Luke_Wilbur

Hurricane Katrina's toll on communities, homes and lives has devastated the nation. Now victims must face the daunting question of where to go next--and we can help. Tens of thousands of newly homeless families are being bused to a stadium in Houston, where they may wait for weeks or months. At least 80,000 are competing for area shelters, and countless more are in motels, cars, or wherever they can stay out of the elements. The Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Red Cross are scrambling to find shelter for the displaced. This morning, MoveOn.org launched an emergency national housing drive to connect your empty beds with hurricane victims who desperately need a place to wait out the storm. You can post your offer of housing (a spare room, extra bed, even a decent couch) and search for available housing online. http://www.hurricanehousing.org The process is simple: * You can sign up to become a host by posting a description of whatever housing you have available, along with contact information. You can change or remove your offer at any time. * Hurricane victims, local and national relief organizations, friends and relatives can search the site for housing. We'll do everything we can to get your offers where they are needed most. Many shelters actually already have Internet access, but folks without 'net access can still make use of the site through case workers and family members. * Hurricane victims or relief agencies will contact hosts and together decide if it's a good match and make the necessary travel arrangements. The host's address is not released until a particular match is agreed on.

Here is a brief bio on William Hubbs Rehnquist Federal Judicial Service to our nation. Supreme Court of the United States Nominated by Richard M. Nixon on October 22, 1971, to a seat vacated by John Marshall Harlan; Confirmed by the Senate on December 10, 1971, and received commission on December 15, 1971. Service terminated on September 26, 1986, due to appointment to another judicial position. Supreme Court of the United States, Chief Justice Nominated by Ronald Reagan on June 20, 1986, to a seat vacated by Warren Earl Burger; Confirmed by the Senate on September 17, 1986, and received commission on September 25, 1986.

Help After a Disaster Applicant's Guide to the Individuals & Households Program July 2004 The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) under the authority of section 408 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. §5174, and Title 44 of the Code Federal Regulations (CFR) may provide financial assistance and, if necessary, direct services to eligible individuals and households who, as a direct result of a major disaster, have necessary expenses and serious needs and are unable to meet such expenses or needs through other means. OVERVIEW OF THE INDIVIDUALS AND HOUSEHOLDS PROGRAM (IHP) PURPOSE: When disasters take place, the Individuals and Households Program (IHP) provides money and services to people in the disaster area when losses are not covered by insurance and property has been damaged or destroyed. This program guide provides information that will help you understand IHP and explains how to apply. You must meet specific eligibility conditions to qualify for help. IHP is designed to help you with critical expenses that cannot be covered in other ways. LIMITATIONS: IHP will not cover all of your losses from damage to your property (home, personal property, household goods) that resulted from the disaster. IHP is not intended to restore your damaged property to its condition before the disaster. In some cases, IHP may only provide enough money, up to the program limits, for you to return an item to service. IHP does not cover business-related losses that resulted from the disaster. By law, IHP cannot provide money to you for losses that are covered by your insurance. While some money is available through IHP, most disaster aid from the Federal government is in the form of loans from the Small Business Administration (SBA) that must be repaid. Applicants to IHP may be required to seek help from SBA first, before being considered for certain types of IHP help. TYPES OF ASSISTANCE: The following list describes the types of assistance available through IHP and what each provides. Temporary Housing (a place to live for a limited period of time) - Money is available to rent a different place to live, or a government provided housing unit when rental properties are not available. Repair - Money is available to homeowners to repair damage from the disaster that is not covered by insurance. The goal is to make the damaged home safe, sanitary, and functional. Replacement: Money is available to homeowners to replace their home destroyed in the disaster that is not covered by insurance. The goal is to help the homeowner with the cost of replacing their destroyed home. Permanent Housing Construction: Direct assistance or money for the construction of a home. This type of help occurs only in insular areas or remote locations specified by FEMA, where no other type of housing assistance is possible. Other Needs: Money is available for necessary expenses and serious needs caused by the disaster. This includes medical, dental, funeral, personal property, transportation, moving and storage, and other expenses that are authorized by law. YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS AND DISASTER ASSISTANCE The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act) is the law that authorizes Federal assistance when the President declares a State to be a disaster area. Section 308 of the Stafford Act protects individuals from discrimination on the basis of their race, color, religion, nationality, sex, age, or economic status in all disaster assistance programs. Section 309 of the Stafford Act applies these non-discrimination provisions to all private relief organizations participating in the response and recovery effort. In addition, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 also protects individuals from discrimination on the basis of their race, color, or national origin in programs that receive Federal financial assistance. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is a Federal law that protects individuals with disabilities from discrimination in all programs receiving funds from the Federal government or operated by the Federal government. Section 508 of that law prohibits discrimination against persons with disabilities in regard to federally operated technology systems. DISASTER ASSISTANCE PROCESS (To be used by people in Presidentially declared disaster areas.) 1. Apply over the phone to FEMA: Call 1-800-621-FEMA (3362) (hearing/speech impaired ONLY—call 1-800-462-7585). In addition to having a pen and paper, please have the following information ready to give to the person who takes your call: -Your Social Security Number. -A description of your losses that were caused by the disaster. -Insurance Information. -Directions to your damaged property. -A telephone number where you can be contacted. More information can be found at this link http://www.fema.gov/txt/about/process/help...ter_english.txt

