I open this “can of worms” with some reservations.  Let me preface my comments by saying that I am a big sports fan. 

I try to support our athletic teams and honor the accomplishments of those who excel on the field, court, and mat.  Sports have always been a big part of my life. 

I believe that a lot of good comes from the school spirit generated by supporting our sports teams.

 I wonder, however, if sometimes we get athletics out of perspective. 

We have equally talented students in art, drama, and music as well as academics.  We send invitations and release students from class for letter of intent signings. 

Should a student who accepts a music or academic scholarship have the same treatment? 

We have multiple pep assemblies for our sports teams, one for academic achievement, and none for the arts. 

What message are we sending concerning the relative importance of these pursuits?

Don’t get me wrong.  I think we should have pep assemblies, support athletic teams, and recognize those who have accepted athletic scholarships. 

I also believe we ought to increase the recognition of excellence in music, art, drama, and other achievements.  

I believe that celebrations for sports signings could be done without taking away important class time.

 At R.A. Long, the use of cell phones for texting has been on the rise. Many teachers believe that the phones are a perfect prop in the setting of cheating on tests and distracting others. “Cell phone jammers” are believed to be the solution to this problem.

“They are appropriate for use when students are interrupting the class with texts and calls,” Mr. Gross, the forestry and natural resources teacher said. “You can always be reached through the office in case of an emergency.”

However, students at RAL have a very different opinion about the jammers.

“I think it’s stupid that teachers feel the need to install them,” Skylar Clark 12 said. “Students should have enough self control to be away from their phone for a whole class period.”

Cell phone jammers work by creating a “dead zone.”  The jammer transmits on the same radio frequencies as a cell phone, disrupting the communication between the phone and the cell phone tower.

Cell phone jammers are mainly intended for military and government use and, in the United States, they are illegal for civilians to both own, sell, and purchase.

“Sure, cell phone use can be a distraction in class rooms, but jamming the signal is deemed illegal due to the Constitution of Communications of 1943,” Bill Davenport 11 said. “Jamming a cell phone signal is in terms stealing broadcasting property purchased by a private company.”

The Federal Communications Commission outlawed jammers because they can interfere with emergency communication, aid in criminal activity and disrupt medical equipment, like pacemakers.

“I believe cell phone blockers take away our rights,” Chelsea Trefren 12 said. “If there were an emergency, we wouldn’t be able to be contacted or contact someone.”

The FCC has not yet prosecuted anyone for cell-phone jamming but fines for a first offense can range as high as $11,000 for each violation or imprisonment for up to one year. The device used may also be seized and forfeited to the government.

According to an anonymous RAL student, “It is the teacher’s classroom and school is for learning, not texting. But jammers make class even more boring!”

If someone told you that the United States was in fact funding the Taliban, you would most likely laugh and ask if the aliens told them that when they were abducted.

      Throughout the entire world, there are only five countries that contribute to the world’s opiate production and Afghanistan contributes to over 90% percent of the global total, making it a billion dollar trade.

      And what do poppies make? Heroin and prescription medication.

      The primary consumers of these two things are The United States and Great Britain, the terrorist organization called “The Taliban’s” two sworn enemies.

      The irony of all this is that the Taliban is based in Afghanistan, and they are the ones that receive money from this massive cash crop.

      The Bush administration devised a plan to “try” to destroy, or at least slow down, production of poppies by a mass burning of the crop and giving the farmers other crops to grow such as wheat.

       “Afghan farmers can buy wheat seeds, that’s not the problem” said Vanda Felbab-brown, professor of Georgetown University. “The problem is that they cannot make a sufficient living on it or get access to credit and land”.     

Richard Halbrooke, the Administrations Coordinator on Afghan policy, calls the method “wasteful and ineffective” and “pushes farmers into the Taliban’s hands by destroying their livelihood and leaving them with few alternatives.”

  According to Steven Coll, author of the book ’Ghost Wars,’ the U.S. government trained Taliban forces in guerrilla warfare in order to fight the USSR.             

So first we teach them tactics for fighting a larger and more advanced military, then western society funds their growth with our need for drugs.

       George Orwell’s novel ‘1984’ is about societal brainwashing and absolute government control of every aspect of human life.

In the story, there are three nations in secret agreement to be constantly at war with one another, in order to keep the strong government ‘needed’ in the minds of the people. They on the surface are at war and sworn enemies, but underneath it, they are in fact symbiotic.

       Could this novel be an unwitted prophecy?

       We buy their products, trained their militia, allow them to continue making money to fight us and push otherwise neutral farmers into the hands of the Taliban by burning their livelihood, in turn giving them fresh troops.

      We may be at war with the Taliban, but we are simultaneously  helping them. What sense does it make to support your enemy? Without U.S. support, they would have no resources to fight us with.

       Don’t take my word for it, do your own research, and make your own conclusions. This is just something to think about.

Ever see those shows on TV that depict what forensics is all about? If you have, then your idea of forensics may be slightly different than what it’s really all about.

Yes, the shows are somewhat accurate, but not fully, since it doesn’t take them very long to solve a case. In truth, it can take years to solve a case at any given time, while the shows usually take only a few days.

Some forensics shows are CSI: Crime Scene Investigation and NCIS (Naval Criminal Investigative Service). Both having to deal with quite a number of forensic values, the shows use ballistics, DNA analyzing, and fingerprinting to solve the case.

The show CSI  has been criticized by police and district attorneys, who feel that the show portrays an inaccurate way to solve crimes. With that said, the show still gets quite the number of views; an average of 21.899 million for the 10 seasons of the show.

NCIS has had an average of 15.67 million viewers for the seven seasons. The fifth season averaged 15.65 million viewers and the seventh season episode, “Reunion,” averaged 21.37 million viewers.

When asked about the shows, some students liked them and others did not. Socorro Perez 10 said that she “doesn’t care” for the shows while another student, Stephen Johnson 10, said that they’re “pretty good.”

Two other students also gave their opinions about the shows. Lee Relf 10 said that the shows were “fun” while Selina Wakefield 10 said that they were “mindless nonsense.”

Even though both shows have to deal with the same concept, they are very different from each other. CSI: Crime Scene Investigation deals with crimes in Nevada around Las Vegas while NCIS deal with any crimes related to the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps.

The creator of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation is Anthony E. Zuiker and is produced by Jerry Bruckheimer. Donald Bellisario is the co-creator and executive producer of NCIS, and another creator is Don McGill.

Both shows are shot in Santa Clarita, California but are set in different locations. CSI  is set in Las Vegas while NCIS is set in Washington, D.C.

Both also have spin-offs; shows that are based off of the original shows but, in different places. NCIS has a spin-off called NCIS: Los Angeles while CSI has two spin-offs called CSI: Miami and CSI: NY. NCIS is a spin off of JAG which aired from September 23, 1995 to April 29, 2005.

From each show, there is a main character. The main character in NCIS is Leroy Jethro Gibbs, portrayed by Mark Harmon. CSI’s old main character was Gil Grissom, portrayed by William Petersen, but was replaced by Raymond Langston who is portrayed by Laurence Fishburne.

NCIS: Los Angeles began airing on September 22, 2009 and airs in the 9 pm time slot following NCIS on Tuesdays. CSI: Miami first aired on September 23, 2002 while CSI: NY first aired on September 22, 2004.

CSI has been airing since October 2, 2000 and is continuing to air. NCIS has been airing since September 23, 2003 and is continuing to air.

In my opinion, I like both shows, but NCIS appeals to me more.

Turning 18 means different things to different people, to some, it means freedom from their childhood home, others, legal gambling, or even voting. Although the newest craze seems to be getting inked up the second your eighteenth rolls around, and for some even sooner.

A tattoo is a permanent alteration of your body, meant to be meaningful and thoughtful.

Tattoos originated in aborigine tribes all across the world, have once been associated with rebellion, but are lately considered a right of passage to most teens.

Tattoos range from oddly unique, delicate and pretty, to downright tacky. Common tattoos of ’09 include last names, initials, tribal, symbols, flowers, and stars.

