 years.

According to npr.org, Jim Calhoun, one of Penn State’s former janitors, “witnessed Sandusky engaging in sexual activity with a boy in a campus locker-room shower” and alerted co-workers and supervisors of what he’d seen.

The Second Mile, founded by Sandusky in 1977, is “a charity [that] plans, organizes, and offers activities and programs for children; a statewide non-profit organization for children who need additional support and who would benefit from positive human contact.” That’s ironic.

He supposedly found his victims through this charity. What kind of sick, demented man starts a charity to help young children “benefit from positive human contact” and then molests them?

According to sfgate.com, the Second Mile, along with the school and Sandusky himself, is also in the process of being sued by an “unidentified man who claims Sandusky abused him more than 100 times over the course of four years.”

How can one even begin to imagine the pain inflicted upon this victim? What Sandusky did was wrong, and he needs to pay the consequences for it.

As stated on guardian.co.uk, Penn State officials were “harshly criticized [as they had] failed to report their suspicions and end the abuse,” and the university responded that it “had not seen the complaint.”

On Nov. 9, after intense criticism on the Sandusky scandal, beloved head football coach, Joe Paterno, announced his plan to resign come the end of the 2011 season, after his three-year contract ended. However, merely hours after this announcement, the Penn State Board of Trustees decided to fire both Paterno and school president Graham Spanier, because of how they took action on the sex abuse allegation, or rather, how they didn’t take action. All they did was ban him from taking children onto campus after the incident leaked. How is merely banning him going to help anyone, specifically, the innocent children involved?

Although Paterno didn’t commit the sexual assault, he was an accomplice by not informing the police. Instead, he reported to his immediate supervisor, which I can’t seem to understand. Why not go directly to the police—an organized group of people who could have actually done something to stop Sandusky?

Upon his firing, Paterno felt like this was “one of the greatest sorrows in [his] life” and “wish he had done more.” At this point, Paterno could say anything to cover up his mistake but my mind is still made.

According to John Gonzales’ article, “The Penn State Riot: A Sea of Fools” on csnphilly.com, thousands of students gathered at the center of campus, and chanted things like “We Love Joe!” I’d be committing a gross disservice to the victims involved in this scandal if I merely said this uproar was ludicrous.

As stated in the New York Times, one of the freshmen, Mike Clark, felt Paterno had “met his legal and moral responsibilities by telling the university authorities.” Where is his sense of humanity? Was his moral responsibility, above all things, really met? Is a football season more important than the lives of young children?

The eight victims involved in this case are, without a doubt, traumatized and scarred for life. Yet, thousands of students gathered to protest the fact that Paterno, of all people, lost his job.

Who cares if he was a great football coach? Being a great football coach does not equate being a good human being.

The bottom line is, Paterno should have reported this sickening incident to the police directly. Had he reported this in the beginning, some of these boys could have been saved from experiencing such disturbing events.

You cannot just sweep this situation under the rug or look the other way, especially because it lasted over a span of 15 years. Young boys’ lives were at stake and men like Paterno and Spanier were too selfish and cowardly to risk a successful season for what is right.

And as for the evil people who supported Paterno through all of this? As they say, ignorance is bliss. Do these inhumane, despicable students not understand the gravity of the situation? They should be ashamed of themselves for even thinking it was okay to support Paterno.

As stated in the Los Angeles Times, Penn State plans to take $1.5 million out of their athletics program and donate that money to the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape and the National Sexual Violence Resource Center in order to “help sex-abuse victims.” As angelic as the deed sounds on paper, this university needs to realize that no amount of money could compensate for the dirty secret they kept for so long.

On Dec. 8, Sandusky was arrested on new charges, regarding two additional accusers. According to the New York Times, he was “taken to the Centre County Correctional Facility in Bellefonte, because he was unable to pay the $250,000 cash bail.” If Sandusky can pay the $250,000, he will be forced to wear an electronic ankle monitor and be under house arrest until a hearing.

