Luke_Wilbur

Chef Geoff's Downtown is the spot this Halloween for a spooktacular event to benefit Elephant Trails, the National Zoo's Asian elephant conservation efforts. Enjoy wicked live entertainment by the folk rock band Mercy Creek and happy hour drink and food specials all night long. Show up in a frightful frock to win prizes. You must be 21 or older to attend this event. Date: Tuesday, October 31 Time: 9 p.m. Location: Chef Geoff’s Downtown, 13th Street between E and F Streets, across from the Warner Theatre Price: $15, which includes one beer from our sponsor Magic Hat Brewery (No tickets necessary. Just pay at the door.)

Growing evidence shows that the dinosaurs and their contemporaries were not wiped out by the famed Chicxulub meteor impact alone, according to a paleontologist who says multiple meteor impacts, massive volcanism in India and climate changes culminated in the end of the Cretaceous Period. The Chicxulub impact may have been the lesser and earlier of a series of meteor impacts and volcanic eruptions that pounded life on Earth for more than 500,000 years, say Princeton University paleontologist Gerta Keller and her collaborators Thierry Adatte from the University of Neuchatel, Switzerland, and Zsolt Berner and Doris Stueben from Karlsruhe University in Germany. A final, much larger and still unidentified impact 65.5 million years ago appears to have been the last straw, said Keller, exterminating two-thirds of all species in one of the largest mass extinction events in the history of life. It's that impact - not Chicxulub - that left the famous extraterrestrial iridium layer found in rocks worldwide that marks the impact that finally ended the Age of Reptiles, Keller believes. "The Chicxulub impact alone could not have caused the mass extinction," said Keller, "because this impact predates the mass extinction." Keller is scheduled to present that evidence at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America (GSA) in Philadelphia, on Tuesday, October 24, 2006. "Chicxulub is one of thousands of impact craters on Earth's surface and in its subsurface," said H. Richard Lane, program director in the National Science Foundation (NSF) Division of Earth Sciences, which funded the research. "The evidence found by Keller and colleagues suggests that there is more to learn about what caused the major extinction event millions of years ago, and the demise of the dinosaurs at the end of the Cretaceous." Marine sediments drilled from the Chicxulub crater itself, as well as from a site in Texas along the Brazos River and from outcrops in northeastern Mexico, reveal that Chicxulub hit Earth 300,000 years before the mass extinction. Microscopic marine animals were left virtually unscathed, said Keller. "In all these localities we can analyze their microfossils in the sediments directly above and below the Chicxulub impact layer, and cannot find any significant biotic effect," said Keller. "We cannot attribute any specific extinctions to this impact." The story that seems to be taking shape, according to Keller, is that Chicxulub, though violent, actually conspired with the prolonged and gigantic volcanic eruptions of the Deccan Flood Basalts in India, as well as with climate change, to nudge species towards the brink. They were then pushed over with a second large meteor impact. The Deccan volcanism released vast amount of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere over a period of more than a million years leading up to the mass extinction. By the time Chicxulub struck, the oceans were already 3-4 degrees warmer, even at the bottom, Keller said. "On land it must have been 7-8 degrees warmer," she said. "This greenhouse warming is well-documented. The temperature rise was rapid over about 20,000 years, and it stayed warm for about 100,000 years, then cooled back to normal well before the mass extinction." Where's the crater? "I wish I knew," said Keller.

PAK GIL YON (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) said that his country totally rejected resolution 1718 and found it unjustifiable. It was “gangster-like” for the Security Council to adopt such a coercive resolution against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, while neglecting the nuclear threat posed by the United States against his country. It was a clear testament that the Council had completely lost its impartiality and was persisting in applying double standards to its work. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was disappointed that the Council was incapable of offering a single word of concern when the United States threatened to launch nuclear pre-emptive attacks, reinforced its armed forces and conducted large-scale military exercises near the Korean peninsula. He said that, on 9 October, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had successfully conducted underground nuclear tests under secure conditions, as a way of bolstering the country’s self-defence. His country’s nuclear test was entirely attributable to United States threats, sanctions and pressure, and every possible effort had been expanded to settle the nuclear issue through dialogue and negotiation. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea indeed wished to denuclearize the Korean peninsula, he said; yet, the Bush Administration had responded to his country’s patient and sincere efforts with sanctions and blockades. His country had, therefore, felt compelled to prove its possession of nuclear weapons to protect itself from the danger of war from the United States. Also, although his country had conducted a nuclear test -- due to American provocation -- it still remained unchanged in its will to denuclearize the Korean peninsula through dialogue and negotiation, as that had been President Kim Il Sung’s last instruction. He said the test did not contradict the Joint Statement of the six-party talks to dismantle nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programmes. Rather, it constituted a positive measure for its implementation. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had clarified more than once that it would have no need for even a single nuclear weapon as long as the United States dropped its hostile policies towards his country, and as long as confidence was built between the two countries. Instead, the United States had manipulated the Security Council into adopting a resolution pressurizing Pyongyang. He said the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was ready for both dialogue and confrontation. If the United States persisted in increasing pressure upon his country, it would continue to take physical countermeasures, considering it as a declaration of war.