THE PRESIDENT: I've just received an update from Secretary Chertoff and other Cabinet Secretaries involved on the latest developments in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. As we flew here today, I also asked the pilot to fly over the Gulf Coast region so I could see firsthand the scope and magnitude of the devastation. The vast majority of New Orleans, Louisiana is under water. Tens of thousands of homes and businesses are beyond repair. A lot of the Mississippi Gulf Coast has been completely destroyed. Mobile is flooded. We are dealing with one of the worst natural disasters in our nation's history. And that's why I've called the Cabinet together. The people in the affected regions expect the federal government to work with the state government and local government with an effective response. I have directed Secretary of Homeland Security Mike Chertoff to chair a Cabinet-level task force to coordinate all our assistance from Washington. FEMA Director Mike Brown is in charge of all federal response and recovery efforts in the field. I've instructed them to work closely with state and local officials, as well as with the private sector, to ensure that we're helping, not hindering, recovery efforts. This recovery will take a long time. This recovery will take years. Our efforts are now focused on three priorities: Our first priority is to save lives. We're assisting local officials in New Orleans in evacuating any remaining citizens from the affected area. I want to thank the state of Texas, and particularly Harris County and the city of Houston and officials with the Houston Astrodome, for providing shelter to those citizens who found refuge in the Super Dome in Louisiana. Buses are on the way to take those people from New Orleans to Houston. FEMA has deployed more than 50 disaster medical assistance teams from all across the country to help the affected -- to help those in the affected areas. FEMA has deployed more than 25 urban search and rescue teams with more than a thousand personnel to help save as many lives as possible. The United States Coast Guard is conducting search and rescue missions. They're working alongside local officials, local assets. The Coast Guard has rescued nearly 2,000 people to date. The Department of Defense is deploying major assets to the region. These include the USS Bataan to conduct search and rescue missions; eight swift water rescue teams; the Iwo Jima Amphibious Readiness Group to help with disaster response equipment; and the hospital ship USNS Comfort to help provide medical care. The National Guard has nearly 11,000 Guardsmen on state active duty to assist governors and local officials with security and disaster response efforts. FEMA and the Army Corps of Engineers are working around the clock with Louisiana officials to repair the breaches in the levees so we can stop the flooding in New Orleans. Our second priority is to sustain lives by ensuring adequate food, water, shelter and medical supplies for survivors and dedicated citizens -- dislocated citizens. FEMA is moving supplies and equipment into the hardest hit areas. The Department of Transportation has provided more than 400 trucks to move 1,000 truckloads containing 5.4 million Meals Ready to Eat -- or MREs, 13.4 million liters of water, 10,400 tarps, 3.4 million pounds of ice, 144 generators, 20 containers of pre-positioned disaster supplies, 135,000 blankets and 11,000 cots. And we're just starting. There are more than 78,000 people now in shelters. HHS and CDC are working with local officials to identify operating hospital facilities so we can help them, help the nurses and doctors provide necessary medical care. They're distributing medical supplies, and they're executing a public health plan to control disease and other health-related issues that might arise. Our third priority is executing a comprehensive recovery effort. We're focusing on restoring power and lines of communication that have been knocked out during the storm. We'll be repairing major roads and bridges and other essential means of transportation as quickly as possible. There's a lot of work we're going to have to do. In my flyover, I saw a lot of destruction on major infrastructure. Repairing the infrastructure, of course, is going to be a key priority. The Department of Energy is approving loans from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to limit disruptions in crude supplies for refineries. A lot of crude production has been shut down because of the storm. I instructed Secretary Bodman to work with refiners, people who need crude oil, to alleviate any shortage through loans. The Environmental Protection Agency has granted a nationwide waiver for fuel blends to make more gasoline and diesel fuel available throughout the country. This will help take some pressure off of gas price. But our citizens must understand this storm has disrupted the capacity to make gasoline and distribute gasoline. We're also developing a comprehensive plan to immediately help displaced citizens. This will include housing and education and health care and other essential needs. I've directed the folks in my Cabinet to work with local folks, local officials, to develop a comprehensive strategy to rebuild the communities affected. And there's going to be a lot of rebuilding done. I can't tell you how devastating the sights were. I want to thank the communities in surrounding states that have welcomed their neighbors during an hour of need. A lot of folks left the affected areas and found refuge with a relative or a friend, and I appreciate you doing that. I also want to thank the American Red Cross and the Salvation Army and the Catholic Charities, and all other members of the armies of compassion. I think the folks in the affected areas are going to be overwhelmed when they realize how many Americans want to help them. At this stage in the recovery efforts, it's important for those who want to contribute, to contribute cash. You can contribute cash to a charity of your choice, but make sure you designate that gift for hurricane relief. You can call 1-800-HELPNOW, or you can get on the Red Cross web page, RedCross.org. The Red Cross needs our help. I urge our fellow citizens to contribute. The folks on the Gulf Coast are going to need the help of this country for a long time. This is going to be a difficult road. The challenges that we face on the ground are unprecedented. But there's no doubt in my mind we're going to succeed. Right now the days seem awfully dark for those affected -- I understand that. But I'm confident that, with time, you can get your life back in order, new communities will flourish, the great city of New Orleans will be back on its feet, and America will be a stronger place for it. The country stands with you. We'll do all in our power to help you. May God bless you. Thank you.

The Red Cross discourages donations of collected goods and individual items for disaster relief? Collections of items require valuable and scarce resources such as time, money, and personnel to sort, clean, and distribute them, which come at the expense of the emergency activities relief workers are attempting to perform. The Red Cross has neither the resources, nor the logistical set-up, to properly handle these types of donations, and therefore cannot accept them. In addition, because the organization has no way of knowing what spontaneous individual donations or unsolicited collections of items will consist of, and therefore cannot ensure there will be enough of a particular item to distribute it equitably, or if the donated products will even be appropriate for the relief effort. Shipping donated goods is also costly and particularly difficult in the aftermath of a disaster, as roads are often damaged or impassable, and easily clogged with shipments of non-priority items. The Red Cross makes every attempt to procure items locally to save money by minimizing transportation and storage costs. “We don’t want to discourage people who want to help,” said Lepof. “But, making a financial gift to support the relief operations really is the best way for people to help after a disaster like this.” Monetary financial contributions enable the Red Cross to support the greatest needs in the most efficient manner. Cash can be used to purchase items in adjacent, staging areas and eliminate the added costs involved in transporting goods

Hi James, The Department of Justice's first priority is to prevent future terrorist attacks. Since its passage following the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Patriot Act has played a key part - and often the leading role - in a number of successful operations to protect innocent Americans from the deadly plans of terrorists dedicated to destroying America and our way of life. While the results have been important, in passing the Patriot Act, Congress provided for only modest, incremental changes in the law. Congress simply took existing legal principles and retrofitted them to preserve the lives and liberty of the American people from the challenges posed by a global terrorist network. The Act Improves Our Counter-Terrorism Efforts in Several Significant Ways: 1. The Patriot Act allows investigators to use the tools that were already available to investigate organized crime and drug trafficking. Many of the tools the Act provides to law enforcement to fight terrorism have been used for decades to fight organized crime and drug dealers, and have been reviewed and approved by the courts. As Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) explained during the floor debate about the Act, "the FBI could get a wiretap to investigate the mafia, but they could not get one to investigate terrorists. To put it bluntly, that was crazy! What's good for the mob should be good for terrorists." (Cong. Rec., 10/25/01) Allows law enforcement to use surveillance against more crimes of terror. Before the Patriot Act, courts could permit law enforcement to conduct electronic surveillance to investigate many ordinary, non-terrorism crimes, such as drug crimes, mail fraud, and passport fraud. Agents also could obtain wiretaps to investigate some, but not all, of the crimes that terrorists often commit. The Act enabled investigators to gather information when looking into the full range of terrorism-related crimes, including: chemical-weapons offenses, the use of weapons of mass destruction, killing Americans abroad, and terrorism financing. Allows federal agents to follow sophisticated terrorists trained to evade detection. For years, law enforcement has been able to use "roving wiretaps" to investigate ordinary crimes, including drug offenses and racketeering. A roving wiretap can be authorized by a federal judge to apply to a particular suspect, rather than a particular phone or communications device. Because international terrorists are sophisticated and trained to thwart surveillance by rapidly changing locations and communication devices such as cell phones, the Act authorized agents to seek court permission to use the same techniques in national security investigations to track terrorists. Allows law enforcement to conduct investigations without tipping off terrorists. In some cases if criminals are tipped off too early to an investigation, they might flee, destroy evidence, intimidate or kill witnesses, cut off contact with associates, or take other action to evade arrest. Therefore, federal courts in narrow circumstances long have allowed law enforcement to delay for a limited time when the subject is told that a judicially-approved search warrant has been executed. Notice is always provided, but the reasonable delay gives law enforcement time to identify the criminal's associates, eliminate immediate threats to our communities, and coordinate the arrests of multiple individuals without tipping them off beforehand. These delayed notification search warrants have been used for decades, have proven crucial in drug and organized crime cases, and have been upheld by courts as fully constitutional. Allows federal agents to ask a court for an order to obtain business records in national security terrorism cases. Examining business records often provides the key that investigators are looking for to solve a wide range of crimes. Investigators might seek select records from hardware stores or chemical plants, for example, to find out who bought materials to make a bomb, or bank records to see who's sending money to terrorists. Law enforcement authorities have always been able to obtain business records in criminal cases through grand jury subpoenas, and continue to do so in national security cases where appropriate. These records were sought in criminal cases such as the investigation of the Zodiac gunman, where police suspected the gunman was inspired by a Scottish occult poet, and wanted to learn who had checked the poet's books out of the library. In national security cases where use of the grand jury process was not appropriate, investigators previously had limited tools at their disposal to obtain certain business records. Under the Patriot Act, the government can now ask a federal court (the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court), if needed to aid an investigation, to order production of the same type of records available through grand jury subpoenas. This federal court, however, can issue these orders only after the government demonstrates the records concerned are sought for an authorized investigation to obtain foreign intelligence information not concerning a U.S. person or to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such investigation of a U.S. person is not conducted solely on the basis of activities protected by the First Amendment. 2. The Patriot Act facilitated information sharing and cooperation among government agencies so that they can better "connect the dots." The Act removed the major legal barriers that prevented the law enforcement, intelligence, and national defense communities from talking and coordinating their work to protect the American people and our national security. The government's prevention efforts should not be restricted by boxes on an organizational chart. Now police officers, FBI agents, federal prosecutors and intelligence officials can protect our communities by "connecting the dots" to uncover terrorist plots before they are completed. As Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) said about the Patriot Act, "we simply cannot prevail in the battle against terrorism if the right hand of our government has no idea what the left hand is doing." Prosecutors can now share evidence obtained through grand juries with intelligence officials -- and intelligence information can now be shared more easily with federal prosecutors. Such sharing of information leads to concrete results. For example, a federal grand jury recently indicted an individual in Florida, Sami al-Arian, for allegedly being the U.S. leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, one of the world's most violent terrorist outfits. Palestinian Islamic Jihad is responsible for murdering more than 100 innocent people, including a young American named Alisa Flatow who was killed in a tragic bus bombing in Gaza. The Patriot Act assisted us in obtaining the indictment by enabling the full sharing of information and advice about the case among prosecutors and investigators. Alisa's father, Steven Flatow, has said, "When you know the resources of your government are committed to right the wrongs committed against your daughter, that instills you with a sense of awe. As a father you can't ask for anything more." 3. The Patriot Act updated the law to reflect new technologies and new threats. The Act brought the law up to date with current technology, so we no longer have to fight a digital-age battle with antique weapons-legal authorities leftover from the era of rotary telephones. When investigating the murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, for example, law enforcement used one of the Act's new authorities to use high-tech means to identify and locate some of the killers. Allows law enforcement officials to obtain a search warrant anywhere a terrorist-related activity occurred. Before the Patriot Act, law enforcement personnel were required to obtain a search warrant in the district where they intended to conduct a search. However, modern terrorism investigations often span a number of districts, and officers therefore had to obtain multiple warrants in multiple jurisdictions, creating unnecessary delays. The Act provides that warrants can be obtained in any district in which terrorism-related activities occurred, regardless of where they will be executed. This provision does not change the standards governing the availability of a search warrant, but streamlines the search-warrant process. Allows victims of computer hacking to request law enforcement assistance in monitoring the "trespassers" on their computers. This change made the law technology-neutral; it placed electronic trespassers on the same footing as physical trespassers. Now, hacking victims can seek law enforcement assistance to combat hackers, just as burglary victims have been able to invite officers into their homes to catch burglars. 4. The Patriot Act increased the penalties for those who commit terrorist crimes. Americans are threatened as much by the terrorist who pays for a bomb as by the one who pushes the button. That's why the Patriot Act imposed tough new penalties on those who commit and support terrorist operations, both at home and abroad. In particular, the Act: Prohibits the harboring of terrorists. The Act created a new offense that prohibits knowingly harboring persons who have committed or are about to commit a variety of terrorist offenses, such as: destruction of aircraft; use of nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons; use of weapons of mass destruction; bombing of government property; sabotage of nuclear facilities; and aircraft piracy. Enhanced the inadequate maximum penalties for various crimes likely to be committed by terrorists: including arson, destruction of energy facilities, material support to terrorists and terrorist organizations, and destruction of national-defense materials. Enhanced a number of conspiracy penalties, including for arson, killings in federal facilities, attacking communications systems, material support to terrorists, sabotage of nuclear facilities, and interference with flight crew members. Under previous law, many terrorism statutes did not specifically prohibit engaging in conspiracies to commit the underlying offenses. In such cases, the government could only bring prosecutions under the general federal conspiracy provision, which carries a maximum penalty of only five years in prison. Punishes terrorist attacks on mass transit systems. Punishes bioterrorists. Eliminates the statutes of limitations for certain terrorism crimes and lengthens them for other terrorist crimes. The government's success in preventing another catastrophic attack on the American homeland since September 11, 2001, would have been much more difficult, if not impossible, without the USA Patriot Act. The authorities Congress provided have substantially enhanced our ability to prevent, investigate, and prosecute acts of terror. You can find more information about the Patriot Act by going to: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d1...d107:h.r.03162: Hope this helps.

Hi Annymous, Where in the United States did you grow up? Have you thought about doing something to help the community instead of putting it down? This is not true in my family at all. My father was a good man and volunteered all his free time helping terminally ill patients. My mother is always helping the poor. We go to family functions all the time. I just went to my uncle's birthday party. I think it is important not to make blanket statements about American people. Especially, if you are one. I am sure you are a decent person as well. "Our ignorance of history causes us to slander our own times.." - ustave Flaubert

On August 1, 2005, a group of reporters with President Bush. The President’s remarks suggest that he believes that both intelligent design and evolution should be taught so that “people are exposed to different schools of thought.” Here are the President's relevent remarks.

Today's Intelligent Design concept is quite simular to the early twenth century thoughts of Jeans, Eddington, Whitehead, and J. S. Haldane tried to convert science into a modern ally of ancient superstition and create a new scientific mystical religion. Jeans and Eddington had assured everyone that real science and real religion were the same thing. Their technique was to conclude from the fact that science had not demonstrated how the universe had come to be, that it must have been made by an intelligent creator; to go from the circumstance that science had not synthesised life to the assertion that the origin of life was a miracle; to make the uncertainty relation in quantum mechanics into an argument for human free will. Such books as Jeans's The Mysterious Universe, ostensibly based on science, were negations of science. Jeans's world was a mythological abstraction from science, an arbitrary reduction of all the concrete universe to a number of abstract categories. The book credited with laying out the philosophical underpinnings of the modern intelligent-design movement was published in 1991 by Phillip E. Johnson, a law professor at Berkeley who claimed that Darwinian evolution is based on scant evidence and faulty assumptions. In 1996, a biochemist at Lehigh University, Michael J. Behe, offered scientific argument in favor of intelligent design. Mr. Behe introduced the idea that some living things are irreducibly complex, meaning that they could not have evolved and must have been designed. Two years later, a mathematician who now works at Baylor University, William A. Dembski, claimed to have developed a mathematical "explanatory filter" that could determine whether certain events, including biological phenomena, develop randomly or are the products of design. The classic experiment demonstrating the mechanisms by which inorganic elements could combine to form the precursors of organic chemicals was the 1950 experiment by Stanley Miller. He undertook experiments designed to find out how lightning--reproduced by repeated electric discharges--might have affected the primitive earth atmosphere. He discharged an electric spark into a mixture thought to resemble the primordial composition of the atmosphere. In a water receptacle, designed to model an ancient ocean, amino acids appeared. Amino acids are widely regarded as the building blocks of life. In 1924 a Russian biochemist, Aleksandr Ivanovich Oparin, wrote a pamphlet on the origin of life (based on ideas presented at the Russian Botanical Society in 1922) and provided what Irish physicist, John Desmond Bernal, called "the first and principal modern appreciation of the problem." Taking into account the recent discovery of methane in the atmospheres of Jupiter and the other giant planets, Oparin postulated that the infant Earth had possessed a strongly reducing atmosphere, containing methane, ammonia, hydrogen, and water vapor. In his opinion, these were the raw materials for the evolution of life.

As the Washington Redskins prepare for the 2005 National Football League season, Metro is also preparing for the upcoming football season at FedEx Field. With two new train stations near the stadium, new parking procedures for using the parking facilities at the new stations for non-Metrorail riders, and shuttle bus services, Metro would like to highlight its transit services for the upcoming football season. Metrorail Service to FedEx Field One option fans have this season is direct Metrorail service to FedEx Field. The Morgan Boulevard Metrorail station on the Blue Line is the closest station to FedEx Field. The station is nine-tenths of a mile from the stadium and a new walkway offers direct access to the stadium. The Largo Town Center Metrorail station, also on the Blue Line, is one mile away from the stadium. The Morgan Boulevard and Largo Town Center Metrorail stations opened last December, and Metro anticipates a higher volume of Metrorail ridership at these stations on game days. Metrobus Service to FedEx Field A second option fans have is access to Metrobus shuttle service from the Landover Metrorail station on the Orange Line to FedEx Field. Metrobus shuttle service will be available from the Landover station beginning three hours before the opening kickoff, and continues two hours after the conclusion of the game. The shuttle service costs $5, with representatives from the Redskins collecting the $5 fee from Metrobus customers after they arrive at the stadium. Parking Procedures at Morgan Boulevard and Largo Town Center Non-Metrorail riders who park at the Morgan Boulevard and the Largo Town Center Metrorail stations to attend special designated events at FedEx Field will be required to pay $25 via their SmarTrip cards. Metro's premium parking program requires Metrorail patrons who park at the Morgan Boulevard or Largo Town Center Metrorail stations during events at FedEx Field to use a SmarTrip card to exit during events because the SmarTrip card allows Metro to charge rail customers using the station for transit, to park, and pay the regular parking rate ($3.50 on weekdays) or free on weekends. For non-Metrorail patrons parking at these facilities who do not have a SmarTrip card, Metro personnel will be on hand at each game to sell a SmarTrip card for $30, which includes a $5 fee for purchasing the card . Metro encourages fans to retain these cards for future use, either to use the rail system, or to use at these parking facilities if people wish to park there again. Metro also encourages customers to register the SmarTrip card online for protection in case of loss or theft. Appropriate signage at these parking facilities, along with personnel from several Metro departments including Metro Transit Police will be available to assist fans with questions on the new parking procedures. The non-Metrorail rider fee is in place three hours prior to event time and remains in effect until two hours after the event. This fee ensures that a premium market-based parking fee is charged to patrons attending these events. "With the start of the new football season just around the corner, we want to remind our customers that they have several options for travel to FedEx Field," said Jim Hughes, Metro's Acting Deputy General Manager for Operations. "The number one option is the Metrorail system, since the new Morgan Boulevard station is less than a mile away and within walking distance. If customers want to use the shuttle bus service, it is still available at the Landover Metrorail station. However, no matter what customers choose as their option to get to FedEx Field this season, the best way to get there will be on Metro."

Scientists face difficult challenges in predicting and understanding how much our climate is changing. When it comes to gases that trap heat in our atmosphere, called greenhouse gases (GHGs), scientists typically look at how much of the gases exist in the atmosphere. However, Drew Shindell, a climatologist at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York, NY, believes we need to look at the GHGs when they are emitted at Earth's surface, instead of looking at the GHGs themselves after they have been mixed into the atmosphere. "The gas molecules undergo chemical changes and once they do, looking at them after they've mixed and changed in the atmosphere doesn't give an accurate picture of their effect," Shindell said. "For example, the amount of methane in the atmosphere is affected by pollutants that change methane's chemistry, and it doesn't reflect the effects of methane on other greenhouse gases," said Shindell, "so it's not directly related to emissions, which are what we set policies for." Chemically reactive GHGs include methane and ozone (carbon dioxide, the most important GHG, is largely unreactive). Once methane and the molecules that create ozone are released into the air by both natural and human-induced sources, these gases mix and react together, which transforms their compositions. When gases are altered, their contribution to the greenhouse warming effect also shifts. So, the true effect of a single GHG emission on climate becomes very hard to single out. Some of the major investigations into the state of our warming planet come from a series of reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment. These reports involved the work of hundreds of climate experts. The reports rely on measurements of greenhouse gases as they exist in the atmosphere, after they may have mixed with other gases. In other words, the findings in the report do not reflect the quantities that were actually emitted. The leading greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and halocarbons. These gases are called ‘well mixed’ greenhouse gases because of their long lifetimes of a decade or more, which allows them to disperse evenly around the atmosphere. They are emitted from both man-made and natural sources. Ozone in the lower atmosphere, called tropospheric ozone, a major component of polluted air or smog that is damaging to human and ecosystem health, also has greenhouse warming effects. In the upper atmosphere, ozone protects life on Earth from the sun’s harmful ultraviolet rays. According to new calculations, the impacts of methane on climate warming may be double the standard amount attributed to the gas. The new interpretations reveal methane emissions may account for a third of the climate warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases between the 1750s and today. The IPCC report, which calculates methane’s affects once it exists in the atmosphere, states that methane increases in our atmosphere account for only about one sixth of the total effect of well-mixed greenhouse gases on warming. Molecule for molecule, Methane is 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas, but CO2 is much more abundant than methane and the predicted growth rate is far greater. Since 1750, methane concentrations in the atmosphere have more than doubled, though the rate of increase has slowed during the 1980-90s, and researchers don’t understand why. Controlling methane could reap a big bang for the buck. Another bonus of this perspective is that in order to manage greenhouse gases, policy decisions must focus on cutting emissions, because that's where humans have some control. "If we control methane, which the U.S. is already starting to do, then we are likely to mitigate global warming more than one would have thought, so that's a very positive outcome," Shindell said. "Control of methane emissions turns out to be a more powerful lever to control global warming than would be anticipated." Sources of methane include natural sources like wetlands, gas hydrates in the ocean floor, permafrost, termites, oceans, freshwater bodies, and non-wetland soils. Fossil fuels, cattle, landfills and rice paddies are the main human-related sources. Previous studies have shown that new rice harvesting techniques can significantly reduce methane emissions and increase yields.

Researchers from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and several other government and academic institutions have created four new supercomputer simulations that for the first time combine their mathematical computer models of the atmosphere, ocean, land surface and sea ice. These simulations are the first field tests of the new Earth System Modeling Framework (ESMF), an innovative software system that promises to improve and accelerate U.S. predictive capability ranging from short-term weather forecasts to century-long climate change projections. “The development of large Earth system applications often spans initiatives, institutions and agencies, and involves the geoscience, physics, mathematics and computer science communities. With ESMF, these diverse groups can leverage common software to simplify model development,” said NASA ESMF principal investigator Arlindo da Silva, a scientist in GSFC’s Global Modeling and Assimilation Office.

Sunoco, Inc. (R&M) and Sun Pipeline Company (collectively, “Sunoco”) have agreed to pay more than $3.6 million to settle a federal government lawsuit over the massive oil spill at the John Heinz National Wildlife Refuge at Tinicum in February, 2000. The Justice Department today filed the settlement papers in federal district court in Philadelphia, on behalf of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Under the proposed consent decree, Sunoco will be required to pay a penalty exceeding $2.7 million for Clean Water Act violations. The violations are related to the discharge of an estimated 192,000 gallons of crude oil into a pond and surrounding wetlands at the refuge as the result of a crack in an oil pipeline. This penalty is to be deposited in the federal Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (http://www.epa.gov/oilspill/oilfund.htm). In addition, Sunoco has agreed to pay $865,000 for damages to natural resources caused by the same oil spill. “The settlement reached today exemplifies the Justice Department’s and EPA’s strong commitment to ensuring that violations of the Clean Water Act will be met with stiff penalties. In order to uphold environmental laws, corporations must regularly inspect and maintain any and all equipment that is in a position to pollute the environment,” said Kelly A. Johnson, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “Through interagency efforts, we are helping to restore a historic site in Pennsylvania and renew a vital habitat for a number of species.” The John Heinz National Wildlife Refuge (http://heinz.fws.gov/), located in Philadelphia and Darby Township, Pa., contains the largest remaining freshwater tidal wetland area in Pennsylvania. The 1000-acre refuge is the habitat of several species of birds, mammals, amphibians, and reptiles, including the threatened red-bellied turtle and southern leopard frog. “This consent decree is the final step in resolving the Heinz Refuge spill,” said Thomas V. Skinner, EPA Acting Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “Sunoco and Sun have acknowledged their responsibility, cleaned up the spill, and paid a significant penalty as a result of the federal government's enforcement action.” Government investigators believe that the crack in Sunoco’s 24-inch diameter crude oil pipeline went undetected for at least three days before February 5, 2000, when a refuge visitor reported oil odors to FWS personnel, who immediately notified Sunoco. According to the government, among the factors that caused or contributed to the oil spill were a defective pipeline joint, inadequate pipeline maintenance, and inadequate leak detection measures. Subsequently, Sunoco removed the defective joint, as well as several similar joints in the associated pipelines, and installed advanced leak detection systems. “The John Heinz National Wildlife Refuge is a wonderful oasis which provides vital habitat for wildlife and unique opportunities for fishing, birding or just appreciating nature in an urban environment. EPA is very pleased with this settlement, which fairly resolves Sunoco’s liability for the environmentally devastating oil spill that occurred in 2000,” said Donald S. Welsh, EPA Regional Administrator for the mid-Atlantic Region. EPA issued an emergency cleanup order to Sunoco on February 7, 2000, followed by a February 29, 2000 order requiring long-term remediation of oil-contaminated soil and sediments in the refuge. Sunoco has since removed the crude oil from the refuge’s 145-acre wetlands pond, excavated contaminated soils and sediments, and revegetated the affected area with new plants and grasses. “This spill damaged one of our country’s most valued resources—land dedicated to conserving wildlife and wildlife habitat as a national wildlife refuge,” said U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Northeast Regional Director Marvin E. Moriarty. “We are pleased with the settlement, and we look forward to restoring wildlife habitat to compensate for the natural resource injuries at the site.” The Clean Water Act prohibits discharges of oil into U.S. waterways and coastal areas and adjoining shorelines in quantities that may be harmful to the public health or the environment. Oil spills threaten both fresh water and marine environments, harming plant and animal life through physical damage and the toxicity of the oil itself, which may poison exposed organisms. For more information on oil spills and spill cleanups, visit http://www.epa.gov/oilspill. The proposed consent decree is subject to a 30-day public comment period and court review and approval.

The Department of Justice announced today that the 4th annual Ballot Access and Voting Integrity Symposium will be held in Washington, D.C. on Oct. 4 and 5, 2005. The annual training conference is part of the Ballot Access and Voting Integrity Initiative, which was established in October 2002 to spearhead the Department’s expanded efforts to address election fraud and voting rights violations. The initiative is headed by the Assistant Attorneys General of the Criminal and Civil Rights Divisions. The goal of the initiative is to protect the integrity of the election process by increasing the Department’s efforts and effectiveness in combating election fraud by: publicizing election fraud convictions to deter similar crimes in the future; ensuring nationwide compliance with the federal laws protecting voting rights; and assuring the public that the Department will combat election fraud and voting rights abuses vigorously, fairly and effectively. “The power to vote is one of the greatest opportunities we share as Americans,” said Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales. “The very fiber of our Nation rests on the zealous protection of certain inalienable rights for every citizen, and we cannot grow complacent in the safeguarding of those rights. The Department of Justice will continue to aggressively protect each person’s right to vote - and just as important - preserve the value of that vote from those who would corrupt the election process.” The Ballot Access and Voting Integrity Initiative includes: Annual Training. Prosecutors serving as District Election Officers in the 94 U.S. Attorneys’ Offices are required to attend annual training conferences on fighting election fraud and voting rights abuses. Previous conferences were held in October 2002, September 2003 and July 2004. These conferences are sponsored by the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division and the Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division, and feature presentations by Civil Rights officials and senior prosecutors from the Public Integrity Section and the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices. As a result of these conferences, there is a nationwide increase in Department expertise relating to the prosecution of election crimes and the enforcement of voting rights. State Coordination. Each U.S. Attorney is required to meet with the state Attorney General, Secretary of State, or other state official responsible for handling election matters in his or her district. These meetings underscore the Department’s commitments to: prosecute election fraud and to protect voting rights; coordinate investigation of criminal matters involving joint federal and state jurisdiction; help ensure state compliance with federal voting rights laws; and avoid interference with the administration of elections, a function left primarily to the states by the Constitution. In addition, several U.S. Attorneys have established task forces with their state counterparts to increase their effectiveness in addressing election fraud and in deterring both discrimination at the polls and electoral corruption. Prioritization of Election Fraud Enforcement. The initiative requires that all components of the Department place a high priority on the investigation and prosecution of election fraud. The Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section oversees the national effort to ensure that election fraud investigations and charges have sufficient factual and legal predication, that they will not interfere with an ongoing election, and that a national standard is maintained in this critical area of criminal law enforcement. As a result of the initiative, nationwide enforcement of election fraud matters has increased dramatically. More than 120 election fraud investigations are currently pending throughout the country, all but four of which were opened after the initiative began in October 2002. In addition, over 60 election fraud matters have been closed after investigation since the initiative began. Finally, since the start of the initiative, 89 individuals have been charged with election fraud offenses. To date, 52 of these individuals have been convicted. The following are examples of the Department’s enforcement successes under the Ballot Access and Voting Integrity Initiative: CRIMINAL DIVISION In Illinois, four precinct officials pleaded guilty to vote buying in the 2004 general election and five more people are awaiting trial on these charges. Also, an election official pleaded guilty to forging ballots in the 2002 general election. In Kentucky, seven persons were convicted of vote buying in the 1998 primary in Knott County, two at trial and five through guilty pleas. Another three persons recently were indicted for vote buying for a candidate for the state senate in the 2000 primary in Knott County and neighboring counties. Finally, four persons were convicted by juries of vote buying and related offenses in the 2002 general election in Pike County, including the county district judge. Another person also pleaded guilty to these charges. In New Hampshire, two political party officials and another person were indicted on charges relating to a scheme to prevent voters from getting to the polls in the November 2002 general election by jamming phone lines of local organizations. Two of the defendants pleaded guilty to telephone harassment charges and the third is awaiting trial for conspiring to violate the right to vote for federal officials and other related offenses. In Kansas and Missouri, three Kansas residents have been convicted, one in Kansas and two in Missouri, of voting in both Kansas and Missouri in the 2002 and 2000 elections. In Florida, 14 non-citizens, including a candidate for the state legislature, pleaded guilty or were convicted at trial of voting-related offenses in 1998 or later elections. In Louisiana, a candidate for St. Martinsville City Council pleaded guilty to conspiring to submit false voter registration information in 2002. In North Carolina, five persons were convicted of vote buying in the 2002 general election, three by a jury and two through guilty pleas. In West Virginia, four individuals, including the sheriff, the former chief of police, and the treasurer of a candidate for state representative, pleaded guilty to vote buying and related offenses in Logan County in the 2004 or 2002 elections. Also, five people have been indicted and are awaiting trial on charges of vote buying in Lincoln County in 2004 and earlier elections. In Wisconsin, four individuals have been charged with multiple voting, and six people have been charged with providing false information regarding their felon status, in the 2004 general elections. CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION Election Coverage. On Election Day in November 2004, the Division sent out 251 employees from the Division and 822 federal observers from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to monitor elections in 86 political subdivisions in 25 states. The number of monitors and observers used for that election was more than were used in all of 2000. During all of 2004, the Division sent a total of 1,996 individuals (533 department personnel; 1,463 OPM observers) to monitor 163 elections in 105 political subdivisions in 29 states. Sections 203, 208 and 4(f)(4) of the Voting Rights Act. The Civil Rights Division has undertaken the most vigorous enforcement of section 203 in the history of the Act. Since 2001, the Division has filed as many section 203 cases as in the previous 23 years, and the pace is accelerating, with more cases filed and successfully resolved since May 2004 than in the previous 11 years. These latter lawsuits alone provided comprehensive minority language programs to more citizens than all previous Section 203 and 4(f)(4) cases combined. During this period the Civil Rights Division filed the first-ever cases to protect Filipino voters (San Diego, California) and Vietnamese voters (San Diego) and in addition it negotiated a private agreement in Harris County, Texas. The Division also used sections 2, 4(e) and 208 to protect the rights of Haitian voters (Miami-Dade, Florida), Arab voters (Hamtramck, Michigan), and Puerto Rican voters (Berks County, Pennsylvania). Section 2. In July 2005, the Civil Rights Division filed a case against Osceola, Florida under section 2 alleging that the at-large method of election for the county commission dilutes Hispanic voting strength. It also filed a case against Boston, Massachusetts for discriminatory treatment of Chinese, Vietnamese and Hispanic voters at the same time. In February 2005, the Division filed a case in Noxubee County, Mississippi under section 2, alleging that local officials routinely discriminated against white voters on the basis of their race. That case has already resulted in a consent decree with several local officials and litigation of the claims against remaining defendants is ongoing. The Noxubee County case marks the first time the Division has filed a case under the Voting Rights Act on behalf of white voters. HAVA. The Civil Rights Division is charged with enforcing the requirements of the Help America Vote Act of 2002, which mandates uniform and non-discriminatory election procedures for federal office. The Division has actively informed state and local officials of the Act’s requirements through an extensive outreach effort, including the creation of a HAVA section on the Division website, responses to questions from election officials, and speeches given to election official conferences. The Division has worked closely with the Election Assistance Commission, which also has responsibilities under the Act, to ensure that the federal government gives consistent views to election officials about HAVA. The Division has obtained extensive voluntary compliance, but has also filed two lawsuits to ensure HAVA compliance, and has filed amicus briefs in several private HAVA cases to ensure consistency in interpretation of its provisions. UOCAVA. During 2004, the Civil Rights Division ensured that members of the armed forces and other persons protected by the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act were able to request, receive and cast a ballot for federal offices in a timely manner in the 2004 elections. The Voting Section was able to resolve problems with state officials without the necessity of litigation, and also initiated litigation against Pennsylvania in April 2004 and Georgia in July 2004, successfully obtaining court orders requiring changes in the deadlines for the return of ballots so that overseas and military ballots would be counted in each state’s 2004 primary election. NVRA. The Division brought two lawsuits under the National Voter Registration Act, a law designed to expand registration opportunities for all citizens and to ensure proper maintenance of voter registration lists. In United States v. Pulaski County (E.D. Ark.), the Division obtained a consent decree requiring the county to establish procedures to ensure that eligible voters were not improperly removed from the list of registered voters. The second lawsuit, United States v. State of New York (N.D.N.Y.), challenged the state's failure to provide registration opportunities at public college offices that provide services to persons with disabilities. This case remains in litigation. A third NVRA lawsuit remains pending in New York. “As these election fraud and voting rights cases demonstrate, the Department’s Ballot Access and Voting Integrity Initiative is a balanced law enforcement effort that is designed to make voting easier and cheating harder,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General John C. Richter of the Criminal Division. “The Criminal Division, through the hard work of the Public Integrity Section, will continue its vigorous enforcement of voter fraud laws to ensure that elections are not corrupted and that every vote counts.” “Protecting access to the ballot for all eligible voters is a major priority of the Civil Rights Division,” said Bradley J. Schlozman, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. “The Ballot Access and Voting Integrity Initiative has been an important instrument in ensuring the effectiveness of our enforcement efforts.”

he Department of Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO) announced today the identification of the remains of 12 U.S. servicemen missing in action from the Vietnam War. Five of those identified are being returned to their families for burial, and the remaining seven will be buried as a group in Arlington National Cemetery, near Washington, D.C. The men who were individually identified are: Cpl. Gerald E. King, of Knoxville, Tenn.; Lance Cpls. Joseph F. Cook, of Foxboro, Mass.; Raymond T. Heyne, of Mason, Wis.; Donald W. Mitchell, of Princeton, Ky.; and Thomas W. Fritsch, of Cromwell, Conn., all of the U.S. Marine Corps. Additional group remains are those of: Pfcs. Thomas J. Blackman, of Racine, Wis.; Paul S. Czerwonka, of Stoughton, Mass.; Barry L. Hempel, of Garden Grove, Calif.; Robert C. Lopez, of Albuquerque, N.M.; William D. McGonigle, of Wichita, Kan.; and Lance Cpl. James R. Sargent, of Anawalt, W. Va., all of the U.S. Marine Corps. Additionally, the remains of U.S. Army Sgt. Glenn E. Miller, of Oakland, Calif. will be included in the group burial. The Marines were part of an artillery platoon airlifted to provide support to the 11th Mobile Strike Force, which was under threat of attack from North Vietnamese forces near Kham Duc in South Vietnam. On May 9, 1968, the Strike Force had been directed to reconnoiter an area known as Little Ngok Tavak Hill near the Laos-Vietnam border. Their base came under attack by North Vietnamese Army troops, and after a 10-hour battle, all of the survivors were able to withdraw from the area. Six investigations beginning in 1993 and a series of interviews of villagers and former Vietnamese soldiers led U.S. recovery teams in 1994, 1997 and 1998 to specific defensive positions within the large battle site. Additionally, maps provided by American survivors helped to locate some key areas on the battlefield. Three excavations by the Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command (JPAC) in 1998 and 1999 yielded human remains, personal effects and other material evidence. JPAC scientists and Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory specialists used mitochondrial DNA as one of the forensic tools to help identify the remains. Of the 88,000 Americans missing in action from all conflicts, 1,815 are from the Vietnam War, with 1,381 of those within the country of Vietnam. Another 768 Americans have been accounted for in Southeast Asia since the end of the war. Of those, 540 are from within Vietnam. For additional information on the Defense Department’s mission to account for missing Americans, visit the DPMO Web site at http://www.dtic.mil/dpmo or call (703) 699-1169.

Hi Jeb, Do you have any tips for people that are just are near the transition from having a home based business to a commercial office space? Thanks in advance.

I spoke over the phone to David Bayless, Director of the Chicago Police Department News Affairs. Mr. Bayless was surprised to hear about the story running throughout the Internet.

This is the result I got for the District of Columbia. District of Columbia: Too many matching offenders. This is what I got for some zip codes 96 hits for State = DC, Zip Code Like 20002 60 hits for State = DC, Zip Code Like 20001 Scary....

This is the response I received from Robyn Ziegler of the CTA. I left a message for David Bayles the Chicago Police Department at 312-745-6110 to further investigate this story. I have also contacted Agnes Vondermuho with the French Embassy at 202-944-6047 about this story. Still no word from the Justice Department Office.

Tom Heneghen has been blasting out damaging information that is catching like wildfire throughout the Internet. Here is an example http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=3388 I just contacted the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) Media Relations Phone: 1-312-681-3090 on his statement. I will post the response from the CTA head of security. I have also contacted the Justice Department 202-307-9065 to get a statement on this matter. I am also trying to contact the Laidlaw Corporation to get their response. If anyone knows the company's location please let me know. "Nothing is swifter than rumor" - Horace

think1st and finnish_creep, I see that you both are quite spirited individuals. Comparisons of current world leaders and events such as the United States war in Iraq must be made carefully and with an awareness of the complexity of history. Our individual perspectives on these comparisons are shaped by differences in political point of view, personal history or age, past experience of violence or tragedy, geographical or cultural origins or reference points. The DC Message Board Project was to developed to give our global online community the opportunity to learn more about complex and difficult issues, rather than re-enacting polarized debate.

I think the Whistleblower Protection Act is more applicable. A federal agency violates the Whistleblower Protection Act if it takes or fails to take (or threatens to take or fail to take) a personnel action with respect to any employee or applicant because of any disclosure of information by the employee or applicant that he or she reasonably believes evidences a violation of a law, rule or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety. The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) has jurisdiction over allegations of whistleblower retaliation for made by employees of the SEC. * Whistleblower Protection Act Complaints should be sent to U.S. Office of Special Counsel Complaints Examining Unit 1730 M Street, NW, Suite 201 Washington, DC 20036-4505 The required Whistleblower complaint form is available online at OSC (www.osc.gov)

I was watching the movie, 'Big Fish,' and was reminded of all you amazing life stories. I can only wish to be half the man you were. I love and miss you very much.

The first electric car in Washington, D.C. operated on the Eckington & Soldiers' Home Railway in 1888. View is at the city terminus of the line at Seventh Street and New York Avenue, NW. Catalog #: 180098, Accession #: 21478 Currently on display From the Smithsonian Collection

Who is everyone? I could not find any news reference to your company.