 “Tattooing is about personalizing the body, making it a true home and fit temple for the spirit that dwells inside it,” says Michelle Delio, a freelance writer whose articles have appeared in Wired News and the MIT Technology Review.

Original tattoos were symbols of gods, and today we have Americans getting Chinese or Japanese symbols on themselves. Does that mean that in Asia people are getting ‘truth’ ‘hope’ ‘love’ or ‘friendship’ tattooed on themselves in plain English? I really doubt it.

Unlike the growth in popularity of tattoos in the nineties, the people getting them nowadays aren’t rebelling against society or parents. Some just do it to be in.

“The tattoo attracts and also repels precisely because it is different,”  Margo DeMello, author of Bodies of Inscription: A Cultural History of the Modern Tattoo Community, said.

Being different is what attracts people to the idea of permanently altering their bodies in the first place, and getting a tattoo you saw on someone else or because someone else did it completely contradicts the purpose of the whole ordeal.

We can laugh now at the mushrooms, butterflies and lower back tattoos our predecessors got, yet unknowingly follow a similar trend.

What is a tribal or nautical star tattoo going to mean to you thirty years from now?

It all comes down to a simple phrase: Think before you ink.

Straight across bangs or frosted tips can grow out. Snap bracelets and ‘brand name’ clothing can be thrown away, but getting a tattoo without a deeper meaning than ‘I thought it looked cool’ can be a regret you wear for life.

A genuine tattoo tells a story. If it doesn’t tell a story that involves you personally, then it’s just there for decoration, and not a valid tattoo. There has to be some emotional appeal or it isn’t, to me at least, a real tattoo.

It tells people who you are and what you believe in. Although it is meant partially for the enjoyment of others, a real tattoo is for you.

A tattoo is a reflection of who you are and a small part of what you’re about. So, make it meaningful.

The 20’s had the Charleston, the 60’s had the Twist, and the 80’s had Break dancing.

Our generation has Grinding.

Grinding is a dance in which the girl usually leads, with both partners “connected” at the hips, often rubbing her backside to his front. This doesn’t sound very creative; it seems more like a direct imitation of a sexual action. 

The history of grinding is somewhat of a mystery. Nobody seems to agree where this dance originated from. While some internet sites suggest that grinding was adapted from the dance Lambada, others think that it came from the close dancing featured in the 1987 film Dirty Dancing. Either way, many agree that this type of dancing started showing up in schools during the mid-nineties; making grinding a 15-year-old fad.

So with a fad so old, why hasn’t it died like many other fads we have seen come and go? I think it could have something to do the sense of rebellion that students feel when they participate in something that they know adults don’t approve of.

 It is true that the appropriateness of modern dancing is an age old debate that plagued many generations. But there has to be a line drawn between actual dancing and blatant sexual inappropriateness, or this “dancing” could easily escalate further and likely have all school dances completely banned.

Many students believe that grinding is really just a harmless dance that has nothing to do with being sexual.

“It’s not dirty to us; it’s what we are used to. What we walked into freshman year and saw [that] it’s just dancing together, you know? [It's] Not like we’re standing there having sex, it’s just two people dancing,” Shayley Morris 12 said.

Whether or not students believe that grinding is their right, it has proven to be the easiest way to get dances canceled. At the next dance, I hope that more students realize how the way they dance defines our generation and how we are seen.

“That was gay.”

  If we were to walk through the halls of our school, we would most likely hear this statement made at least five times. But do we know what we mean when we say it?

  Homosexuality is a term that causes most high school students to cringe. It’s a topic most of my peers shy away from or, when someone is brave enough to bring it up, causes awkward silences intermingled with nervous giggles and side comments.

In speaking with English teacher, Jan McIntyre, it became apparent that while we aren’t typically beating GBLT (Gay, Bisexual, Lesbian, and Transgendered) kids up anymore, there is still a definite discomfort with homosexuality in our school.

“In my ten plus years I have seen a major shift in attitude towards our GBLT young adults. I’m not saying that our gay kids are totally accepted, but I’m seeing more tolerance and a lot more acceptance,” said McIntyre.

  RAL senior, Trevor Scott gave me slightly different feedback.

 “What we need now is acceptance. It goes beyond regular teasing. It is getting worse in high schools,” said Scott.

According to a study published by The New Press, 45 percent of gay males and 20 percent of lesbian females experience physical or verbal abuse in high school and 28 percent of these young people feel forced to drop out of school due to harassment based on sexual orientation.

“I still hear a lot of ‘gay bashing’ as a put down for people, to silence people,” said McIntyre.

 By taking what a person is and using it as an insult, I feel we are insulting the people themselves. I, personally, would be hurt if someone took something that was a part of me and turned it into insult.

Saying “That’s so Christian” when given an assignment we don’t like would be hurtful to those who actually are Christian. Stating that it’s so “tennis” or “pep band” when a person irritates us would be putting down all of the people who fall into whatever group we are using to express our discontent.

“I just think that people need to know that homosexuality doesn’t affect how athletic someone can be, how intelligent someone can be, or how capable a person is of caring about others and doing good in our world,” said RAL junior, Bill Davenport.

 I believe we use homosexuality as a negative very lightly and very often. What I think we need to realize is that when we do this, we are degrading a portion of our school’s population

“People being different doesn’t mean they’re wrong,” said McIntyre.

Whatever our beliefs are about homosexuality, whether they are personally, religiously, or scientifically based, I don’t believe that it changes the fact that we need to be accepting of those who are homosexual.

“I’m still having the pressure of the Senior Project, I’m still dealing with problems with parents at home, I’m still trying to find a job; I’m just an everyday student, I just have a different ‘lifestyle,’” said Scott.

In an effort to change the views our community has about RAL, let’s let them know that we care about each other as a group by ending our use of demeaning and derogatory terms and accepting others based on their character, not who they’re attracted to.

This age old adage has been used by parents around to world when accounting for behavior that did not follow the moral codes they impose upon their children.

Recently the statement has applied to teachers; specifically, teachers telling students where to park.

The area by the administration building holds faculty cars, the back parking lot close to the school  contains student parking, and the area in front of the school is a free-for-all. A mystery, however, is the status of the parking lot in between the gym and the portables. Are the tiny spaces only for staff parking, can students also park there if it is convenient to do so? This has never been truly outlined, and leaves students ambiguous about the faculty’s authority to make them move.

“The student’s have a new parking lot all to themselves,” Mr. Elliot, a math teacher, sad, “It’s spaces are much wider too than the ones by the portables. I don’t know why they would try to park here. I don’t like parking here.”

“I hurt my foot in the Kelso soccer game,” Christina McDonald 12 said, “So parking right by Leadership was handy. But every day I was asked to move, even though I moved after class, and I even parked down by the Harding Building and someone told me to move.”

What is most frustrating about being told to move from such convenient parking spots is that teachers do not follow their own guidelines. Every day, RAL faculty parks in the back parking lot that is designated for students, taking up spaces that are close to the school and forcing kids to park farther away than necessary.

“Teachers probably park in student spots as a reaction,” Elliot said, “Either the staff parking lot isn’t big enough, or students are in their spots.”

As a student who does not usually drive a car, the complaints I have heard about teachers parking in the student parking lot have mostly come second-hand. However, walking to the back parking lot at 7:25 a.m. proves this to be true.

On behalf of the RAL student body, I implore that the parking be better outlined so that we the kids know whether or not we are being tricked out of our rightful spots. And once the lines have been drawn, I ask the teachers to follow their own rules.

If there are simply not enough parking spots to go around, that is a whole new parking problem.

I have a number of students that have been urging me to attend the Mainstage production of “For the Love of Three Oranges” and give my opinion on the performance.  So here goes.  I very much enjoyed the production.  The acting was excellent with a number of very good individual performances.  The writing was clever at times bordering on edgy.  I liked the fact that it appeared to be featuring high school talent.  My personal bias is that I would rather see students than local adult talent.  I very much enjoyed the choreography especially the final dance moves.

My only reservations are that at over two hours, it was a bit long and dragged at times.   Secondly I could have done without some of the references to boozing, cigarettes, and being high.  I don’t think they really added anything to the play.  Overall, an evening very well spent.  My hats off to the cast, director, and crew.

Karl Jamison