My thoughts and prayers go out to the young boys assaulted in this incident and their families that need all the support in the world right now. Hey, Penn State students, if you really want something to yell about, riot on the side of the victims, not the side of the coach who hid such a hideous secret.

Shooting down gun control

By: Cristine Kenady

The Columbine and Virginia Tech massacres, the D.C. Sniper shootings, and the Amish elementary school attack. Although different in size and magnitude, all have one thing in common: the completely legal purchases of firearms.

One of the biggest flaws of the regulation of firearm possession in the United States is a lack of mandated background checks. The people purchasing these guns may not be criminals, but they could have deep psychological problems.

In 1993, former President Bill Clinton passed the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which stipulated that before a civilian purchases a gun, a criminal background check must be conducted. This act corresponds with the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which also has the same requirement. Although both of these acts are in place, not much prosecution and conviction has been done.

Even with the background checks, it’s still not enough to prevent situations like high school shootings from becoming less frequent.

Seung-Hui Cho, the killer of the Virginia Tech students in 2007, had a history of odd behaviors throughout his life and during his tenure at the college. Professors said that they feared for their safety and that students were very put off by his antisocial behavior and menacing demeanor, with even a handful of students fearing for their lives. If this man posed this much of a threat to society, why was he allowed to purchase two firearms completely legally?

And just earlier this month, another gunman opened fire on Virginia Tech’s campus, killing two people, including himself. I could go on to another issue about the lack of security on this unfortunate campus, but that’s for a different time. While currently the gunman has not been identified, he’s presumably a person that’s sick in the head.

Such tragedies and massacres that occur in the United States are the main reason why psychological tests should be conducted. We shouldn’t put such dangerous weapons into the hands of the people who will use them to harm and kill others. If we want the number of deaths from firearms to decrease, then measures need to be put in place where these weapons shouldn’t be put into the wrong hands.

Guns shouldn’t be completely outlawed, but there needs to be regulations on who can safely own a gun.

The Second Amendment should still be in the Bill of Rights, because people have used guns for self-defense, but it needs to be revised so that it can only be used for that purpose, not to take the lives of others.

Curriculum integrates LGBT

During the past decade, the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) community has fought for its rights with a caliber of success that only a few years ago may have seemed preposterous and impossible.

Its cries for fairness and equality have been so loud in recent years that it seems the law has finally decided to stop playing deaf and actually hear them out.

Gov. Jerry Brown passed a law during the summer that mandates elementary and secondary schools to add LGBT history to their curricula. The new law, called the California Fair Education Act (CFEA), also requires educators to teach students about contributions made by Native Americans and disabled people.

As long as LGBT history is integrated as yet another chapter in history, and not as separate curricula, then the change is certainly a positive one that will fall along the lines of desegregating schools and teaching students black history.

The Los Angeles Unified School District has chosen to embrace the mandate, giving its schools a 60-day time slot to create a curriculum that includes LGBT history, whereas most California schools have chosen a slower approach due to the issue’s controversy.

It is very admirable of our neighboring school district to so eagerly promote tolerance in the community. After all the anti-gay bullying that has taken place, it only makes sense that the state and school districts would seek ways to prevent similar occurrences in the future.

Ignorance, no doubt, has played a key role in the mistreatment of non-heterosexual people. Many have this insane notion that if students are taught LGBT history, they will somehow magically turn gay…as if a transgender fairy godmother is going to appear out of thin air and cast a gay spell over all the little children.

Whether this belief is influenced by religion, upbringing or sexual preference, it is flat-out wrong to ostracize people based on something as insignificant to one’s character and morality as sexual orientation.

Once people are taught LGBT history at a young age, they will grow to be more accepting than preceding generations. Being exposed to various sexual orientations will help students see homosexuals, bisexuals and transgenders as normal people. The purpose of the law is not to out every single historical figure that may or may not have been gay, but to show that a person’s ability to function in society and impact history is not influenced by desire to be with a man or a woman.

