No NBAF in Kansas

Real Biosecurity for the Heartland

Press catching on, sort of

Posted by Dale on August 20, 2008

KTKA ran a segment on No NBAF on Kansas yesterday. I appreciate the coverage, even if I wish they had done a little more fact checking.

Check out the comments on this segment, however. Several proponents of the NBAF have left comments calling us fearmongers and fools. Please take a moment, register for their site (it’s easy and painless) and leave a comment. Let’s flood the page with No NBAF in Kansas comments and use it to get our message out and show our numbers!

Advertisements

2 Responses to “Press catching on, sort of”

  1. Gerold Holden said

    In reference to the Mercury’s report on the meeting last Thursday. I think some of the errors and inaccuracies hurt our cause. It was the first time I remember seeing the Mercury repute facts in the context of the article. I guess we know where they stand. I have written repeatedly to the Mercury, to DHS, and our elected reps in opposition to this project. I still have no answer to “How do they protect the NBAF against the disgruntled employee who decides to spread a disease or organism to teach the system a lesson?”. No one answers that question. Having over three decades of experience within the government, I am sure the Washington DC attitude is “Why not in Kansas, there is nothing out there anyway?”. Where can I sign the No NBAF petition?

  2. Debbie said

    Gerold:

    Rather than sign a petition, the best action you can take is to contact DHS and express your concerns and opinion before the comment period closes on August 25. The toll-free number is 866-501-6223. If you have trouble getting through you can also send your comments by fax and the phone number is 866-508-6223. Finally, you can send comments via email by going to the DHS website (http://www.dhs.gov/nbaf) and clicking on Public Involvement.

    By the way, the Mercury’s article seriously mischaracterized Tuesday night’s meeting. There were at least 80 people in attendance, perhaps more, and many of the statements that were reported were incomplete and not attributed to the appropriate individual. The reporter (who just happens to be the one of the long-time editors) was clearly bored by being there and wasn’t there to report “the facts;” he was there to report to undermine the sincere efforts of a group of concerned individuals.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
%d bloggers like this: