http://www.mysanantonio.com/military/Info-gathering_office_defended.html

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/03/bureaucrat-who-allegedly-hired-jason-bournes-speaks/

I must clear up misconceptions. The government was never intended to be our only client nor our only focus. You can see this democratic approach in our previous ventures like Iraqslogger. We simply reversed the subscription model so that the major clients would have customized sections based on their total subscriptions, rather than building them one reader at a time. So we approached the military and state department asking them what they would want and what level of effort they would expect. We were asked to start immediately. Mr Furlong was sitting in that meeting and promised he would fund our subscription. That’s when what you read about began.

In any case, whatever Michael Furlong invented with the government funding intended for us and whatever he was thinking by hiring perjurers, rapists, ex spooks and special operations soldiers is currently under investigation. We had nothing to do with that and protested as soon as we heard about what he was doing.

I think you are taking the lead from the somewhat sensational “secret contractor death squads” narrative. That sells papers and looks good in a headline but has nothing to do with what we did, my background or even my intent. My statements in the media revolve around explaining the above and my lack of support for what was done with money originally intended for what is now even more desperately needed in Afghanistan.

I share your concerns (as stated previously) that all those kissy huggy military programs may be just yet another name for intelligence but our work was out there for all to see and read. It didn’t even have an acronym. :)

I fear that the very people we gather that information to better understand them are growing weary of good intentions as well as more and more suspicious. That is why I feel our solution is the most robust and honest (and productive). Gather the information, publish it, let the people read it and comment on it and also use it to follow up on promises and intentions.

I encourage you to read http://www.iraqslogger.com it stands on its own in it candor, depth and accuracy. And as for your comments, please don’t take my mild scolding or humor the wrong way, this forum is an intelligent, forward looking place to discuss exactly these issues and I look forward to your insights and opinions. But when when you say that I am “honest and accurate, but not necessarily truthful” that kind of creeps me out since it opens the paradigm that people lie by telling the truth. You can see what we did, we are not hiding and I look forward to changing the paradigm as I have in the past with my books, articles and documentaries.

Which probably requires it own 2000 word article to explain what that means:))

best

RYP

If anyone was considered an expert on how contractors bend the rules that would be me

I may continue later, being very late now, but what concerns me the most is the close alignment with the U.S. military, regardless of whatever is public, open source, etc. Frankly, if more information, and collaborative input was the simple intention, you could have done a lot of it using totally free open source tools. The military funding is the critical component here.

You asked me to tell you where I may “find fault in bringing in the entire world to help understand Afghanistan.” My eyes fixed on this part: “bringing in the entire world” — is that what Afghans want or need? I would think they have had rather too much of the “entire world”, especially the many nations that have invaded it throughout its history, and the 42 or 43 nations whose forces currently occupy it. Who needs this “understanding,” Robert? You almost make this sound like a community, NGO initiative — which is not difficult these days, the NGO fabric has been abundantly soiled with multiple collaborations with states and military occupiers.

Anyway, as for the idea that more information is a good thing, and leads to greater understanding…you now have the dubious privilege of sitting back and reflecting on how it led to increased carnage.

Shame on you. You have my email and you know my position but you follow the New York Times bouncing ball to reboot your analytical process and frame of reference? The NYT was using a leaked CIA memo from the station chief to the AsstSecDef to burn Furlong and his Jason Bournes. Most likely after they realized that Dewey was still operating last week. Since the NYTimes didn’t get the full brief, David Ignatius had it spelled out for him in block letters. Neither of these stories had anything to do with me but they did want to get my input on getting their facts straight.

We pitched an subscription service product that you could read, comment on and even enhance. What more perfect concept than to harness both foreign and Afghan input on the region? You can see the prototype at IraqSlogger.com

Its almost as if being upfront and honest scares people. Your comment: Pelton may have a skill that I had not recognized earlier: the ability to be honest and accurate, but not necessarily truthful.” is a conundrum. As if saying you own a phonebook is accurate but because you didnt list all the names within you were not fully truthful.

AfPax is what it is and you can see it for all its still borne glory. Just as your blog is part opinion and part reaction to your opinion. AfPax was to be a workshop for granular reporting from ALL sides of the war allowing the military, State, NGO’s, journos, citizens and most importantly locals (there was to be a local language version) to learn from people on the ground.

As for Furlong he was an enigmatic fellow who clearly had a different agenda. We never worked for Furlong, we never took direction from Furlong and we strongly protested when we felt he was heading down the wrong path. But that is history. We were never contracted, never were able to launch the full site and have since moved on.

But it appears (From the WaPo at least) that certain clandestine elements of his program remain, even if Furlong is locked out of his office and under investigation. Call it naive, call it noble or call it pragmatic, our deliverables were pretty impressive, non lethal and something that I think an anthro would be quite proud of.

As for HTS, my opinions are clear and I have never said that there is any singular solution for information in the region. The top command says its not the quantity of information, its the quality or usability that’s lacking. Thats where our pragmatic approach to answering questions, connecting people and organizing face to face dialog excel.

I don’t need the government’s money to survive but I have no problem reducing violence, increasing understanding and helping people benefit from information. AfPax is not functional anymore but it is a great concept for understanding of conflict areas.

I fail to see why you have a problem with our statement. It is truthful to a fault and responsive to false accusations. Perhaps you can flip it around and tell me where you find fault in bringing in the entire world to help understand Afghanistan.

best

RYP