We had our objections to the CFEA at first—not because we are homophobic or morally against it, but because we believed that teaching LGBT history as a separate curriculum would further ostracize non-heterosexual people.

It will take a few years until new history textbooks that meet the new criteria are published and distributed to schools, but until then, teaching LGBT history with a certain level of distinctness may in fact be healthy due to the mixed and confused views on homosexuality. It will give people time to digest the fact that non-heterosexual people will finally have their own place in history while giving teachers time to provide students with a newer, more tolerant and objective perspective on sexuality.

Ignorance isn’t bliss. The new law, while long overdue, has finally arrived.

Censorship

By: Jeannie Mai

There’s nothing quite like going home after a long day at school and blogging about it on Tumblr. What’s that, U.S. Government? CENSORED. Oh, maybe I’ll just post a status on Face—CENSORED. Okay, I’ll tweet—CENSORED.

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property (PROTECT IP) Act were both introduced this year. The two practically go hand in hand, except the SOPA is the House of Representatives version of the PROTECT IP Act, a Senate bill.

According to discovermagazine.com, both bills “essentially [allow] the government and private corporations to censor entire sites that they fear are illegally distributing copyrighted material.”

Opencongress.org states that the PROTECT IP Act also allows for “copyright [owners to] be able to commence a legal action against the alleged infringer [and] would be allowed to demand that search engines, social networking sites and domain name services block access to the targeted site. In some cases, action could be taken to block sites without first allowing the alleged infringer to defend themselves in court.”

In the popular “PROTECT IP/SOPA Act Breaks the Internet” video found on fightforthefuture.org, even something as little as an “ordinary user” who filmed himself “just singing a pop song…could go to jail for five years for posting any copyrighted work.”

Basically, here’s what this means. That video you posted of yourself covering the latest Britney Spears song? Copyright infringement. The government has now determined that it is its place to limit our freedom of speech and censor what we choose to say and do.

Major organizations supporting this bill include the Motion Picture Association of America, Microsoft, Disney, Warner Music Group, etc.

On Sept. 22, a letter was sent to members of the U.S. Congress stating that the companies aforementioned and many more “look forward to the introduction of a bill in the House” and feel that “rogue sites—the websites dedicated to counterfeiting and piracy—put American jobs, consumers, and innovation at risk.” These companies believe that our country shouldn’t “tolerate this criminal activity.”

Major organizations opposing the bill include Google Inc., Facebook Inc., eBay Inc., Yahoo Inc., AOL Inc., etc. These companies, along with millions of upset Americans, “cannot support these bills as written and ask [they] consider more targeted ways to combat foreign ‘rogue’ websites.”

Speaking of censoring the Internet, has anyone ever been to China? This past summer, I went to Beijing, and I was pleasantly surprised to find out that Facebook, Twitter, and even Wikipedia were all blocked by the government.
According to Time Magazine, China’s government uses technology known as “the Great Firewall [to] block websites on an array of sensitive topics.” China has approximately 1,000 monitors and “citizen volunteers” who regularly check “blogs [and] chat forums.”

My point? China’s Internet is heavily censored and in Rebecca MacKinnon’s article, “Stop the Great Firewall of America” in the New York Times, she discusses that Congress “under pressure to take action against the theft of intellectual property….may even bring major features of [the Great Firewall] to America.” Can you imagine trying to log onto Facebook and discovering it’s been blocked? Or logging onto Yahoo! Messenger and having every word you type be read?
According to mpaa.org, the bills “do not violate website owners’ or users’ First Amendment rights” because they are “narrowly tailored, [provide] strong procedural protections, and [are] consistent with existing copyright enforcement.” Even so, if this bill passes, websites like Facebook “would have to censor their users or get shut down” because, according to this act, they are liable for “everything users post.”

Tell me how this isn’t a violation of our freedom of speech.