SECURITY COUNCIL CONDEMNS NUCLEAR TEST BY DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA, UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTING RESOLUTION 1718 (2006) Action Prevents Provision of Nuclear Technology, Large-Scale Weapons, Luxury Goods to Country; Permits Inspection of Cargo to Ensure Compliance Expressing the gravest concern over the claim by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) that it had conducted a nuclear weapon test, the Security Council this afternoon condemned that test and imposed sanctions on the DPRK, calling for it to return immediately to multilateral talks on the issue. Acting under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, but barring automatic military enforcement of its demands under the Charter’s Article 41, the Council unanimously adopted resolution 1718 (2006), which prevents a range of goods from entering or leaving the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and imposes an asset freeze and travel ban on persons related to the nuclear-weapon programme. Through its decision, the Council prohibited the provision of large-scale arms, nuclear technology and related training to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, as well as luxury goods, calling upon all States to take cooperative action, including through inspection of cargo, in accordance with their respective national laws. The Council stressed that such inspections should aim to prevent illicit trafficking in nuclear, chemical or biological weapons, as well as their means of delivery and related materials. Regarding the freezing of assets, the Council provided specific exemptions for the transfer of monies to meet various financial obligations and humanitarian needs, specifying humanitarian exemptions for the travel ban, as well. To monitor and adjust the sanctions imposed on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Council decided to establish a committee consisting of all 15 members of the body, which would provide a report every 90 days, beginning with the passage of the resolution. Following the vote, several members of the Council condemned what many called an irresponsible step by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, stressing the importance of the Council’s swift and decisive action and emphasizing that, should the country implement the provisions of the new resolution, the sanctions could be lifted. The United States representative said the test posed “one of the gravest threats to international peace and security that this Council has ever had to confront”. The resolution adopted today would send a strong and clear message to North Korea and other would-be proliferators that they would meet with serious repercussions should they choose to pursue the development of weapons of mass destruction. Further, it would send an unequivocal and unambiguous message for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to stop its procurement programmes and to verifiably dismantle existing weapons of mass destruction programmes. “All of us find ourselves in an extraordinary situation, which requires the adoption of extraordinary measures”, the representative of the Russian Federation said. Today’s text contained a set of carefully considered and targeted measures, aimed at resolving the main issue: to make the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea reconsider its dangerous course, come back to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and resume, without preconditions, its participation in the six-party talks. That could be done only through political and diplomatic means. He insisted on the Council’s strong control over the measures against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and noted that the resolution reflected concern over the humanitarian consequences of strict measures. China’s representative agreed that the Council’s actions should both indicate the international community’s firm position and help create conditions for the peaceful solution to the DPRK nuclear issue through dialogue. As the resolution adopted today basically reflected that spirit, his delegation had voted in favour of the text. However, sanctions were not the end in themselves. China did not approve of the practice of inspecting cargo to and from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and urged the countries concerned to adopt a responsible attitude in that regard, refraining from taking any provocative steps that could intensify the tension. China still believed that the six-party talks were the realistic means of handling the issue. It also firmly opposed the use of force. Japan’s representative said that the combination of ballistic missile capability and, now, the claim of nuclear capability in the hands of a regime known for reckless irresponsible behaviour, created nothing less than a grave threat to peace and security. He not only supported the Council’s sanctions, but also outlined a set of national measures undertaken by his country, including closure of Japanese ports to DPRK vessels; denial of imports from the DPRK; and prohibition of entry for DPRK nationals into Japanese territory. The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, however, “totally rejected” the text, saying that it was “gangster-like” of the Security Council to adopt such a coercive resolution against his country, while neglecting the nuclear threat posed by the United States against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. It was a clear testament that the Council had completely lost its impartiality