I'm not getting why the name and contact info for the FEMA rep was redacted. There is no legitimate reason I can think of to do that, and it makes independently validating this next to impossible. [More]
It's not like we're talking about a whistleblower needing protection here. This was a public employee making a public inquiry. And it can hardly be that the supplier fears they'll be mad at him -- if this is genuine, they're no doubt already irked, their procurement guy being ID'd or not.
All may be as represented here, but until I see a way to check into this, I can't take it too seriously.
[Via several of you]
Monday, August 05, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Interesting. When I first heard about this, it was reported as "FEMA sent a request for purchase for everything I have on hand." But this email simply looks like a low level bureaucrat asking how fast a company can ship emergency foods during an emergency... like during the current hurricane season which is approaching the statistical peak (which is almost sorta like something a hypot6hetically constitutional emergency management agency should be doing.
Even it were an ominous RFP, there's no logical reason to redact the name/contact data. For what looks like a routine planning measure? More like someone is trying to drum up paranoid fears of FEMA (heck, what FEMA really does is sufficient there, without silly stuff like this).
I agree, Bear. This looks like the type of query FEMA should be making. I saw nothing requesting that it be kept confidential, either.
Post a Comment