We are one of the most technologically advanced countries of our time. Why are we taking two steps back?

On various websites such as change.org and act.demandprogress.org, people have the opportunity to sign petitions and send their thoughts regarding the bill to members of Congress. On stopcensorship.org, if signed, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden said he would “read censorship opponents’ names from the floor of the Senate, and try to enter the rest into the Congressional Record,” decreasing the chances of this legislation passing.

As an active social media user, I can’t imagine what the consequences would be if these bills were to pass. Facebook statuses and tweets aside, what about the people trying to pursue singing careers on say, YouTube? There is a chance they’ll be imprisoned because of posting their talents online?

I’m amazed that such bills would even be proposed. Say goodbye to freedom of speech.

ARGUMENT: E-Readers are a good thing

Pro

By: Daphne Ong

Imagine carrying 3,500 books everywhere you go. No, you don’t have to drag these heavy blocks of paper around on a wagon like Matilda. All you need is an electronic reader, or e-reader, and the possibilities are endless.

An e-reader is any portable device like a smart phone, iPad, or Kindle that has the capability of downloading books to be read electronically.

Reading a virtual book is not supposed to feel strange; after all, we do live in the 21st century. In a world where kids and teenagers are slowly turning away from Shakespeare and turning to Snooki instead, it is great that book franchises such as Barnes & Noble and Amazon are reviving the written art through technology.

Admit it—reading text messages on your phone is easier to do than reading a few sentences from a book. So why not have your book available to you on your iPhone or Kindle?

E-books are like real books, just packed with more features. Even though they are the size of notebooks, e-readers can hold anywhere from 1,500 to 3,500 books in its memory, and that is without the Secure Digital memory cards some of them can utilize. I don’t know of any bookworm who has enough shelf space to own all those books. Random. Also, when reading an e-book, one is able to adjust the font style, size, and color to his preference.

Every day, less and less books are being printed because of the declining sales of books. Those books that have fallen off the printing list could still survive with the help of e-books because they can still be bought and read electronically.

Even though buying a tablet can cost up to $300, buying books online is essentially cheaper than buying hard copies. In fact, many books in the public domain such as “Romeo and Juliet” and “Wuthering Heights” can be downloaded for free. That means that over one million classic books could be downloaded, completely free of charge.

In fact, if you download the free Kindle Application onto your phone or iPod, you can download these books, pay for ones you want to buy, read multiple books at once, and still be able to bookmark it and continue your book on your Kindle.

The price of an e-book can cost half the price of a traditional book, which usually ranges from $5 to $30. According to Amazon, since April, for every 100 print books it has sold, it has also sold 105 e-books.

However, sometimes one does not like buying books and prefers checking them out from public libraries. Today, e-book libraries are available to Barnes & Noble Nook, Sony Reader, and now Amazon Kindle owners. Public libraries are converting their material to electronic copies in order to take benefit of the e-book library craze, which still works for the community’s advantage.

On top of the variety of cheap books that are available online, e-readers can also download newspapers, magazines, and blogs. One material that can contain all of these publications is far more resourceful than an ordinary book. Something extremely amazing is the fact that the newest versions of these data are immediately available.

Not only are e-books convenient devices for active readers, but practical textbook replacements for students. Instead of having students walk around with bulging backpacks, why not have them carry e-books that contain all their necessary textbooks? They are much lighter and less likely to cause back pain.
Buying e-books instead of textbooks will also help out the budget because the data in e-books are available almost immediately, and all the school has to do is replace the old version with the new one with the push of a button.

E-books are ecological. If we buy less printed books, maybe a tree or two will get a second chance at life. The more books are being left alone on the shelves of our favorite bookstores, the more wood is being unnecessarily chopped down.

Next time, when you plan on buying the new “Vampire Diaries,” think about this: would you rather go through the trouble of putting on some pants, having your mother drive you down to the bookstore, searching for it, and waiting in line to pay? Or would you rather buy it through your iPhone in the comfort of your bedroom and have it in an instant?