and was persisting in applying double standards to its work. JOHN BOLTON ( United States) said that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s (DPRK) proclamation that it had conducted a nuclear test had posed the gravest threat to international peace and security that the Security Council had ever had to confront. The resolution just adopted would send a strong and clear message to the DPRK and other would-be proliferators that they would meet with serious repercussions should they choose to pursue the development of weapons of mass destruction. Further, it would send an unequivocal and unambiguous message for the DPRK to stop its procurement programmes and to verifiably dismantle existing weapons of mass destruction programmes. He said resolution 1695 (2006) had demonstrated to North Korea that the best way to promote the livelihood of its people and end its isolation was to stop playing games of brinksmanship, comply with Security Council demands, return to the six-party talks and implement the terms of the joint statement from the last round of those talks. But sadly, the regime in Pyongyang had chosen a different path, answering the Security Council’s demands with an announcement that it had conducted a successful nuclear test. North Korea had thus broken its word, provoking a crisis and denying its people a better life. He said that, three months ago, the United States had counselled other Member States to prepare for further action in the event that the DPRK failed to comply with resolution 1695. His country was pleased, therefore, that the Security Council was united in its condemnation today, proving that it was indeed prepared to meet threats to international security with resolve. Acting under Chapter VII, the Council would impose punitive sanctions on Kim Jong Il’s regime. By today’s resolution, Member States would also agree not to trade in materials that would contribute to nuclear weapons -- and other weapons of mass destruction -- programmes, as well as to ban the trade in high-end military equipment. In doing its part to implement that provision of the resolution, the United States would rely on a number of control lists already in place, as published by the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the Missile Technology Control Regime and the Australia Group. He said the resolution would prevent the travel of officials known to be involved in weapons of mass destruction efforts, as well as target the way Kim Jong Il financed his related weapons programmes, including through money-laundering, counterfeiting and selling narcotics. By the resolution, Member States were bound to take action against those activities and freeze the assets of involved entities and individuals of the DPRK. It would provide for an inspections regime to ensure compliance with its provisions, building on the existing work of the Proliferation Security Initiative. It would impose strict demands on the DPRK not to conduct further nuclear tests or launch ballistic missiles, he said, as well as to abandon all weapons of mass destruction programmes, whether nuclear, chemical or biological, in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner. The Council would lift the measures imposed by the resolution if the DPRK complied fully with all its provisions and resumed the six-party talks. However, Member States must be prepared if the country again ignored Security Council demands; in that event, measures must be strengthened and Member States must return to the Council for further action. As the United States pursued a diplomatic solution, it was also reassuring its allies of its commitment to security, he said. It would seek to increase its defence cooperation with allies, including on ballistic missile defence and cooperation to prevent the DPRK from importing or exporting nuclear missile technology. The goals were clear: a nuclear-free Korean peninsula, and to work with other countries to ensure that the DPRK faced serious consequences if it continued down its current path. The resolution provided a carve-out for humanitarian relief efforts in the country, however, because the concern was with the regime and not the starving and suffering people of the DPRK. Hopefully, the country would implement the resolution so its people could enjoy a brighter future. JEAN-MARC DE LA SABLIÈRE ( France) said that the Council, by adopting resolution 1718 today, had provided a firm reply to the announcement last Monday of a nuclear test by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. That reply voiced the international community’s unanimous condemnation of that extremely grave act, and unanimous determination in the face of Pyongyang’s behaviour. Adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter, the resolution contained a number of strong measures, in particular regarding missile and weapons of mass destruction programmes. It also contained provisions to prevent exporting and importing of products associated with those programmes by the DPRK. It was necessary to ensure the effectiveness of those measures by proceeding under international law with inspections of cargo to and from the DPRK, he said. Given the challenge posed by North Korea, it was essential for the international community to be united and extremely firm. The Council had clearly demonstrated that the behaviour of North Korea would not be tolerated. His delegation also understood that full compliance with the resolution by the DPRK and successful resumption of six-party talks would prompt the Council to lift the sanctions imposed by the resolution. WANG GUANGYA ( China) said that, on 9 October, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had flagrantly conducted a nuclear test in disregard of the common opposition of the international community. China’s Foreign Ministry had issued a statement on the same day, expressing firm opposition to that act. Proceeding from the overall interests of brining about denuclearization of the Korean peninsula and maintaining peace and stability there and in North-East Asia, China supported the Council in making a firm and appropriate response. The action of the Security Council should both indicate the firm position of the international community and help create enabling conditions for the final peaceful solution to the DPRK nuclear issue through dialogue. As the resolution adopted today basically reflected that spirit, his delegation had voted in favour of the text. He reiterated that sanctions were not the end in themselves. As stipulated in the resolution, if the DPRK complied with its requests, the Council would suspend or lift sanctions against the country. At the same time, China did not approve of the practice of inspecting cargo to and from the DPRK, and he had reservations about related provisions of the resolution. China strongly urged the countries concerned to adopt a prudent and responsible attitude in that regard, and refrain from taking any provocative steps that could intensify the tension. China’s Government had committed itself to brining about denuclearization of the Korean peninsula and to maintaining peace and stability both on the peninsula and in North-East Asia, he said. It had always advocated seeking a peaceful solution to the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula through diplomatic means. China had made enormous and unremitting efforts towards that end, initiated the six-party talks and pushed parties concerned to implement the Joint Statement of September 2005. Though there had been the negative development of the DPRK’s nuclear test, those policies remained unchanged. China still believed that the six-party talks were the realistic means of handling the issue. He also firmly opposed the use of force. China noted with satisfaction that, in condemning the DPRK nuclear test, the parties concerned had all indicated the importance of adhering to diplomatic efforts. Under the current circumstances, it was necessary to “unswervingly stick” to the objective of denuclearization of the Korean peninsula, oppose nuclear proliferation, adhere to the general direction of resolving the issue through peaceful dialogue and negotiations, avoid any acts that might cause escalation of tension and maintain peace and stability on the Korean peninsula and in North-East Asia. That was in the common interest of all the parties concerned. All the parties should take vigorous and positive action towards that end. China was ready and willing to strengthen consultations and cooperation with other parties concerned, so as to ensure a cool-headed response, push forward the six-party talks and continue to play a constructive role in realizing denuclearization of the Korean peninsula and North-East Asia. EMYR JONES PARRY ( United Kingdom) welcomed the strong signal sent to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, saying the Council had acted decisively and quickly under Chapter VII to ask for an end to that country’s provocative and irresponsible act. The resolution was important because it reiterated the international community’s condemnation of such actions, and made clear to the DPRK and all States concerned that they had a legal obligation to carry out its provisions. He said the United Kingdom condemned the 9 October test as an irresponsible act, because it had raised tensions both regionally and internationally. Despite the repeated urging of its neighbours, the DPRK had contravened its commitments under the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty and had ignored resolution 1695 (2006). Indeed, the test had been a direct provocation to the international community and constituted a threat to peace and security. As such, the Council had duty to condemn the act, and had done so by sending a strong message to Pyongyang. The resolution contained robust terms, he said, but its purpose was to bring about a stop to the DPRK’s weapons of mass destruction and missile programmes and to change the behaviour of the leaders in Pyongyang, not to hamper the lives of people who were already suffering. The United Kingdom would lift the measures imposed today if the DPRK returned to the six-party talks. It was that country’s choice to flout or accept the obligations contained in it. VITALY I. CHURKIN (Russian Federation) said that, even before the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s statement of its intention to conduct a nuclear test and then following that irresponsible step, his country had emphasized that such actions could complicate the settlement of the nuclear problem on the Korean peninsula, pose a threat to international peace and security and undermine the non-proliferation regime. His country had always advocated a strong, but carefully vetted, response from the Council, aimed at preventing further escalation of tension. He could only regret that North Korean authorities had ignored the warnings contained in the Council’s presidential statement of 6 October about the negative consequences that would flow from a nuclear test, primarily for the DPRK itself. “All of us find ourselves in an extraordinary situation, which required adoption of extraordinary measures,” he said. Having supported the text -– a result of tense negotiations, in which all members of the Council had participated –- he noted that the resolution reflected concern over the humanitarian consequences of strict measures. At the same time, as a matter of principle, it was necessary –- as envisioned by relevant decisions of the United Nations –- to carefully weigh such consequences on a case-by-case basis. Any sanctions introduced by the Council should not go on indefinitely and should be lifted upon implementation of the Council’s demands. In that connection, he also emphasized that sanctions unilaterally adopted by States did not facilitate resolution of such problems, when the Council was working on joint approaches, with the participation of all relevant parties. He added that today’s text contained a set of carefully considered and targeted measured, aimed at resolving the main issue: to make the DPRK immediately review its dangerous course, come back to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and resume, without preconditions, its participation in the six-party talks. That could be done only through political and diplomatic means. The measures against the DPRK must be implemented under strict control of the Council and its Sanctions Committee set up by today’s resolution. It was very important that, under the text, full implementation of its provisions by the DPRK would lead to the lifting of the sanctions. He hoped Pyongyang would adequately understand the collective position of the international community and take practical steps to achieve denuclearization of the Korean peninsula, as well as peace and stability in North-Eastern Asia. The Council’s President, KENZO OSHIMA ( Japan), speaking in his national capacity, welcomed the resolution adopted today as one of the most important decisions the Council had taken in recent times. It was essential that such an important decision be taken by a unanimous vote, and that was a welcome outcome. The resolution strongly condemned the irresponsible act on the part of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, which had proceeded to conduct a nuclear test in total defiance of the calls to refrain from doing so by all its immediate neighbours and, indeed, by the entire world. That was unacceptable behaviour, which deserved to be met not only with a strong admonishment, but also with necessary measures prescribed in Chapter VII of the Charter. Under the circumstances, the Council had acted in the discharge of its responsibilities by responding to the grave situation created by the DPRK, swiftly and in unity. The situation created by the DPRK had caused widespread and deep concern in East Asia and beyond, he continued. The danger presented by Pyongyang’s total disregard of the non-proliferation regime was clear and present. Last July, when the DPRK had resorted to the launching of ballistic missiles, the Council had unanimously adopted resolution 1695, condemning that action. It had also unequivocally urged the DPRK not to go forward with the test, through a strong presidential statement. Only two days after the Council’s call, however, the DPRK had claimed that it had conducted a nuclear test. The combination of ballistic missile capability and, now, the claim of nuclear capability in the hands of a regime with a record of known and reckless irresponsible behaviour, created a situation that was nothing less than a grave threat to peace and security. Japan also regretted that the DPRK’s actions were in contravention of the Japan-DPRK Pyongyang Declaration, the Joint Statement of the six-party talks and several other agreements. Along with other concerned countries in the region, Japan expected that the DPRK would act as a responsible Member of the United Nations, by implementing this and other Security Council resolutions and decisions, including resolution 1695, in good faith. At the same time, the security issue was not the only point of contention between the DPRK and the international community. The resolution underlined the importance for the DPRK to responding to the humanitarian concerns of the international community, which included the abduction issue. He demanded that the issue be resolved as soon as possible. He said that, on 11 October, his Government had announced that it would take a set of national measures in strong protest against the claimed nuclear test, recognizing the need to take firm measures in response. Those measures included denial of permission to enter Japanese ports to all DPRK vessels; denial of import of all items from the DPRK; and denial, in principle, of entry by DPRK nationals into Japanese territory. Japan would also implement in good faith the measures under the resolution. The resolution contained strong measures, he added, but sanctions were not invoked for the sake of sanctions. The goal of the resolution was to remove the threat to international peace and security, by ensuring discontinuation of the DPRK’s nuclear testing and ballistic missile launchings, as well as the abandonment of its nuclear and missile programmes. It was up to the DPRK whether that opportunity would be utilized. That country’s compliance with the resolution and addressing the concerns of the international community would open the way for the international community to consider actions for the benefit of the DPRK as made clear in paragraph 15 of the resolution. Japan had not closed the door on dialogue and urged the DPRK to respond sincerely for a diplomatic solution to the issues between the two countries.

B. Frank has stated to me that he is not Martin.

On the DC1st web site it states that Austermuhle lives on the eastern end of Capitol Hill? You are stating that by Austermuhle coming out of Sam Brooks home verified what you heard from the bartenders at Remingtons and the The Fireplace that the two men were lovers. Because of the relationship Austermuhle would use his position at DC1st to destroy your campaign. Is this correct? Do you remember the bartenders names so I can verify what they stated? How did you find out about Austermuhle’s criminal record in the USA and Costa Rica and his involvement with the Communist Party USA?

I still do not understand where and why this feud started. Rees you claim you met Martin Austermuhle at 4:00 am on Wisconsin avenue while passing out campaign media. Correct? Was the day you met Mr. Autermuhle Sunday, March 12, 2006? Were you wearing an the orange shirt and blue jeans at the time? Was it at this point Martin Austermuhle mocked your looks and made a comment about the way you entered into buildings. Did any other conversation transpire between You and Martin Austermuhle during this meeting? Did you have any other bad encounters with anyone else between 4 and 6 in the morning?

Here is the President's other statement on North Korea.

I did not forget the questions. I was just putting out his public statement. But, in fairness you forgot to post the President's response to previous administrations. This is not just an American, so I am moving this topic to World Politics.

Here are the Presidents remarks at a Rose Garden Press Conference.

What happened during that encounter?

How do you know Martin Austermuhle? Did you meet him? From what I have read DC1st is focused on our local community. Does Martin Austermuhle write columns about his opinions on the political climate in Venezuela that upsets you?

I never have met or corresponded with Martin Austermuhle. So, I am no help on this. Sorry.

Here is the latest from Rob

AdamsMorgan MainStreet highlights new, independent wine store DeVinos. (couldn't tell if your Evite got through?) WINE TASTING, APPETIZERS & DOOR PRIZES! Sparkling wine to open; then reds and whites Specialty wines from DeVinos Tuesday, Oct. 10; 7:00 – 9:00pm Location: El Tamarindo (1785 Florida Ave, NW) JOIN THE FUN, mingle with neighbors, enjoy tasty tidbits from family-owned El Tamarindo. DOOR PRIZES: Urban Escape and Fleet Feet

What level are you Anil?

I will give them a call and ask.

When you find peace and smile. That is heaven.

Hi Clemence, When I was younger I had the biggest crush with a girl that lived next to me at the beach. She was very pretty and was alot of fun. But, I never had the courage to let her know how I felt. She ended up meeting this guy and got married. I was seriously bummed out for awhile. But, then a friend of mine set me up with one of his friends. We naturally hit it off and eventually got married. After reading your post it really made me feel grateful that I did not go out with the girl at the beach. Life is crazy, so just have fun. Before my dad died he would say, "Son, if you look for the bad in life you will find it. If you look for the good in life you will find it. Its up to you to decide which path to take. I hope you look for the good.

Mercury attacks the central nervous system and endocrine system and adversely affects the mouth, gums, and teeth. High exposure over long periods of time will result in brain damage and ultimately death. Mercury also can have severe effects on fetuses and infants. Mothers who have taken in high levels of mercury have given birth to children with birth defects. Due to this risk, with the exception of some Influenza (flu) vaccines, none of the vaccines used in the U.S. to protect preschool children against 12 infectious diseases contain thimerosal as a preservative.

The District Department of Public Works (DPW) will hold its fall household hazardous waste and electronics recycling drop-off Saturday, October 28, 2006, from 8 am to 3 pm at the District’s newly renovated Trash Transfer Station at 3200 Benning Road, NE. This service is free and open to all District residents. Household hazards include old cleaning and gardening chemicals, pesticides and poisons, acids, varnish, oil-based paints, solvents, aerosols, wood preservatives, spent batteries of all kinds, roofing tar, chemistry sets, automotive fluids, and even asbestos floor tiles. DPW will also have an electronics recycling station to receive end-of-life televisions, office and audio equipment, computers, computer parts and accessories. All computer monitors and TV screens must be intact, not cracked, punctured or shattered. During processing, the electronics are broken down into component parts, precious as well as toxic metals are extracted, and then the various materials are recycled or disposed of safely.

As far as temperatures drop in the Arctic winter – on average to -34°C (-29°F) – a new study shows that in the last two years sea ice is shrinking on the surface of Arctic waters to record low levels. Using satellite data, scientists have observed unusually warm wintertime temperatures in the region and a resulting decline in the length of the Arctic seasonal ice. The maximum amount of sea ice in the Arctic winter has fallen by six percent over each of the last two winters, as compared to a loss of merely 1.5 percent per decade on average annually since the earliest satellite monitoring in 1979. This is happening as summer sea ice continues its retreat at an average of ten percent per decade. "This amount of Arctic sea ice reduction the past two consecutive winters has not taken place before during the 27 years satellite data has been available," said Joey Comiso, a research scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. "In the past, sea ice reduction in winter was significantly lower per decade compared to summer sea ice retreat. What's remarkable is that we've witnessed sea ice reduction at six percent per year over just the last two winters, most likely a result of warming due to greenhouse gases." Comiso used satellite data from 1978 to 2006 to carry out the study, to be published in Geophysical Research Letters this month. Computer simulations of the climate warming effect of greenhouse gases had predicted that winter sea ice would decline faster than summer sea ice Satellite data has shown otherwise until two years ago, when record low winter ice cover and warmer temperatures have prevailed. Sea ice cover in the Northern Hemisphere spans nearly 6.2 million square miles in the winter. Satellite sensors are the only means to observe such a large region effectively. Comiso confirmed the accuracy of satellite sea ice data by comparing it with high-resolution satellite information and data gathered from sensitive instruments aboard aircraft. Surface temperature data from satellite sensors are checked against measurements from meteorological stations in the region. Adding to the plight of winter sea ice, previous research has shown a trend in which the melt period lasts about two weeks longer per year annually due to summer sea ice decline. This means that the onset of freeze-up is happening later in the fall season. As a result, the ice cover in winter never gets as extensive as it would have been if the freeze-up had begun earlier. More than that, the ice reflects the sun's radiation much more efficiently than the ocean's surface. As a result, as the ice cover declines, the ocean's surface warms, causing in turn, further decline of the ice. According to Comiso, if the winter ice retreat continues, the effect could be very profound, especially for marine animals. "The seasonal ice regions in the Arctic are among the most biologically productive regions in the world," he said. "Some of the richest fisheries are found in the region, in part because of sea ice. Sea ice provides melt-water in spring that floats because of low density. This melt-water layer is considered by biologists as the ideal layer for phytoplankton growth because it does not sink, and there is plenty of sunlight reaching it to enable photosynthesis. Plankton are at the bottom of the food web. If their concentration goes down, animals at all tropics level would be deprived of a basic source of food." In addition to climate warming, other factors can contribute to the observed retreat of winter sea ice. Hard blowing winds can compact ice, causing it to contract, making it thicker, but covering a smaller area. Wind direction may blow ice toward warmer waters, causing it to melt. Other processes can also affect sea ice, by way of warmer oceans to the south spinning up cyclones that will introduce warmer temperatures than normal that melt ice. "A continued reduction of the Arctic winter ice cover would be a clear indicator of the warming effect of increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. It would at least confirm our current understanding of the physics of the Arctic climate system that has been incorporated in our models," said Comiso.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has cited Allied Realty Corp. of Bethesda, Md., for violating a federal law requiring home sellers and landlords to disclose information on lead-based paint to prospective purchasers and tenants. According to EPA, Allied Realty failed to disclose information on lead-based paint to tenants in 16 rental properties in Washington, D.C. and its Maryland suburbs. Under the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, sellers and landlords of residential housing built before 1978 (when the federal government banned the sale of lead-based house paint) are required to notify purchasers and tenants about the presence of known lead- based paint or disclose their lack of knowledge as to the presence thereof. The law also requires landlords to provide a lead-based paint information pamphlet to prospective tenants, provide a standard warning statement in the lease on the dangers of lead-based paint and include disclosure and acknowledgment language in sales contracts and leases. EPA's administrative complaint cites 82 violations of the regulations implementing the lead-based paint disclosure rule, involving 19 lease agreements for 16 rental properties signed between November 2001 and May 2004. Among the cited violations are failure to disclose known lead-based paint to prospective tenants, failure to provide available reports regarding lead-based paint and failure to provide lead-warning statements in leases. The Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act provides for a maximum penalty of up to $11,000 per violation. EPA will propose a specific penalty after giving the company an opportunity to provide relevant information. The company has the right to a hearing to contest the alleged violations and proposed penalty.

When American Muslims celebrate Eid-ul-Fitr they observe the same religious traditions familiar to Muslims around the world, but celebrate in a distinctly American way, as people from diverse national and cultural backgrounds come together to share the feast. Imam Mohamed Magid from the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) center in Sterling, Virginia, says that Muslims in America look forward to Eid-ul-Fitr for several reasons. Besides the religious observances, breaking the monthlong Ramadan fast and socializing, Muslims receive special greetings from the president of the United States. “It makes Muslims feel their holiday is part of mainstream American holidays,” the imam told the Washington File. It has been a tradition to mark the occasion of eid in the White House since George H. W. Bush was president. The Clinton White House continued the observance, as has George W. Bush. In 2001, a U.S. postage stamp was issued commemorating eid. According to Magid, new technology has made it easier to plan eid celebrations. Now Muslims accurately can calculate when the new moon will signal the beginning of eid in their locality. No longer must they wait for an imam to sight the moon. “They can know far ahead of time when to take off work,” he said. The ADAMS center has a congregation of 5,070 families from diverse Muslim traditions. The mosque is known for its openness and involvement in interfaith dialogues. Sunni and Shiia worship there together. “I think we find a common ground being Muslims and Americans. We focus on the common good, working and studying together,” Magid said. “Respect for all in Islam must be in a mosque,” he said. “Respecting each other and living in harmony.” He said his mosque initiated a Sunni-Shiia dialogue, which is continuing nationwide. “We hope we can send the dialogue to Pakistan and Iraq” and other places where there is conflict between the two sects, he said. Most families observe the same general eid customs of going to the mosque after sunrise. “Before anything we offer zakat,” or alms to the poor, said Moroccan-American Saad. In America, this is customarily done through the mosque. Then special eid prayers are said. Usually, on Eid-ul-Fitr, the faithful pray in a large group in the mosque, outdoors or in some other venue where an imam will give a sermon. The Ramadan fast is broken with sweets. Everyone wears new clothes -- especially children are dressed in bright, new outfits. Later, most families celebrate with a sumptuous midday meal complete with holiday delicacies. Meeting relatives and friends is also an important part of the eid celebration. Magid, who is originally from Sudan, says part of his eid celebration is taking his children to an amusement park for a special day of recreation. Amina, originally from Egypt, makes traditional cookies or kak-ul-fitr for her family to break the fast, as do Arab-American Muslims from the Gulf states. Iranian-American Muslims prepare a sweet, saffron-spiced rice dish and halwah in honor of the holiday. And for the big luncheon, halal meat is readily available in cities and towns with Muslim communities. Businessman Mukit Hossain, who hails from Bangladesh, told the Washington File that on eid Bangladeshi Muslims relish vegetables fried in batter and moori, puffed rice with chickpeas. Misti doi, a thick yogurt sweetened with palm sugar and lassi, a yogurt drink, are also a must on his Eid-ul-Fitr menu. Hossain said Bangladeshi Muslim organizations sometimes invite members of the Bangladeshi-American community to special observances. Eid sermons are delivered in English because many second-generation Bangladeshi Americans do not speak Bangala, and American Muslims have various ethnic and linguistic origins. Regarding the eid sermon, Hossain said, “If I know a person who is ultraconservative, I avoid those people because, in my humble understanding, they don’t represent Islam.” The majority of Muslims in the United States are African Americans. South Asians are thought to be the second largest group, with Arab Americans third largest. Estimates of the Muslim population in the United States range between 3 million and 8 million. There are more than 800 mosques in the United States. In the hectic pace of daily life, Muslim Americans have the same difficulty meeting their friends socially as do most hard-working Americans. Consequently, Hossain identifies one of the greatest joys of eid saying, “You meet a lot of people you haven’t seen in a long time.”

Come and see nature’s way of blanketing the mountains with stunning color during the month of October. Enjoy fun filled days complete with good food and entertainment including bluegrass music, cloggers, arts and crafts, hayrides and horseback rides. Experience the days of yesteryear watching apple butter and Brunswick stew being cooked in kettles over and open fire. Our orchards are open for apple picking or you may select your own from the apple bins at the picnic pavilion. Visit the farm and the animals. Music played daily from 11 - 3 Oct 14- Green Branch Oct 21 - Dark Hollow Oct 15 -Flatland Bluegrass Band Oct 22 - Driving Force Lunch is served in the festival area and reservations are not required. Home cooked meals will be served in the covered picnic pavilion each Saturday and Sunday from 1130am- 430pm or as long as the food stores hold out! The menu will be: Brunswick Stew, Cornbread, Applebutter, Applesauce and Apple cider. Hamburgers and Hotdogs and fries are also available Meals at the lodge: At the main lodge lunch is served from 1200Pm- 130Pm, dinner from 600pm-730pm. Reservations are required and seating is limited. Please call 540-923-4231 for reservations. Apple Orchards- Pick you own apples fresh from the trees. Varieties include: Red and Golden Delicious, Stayman, York, Winesap, Mutsu Fuji, Granny Smith and Empire. At our packing shed you can also select pre-picked apples to suit your tastes or purchase pumpkins, gourds, cider and Indian corn. We also offer a large selection of our preserves and condiments. For more information contact the packing shed at 540-923-4638. Gift Shop- stop in at the main lodge to find a variety of items. Clothing, gift items, preserves toys, jewelry and country gifts. Rain or Shine Free Admission / Free Parking Graves’ Mountain Lodge Inc. Celebrating 37 Years Rt. 670 Syria, Virginia 22743 540-923-4231/ Fax 540-923-4312 10:00AM-4:30PM Daily