Con

By: Michael Yapujian

Two women are at a restaurant—one has brought her son, and the other has brought her daughter. The boy is busy on his Nintendo DS, the girl on her iPhone. The moment one of the two mothers leaves to use the restroom, the other mom whips out her iPhone and begins playing a game that I can’t quite make out.

I witnessed this scene only a few weeks ago. Three people sitting together at a restaurant, each one of their faces lit up by their little technological “gadgets and gizmos.” This is the future—actually, it is the present.

No matter how cliché this phrase has become, humans are being taken over by technology. And although I have been very generous regarding this technological takeover, the world has crossed over a very fine line, into very sensitive ground: books are becoming electronic.

Today, e-readers are becoming more and more popular, especially with the younger generation. We are so used to instant gratification that we cannot help but be giddy at the fact that we can download entire books in just a few seconds, that within a few seconds, we can access the entire world’s vast collection of books.

But with all of the technological advancements that are already taking place, shouldn’t we have some kind of connection to the tangible past, something that will somehow keep us connected to our human history? And what better way to help preserve some part of the past than a book.

I just cannot see how e-books are beneficial. Just as you reach the climax of “To Kill a Mockingbird, your battery might die, and your cup of water will become the enemy after it spills and causes the oh-so-convenient e-reader to break.

And furthermore, what about the feeling of a book? Personally, I find it impossible to enjoy a book with intangible pages; a flick of a finger is not enough for me.

E-books might be the future, but I refuse to give in to the idea that they are better than actual paper books.

A warm cup of tea, a comfortable couch, a fuzzy blanket, and an…e-reader? Am I the only one who sees something very wrong with this picture?

Hookah Hems Havoc

By: Agnessa Kasumyan

Hookah is, no doubt, a seductive form of smoking. I’m pretty sure that part of its appeal is its lingering fruit-infused tobacco smoke that takes us back to ancient harems where men kicked back on luxurious, Arabic sofas, smoking hookah while watching beautiful women dance in revealing chiffons.

During the time that hookah became such a popular phenomenon, its health risks were relatively unknown. In fact, it was actually believed to be healthy and good for the heart. Nowadays, we know all too well just how harmful smoking can be.

So why, might you ask, is the city of Glendale considering expanding the smoking areas of restaurants? In 2008, the city passed a Fresh Air Ordinance that only allowed restaurants to provide 25 percent of its outdoor area for smokers. However, proponents of hookah were arguing that smoking areas should be expanded to about 50 percent. A quarter of an increase may not seem like much, but do we really want to risk promoting smoking in a city that earned an A from the American Lung Association for its austere smoking laws?

People like to convince themselves that smoking tobacco from hookah is healthier than smoking it from a cigarette. Sorry to break it to you, but you can’t have your cake and eat it, too. Does anyone really expect to smoke, be it marijuana, a cigarette, or hookah, and not expect to suffer the consequences?

According to MayoClinic.com, smoking through a hookah pipe is no less dangerous than smoking from a cigarette roll. The base of a hookah’s structure contains water, where liquids such as fruit juice and items like mint leaves and crushed ice may be added in order to contribute to its overall taste. Contrary to common belief, however, the water does not filter the toxins of tobacco. Breathing in from a hookah hose carries out a larger portion of smoke and requires more lung capacity to hold it in, damaging the lungs on a far greater scale. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, one hookah session usually involves inhaling between 100 to 200 times the amount of smoke wheezed from just one cigarette.

According to usatoday.com, hookah delivers the same amount of nicotine as cigarettes, which can lead to addictive behavior. Hookah smoke contains higher concentrations of tar, carbon monoxide and carcinogens, or cancer-causing chemicals. Don’t be surprised if, after years of smoking hookah, you’re faced with heart disease or lung cancer.

Again, a 25 percent increase really does not seem like much when it comes to allowing more space for smokers in restaurants, but just the notion of giving them more room promotes the wrong idea that smoking is okay. Younger children in restaurants will see these smokers and think it’s the socially accepted thing to do, no matter how many times their parents may tell them that smoking is a “no-no.” Besides, the more room smokers have, the more they’ll smoke, and the more the tobacco will affect non-smokers. It really does not take much to risk the health of non-smokers.

As the Los Angeles Times reported, lung cancer rates have been dropping at a steady pace over the last decade. The number of people with cancer dropped 1.4 percent between 1999 and 2005, and 2.9 percent from 2005 to 2008. The West experienced the greatest triumph, with a 3.9 percent drop in men’s lung cancer diagnoses between 2006 and 2008. The percentages are small, so it may not seem like much a difference, but think about how many people didn’t have to suffer from a disease caused by something as preventable as smoking.

Honestly, why put so much effort into preventing smoking only to have all that work go down the drain. Expanding smoking areas will take us back a step when it comes to raising awareness about the horrible effects of smoking and trying to provide a healthier environment for future generations.

I personally don’t smoke and am not a fan of it—never have been, never will be. Smoking is a personal choice. If somebody wants to risk lung cancer and poison his breathing source, he can go on ahead and do so. By all means, he can knock himself out¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬—I’m sure the tobacco eventually will.

The percentage of smokers to non-smokers is significantly smaller, so why a majority of people’s health should be put at risk for a smaller group of people that smoke is beyond me.

In Cold Censorship

Censorship. In America, we have been bred to cringe at the sight, sound, or even thought of this word. And when one of the most influential books of all time was “pending approval” from the Glendale Unified School District’s (GUSD) for its reading list, none of us could help but cringe more than we ever had before. Thankfully, GUSD did the right thing by approving the text with a 4-0 vote (Board Member Mary Boger didn’t vote).

Glendale High School English teacher Holly Ciotti requested that Truman Capote’s classic work “In Cold Blood” be added to the list of district-approved books for her AP English Language classes.

And although she thought this would be easy, there were a few bumps in the road. Some school board members found the book too grotesque to be read by students.

Now, we can’t help but chuckle a bit here. “Frankenstein” is a work that is, apparently, on the school board’s list of books that can be taught in school.
But many of us remember feeling nauseated by some of Shelley’s descriptions of the monster in the novel. Is it okay for us to read about one man’s digging up of bodies from the cemetery, and his experience sewing different pieces of those bodies together?

What about the detailed descriptions of the monster’s methods of murdering all of Frankenstein’s friends and family? What about some of the most grotesque images in the novel—the incredibly vivid smirks of the monster, after committing some of the foul deeds that have been detailed in the text? Is it okay for us to feel our stomachs turning while reading this when we are not allowed to read the one novel that has been said to be “the birth of the non-fiction novel genre?”

There should have been no dispute regarding the silencing of Capote’s impeccable writing, and we are glad that GUSD students have the opportunity to analyze it.

Remembering Apple’s Steve Jobs

The hallways are full of kids with ear plugs on, disconnected from the world, aimlessly walking with their iPods on blast.

In the center of all this is one man: the late Steve Jobs, co-founder of Apple Computers. He made and thought about all these technological advances that we adore, and has changed life as we know it.

In 2005, the iPod revolutionized the world: we now have a more portable, sleek device to carry our music around in instead of our walkmans and numerous CDs. (Do people today even know what a CD is?)

After a couple of years he came up with the iPod touch and the iPad, devices with a touch screen, something unimaginable twenty years ago when he started out.

He was also the CEO of Pixar studios, the biggest animation studio in the world today, the first company to produce a computer animated film, “Toy Story.”

And although it seems to many of us that his life was full of money and success, it was not.

Jobs, unsure of what was to happen with his future, dropped out of college to pursue his dream—Technology.

And with this uncertainty was the belief he had in himself, that pushed him to overcome the many trials and tribulations of his life, finding one of the biggest companies in the world.

The fact that he was diagnosed with a rare form of pancreatic cancer in 2004 did not stop him thinking about new novel ideas for Apple.

We owe a lot of the things that we take for granted to Jobs. Can you even imagine life now without your computer? Can you imagine walking down the street without your iPod on?

His inventions have been and will always be a part of our life, and it is all because of his perseverance and imagination that he accomplished all these.

Keep lockers open

By: Megan Knight

Retarding ignorance

By: Michael Yapujian

AP classes—where the elite do not meet

By: Anonymous

The Japanese don’t fall through the cracks

Losing control over Lent

Illustration Credit: Troy Jonic

By: Michael yapujian

Take the sub out of substitute

By: Cody Senteno

Planned Parenthood gets put out

“Sheening” up the news with sheer madness

Uselessness weaves its way into education

By: Michael Yapujian

ATHLETE OF THE MONTH­­­ ~ March 2011

By: Greg Kalfayan

Confessions of an iPhone

Illustration Credit: Eunice Choy

By: Edward Nadurata

It’s expensive to look this cheap

By: Michael Yapujian

Proposed schedule shows promise

“Clubitis” hits campus

People for the not-so Ethical Treatment of Animals

Illustration Credit: Troy Jonic

By: Michael Yapujian

Dumbing down the beat

Mind Your manners, please

I have this theory: manners really do not mean that much to people anymore. Well, actually, maybe it is not that they do not mean much, but rather that we just do not make it a necessity to have manners.

To test my theory, I decided to try holding the door for everyone in a few of my classes and count how many people thanked me. Personally, I think a simple “thank you” is one of the kindest gestures, but apparently for others, this is not the case. For my calculus class of 32 students, I received only fo

ur “thank yous”. Out of 40 students in my AP English class, I got a mere 11.

But manners go beyond simple “thank yous” and “you’re welcomes.” For example, the use of cuss words. I do not understand why, when I go to a restaurant with families all around me, I still hear curse words loud and clear for all to hear. And not only restaurants, but any public area where families and young children are around.

I am not saying cursing should be forbidden completely, but people should be more cautious when in public. It is common courtesy to consider those around us, and common courtesy seems to be something we have definitely forgotten.

On the subject of common courtesy, let us discuss the rudeness of people with cell phones and iPods. I simply cannot fathom why it is considered perfectly fine to text or have your headphones in your ears while having a conversation with someone. I must admit, I am guilty of this, and it is definitely not something I am proud of. Our society has gotten so used to not considering others, we do not even realize our own rude behavior.

The blame for our generation’s tendency to be a bit more inconsiderate than expected can be partially blamed on the way we were brought up.

In the past, families were usually closer to their neighbors and looked to strangers for kindness, doing things such as having the neighbors baby-sit the children, which is not as common nowadays. In fact, many today do not even know who their neighbors are.

People have become so detached and alienated from others, and thus our attitudes towards each other have grown worse and worse over the years. This eventually causes us to become more accustomed to being rude and not having manners, which is quite an unfortunate consequence.

Some will say that there are more important things to worry about than saying “thank you” when someone holds the door for you. Due to the incredible amount of ridiculousness in this response, I must stop and laugh for a second.

Really? Because we are all so preoccupied with ending world hunger, we should just throw being polite out the window completely, right?

Maybe it can be seen as a bit naïve and childish to be bothered by such a small thing as common courtesy, but perhaps that is the problem. Our society has put having manners so low on their priority list that it almost does not even matter anymore.

We compliment ourselves daily on what clever individuals we are—a society based on multi-tasking, yet we cannot even be thoughtful enough to have some kindness and courtesy towards others.
Manners should be a given, not something people have to hope for.

So the next time someone holds the door for you as you leave class, please take one second to say thank you, smile, and walk away. It will not hurt, I promise.