Starting Points

May 17, 2010

Taliban Hold Sway in Area Taken by U.S., Farmers Say

By CARLOTTA GALL

LASHKAR GAH, Afghanistan — Farmers from the district of Marja, which since February has been the focus of the largest American-led military operation in Afghanistan, are fleeing the area, saying that the Taliban are terrorizing the population and that American troops cannot protect the civilians.

The departure of the farmers is one of the most telling indications that Taliban fighters have found a way to resume their insurgency, three months after thousands of troops invaded this Taliban stronghold in the opening foray of a campaign to take control of southern Afghanistan. Militants have been infiltrating back into the area and the prospect of months of more fighting is undermining public morale, residents and officials said.

As the coalition prepares for the next major offensive in the southern city of Kandahar, the uneasy standoff in Marja, where neither the American Marines nor the Taliban have gained the upper hand and clashes occur daily, provides a stark lesson in the challenges of eliminating a patient and deeply rooted insurgency.

Over 150 families have fled Marja in the last two weeks, according to the Afghan Red Crescent Society in the provincial capital, Lashkar Gah.

Marja residents arriving here last week, many looking bleak and shell-shocked, said civilians had been trapped by the fighting, running a gantlet of mines laid by insurgents and firefights around government and coalition positions. The pervasive Taliban presence forbids them from having any contact with or taking assistance from the government or coalition forces.

“People are leaving; you see 10 to 20 families each day on the road who are leaving Marja due to insecurity,” said a farmer, Abdul Rahman, 52, who was traveling on his own. “It is now hard to live there in this situation.”

One farmer who was loading his family and belongings onto a tractor-trailer on the edge of Lashkar Gah last week said he had abandoned his whole livelihood in Sistan, Marja, as soon as the harvest, a poor one this year, was done.

“Every day they were fighting and shelling,” said the farmer, Abdul Malook Aka, 55. “We do not feel secure in the village and we decided to leave. Security is getting worse day by day.”

“We thought security would be improving,” he said.

Those who remain in Marja voiced similar complaints in dozens of interviews and repeated visits to Marja over the last month.

“I am sure if I stay in Marja I will be killed one day either by Taliban or the Americans,” said Mir Hamza, 40, a farmer from Loye Charahi.

Combat operations in Marja ended at the end of February and the military declared the battle won. But much of the local Taliban, including at least four mid-level commanders, never left, stashing their rifles and adopting the quiet farm life.

A Taliban resurgence was not entirely unexpected, especially now as the poppy harvest ends, freeing men to fight, and as the weather warms up. But the military had seen Marja as a “clear and hold” operation in which the first part, clearing the district of militants, would be wrapped up fairly quickly. In fact, clearing has proved to be a more elusive goal.

By April, life had picked up. People began coming forward to receive government handouts and farmers were happily taking money in return for destroying their poppy crops, whose opium provides a main source of Taliban financing. As villagers saw their neighbors benefiting, more were encouraged to approach the district administration as well, despite Taliban threats.

The change was even more pronounced in the adjacent Nad-e-ali district, where the Taliban have been weakened and security improved thanks largely to the operation in Marja.

But the insurgents’ extensive intelligence network in Marja has remained intact, and they have been able to maintain a hold over the population through what residents have described as threats and assassinations. In April members of the Taliban visited one old man late at night and made him eat his aid registration papers, several residents said, a Mafia-style warning to others not to take government aid.

At the beginning of May, a well-liked man named Sharifullah was beaten to death, accused of supporting the district chief and not paying taxes to the Taliban. His killing froze the community and villagers stopped going to the district administration.

“The Taliban are everywhere, they are like scorpions under every stone, and they are stinging all those who get assistance or help the government and the Americans,” Mr. Rahman, the farmer, said.

The population remains divided in its support for the Taliban, with a portion providing shelter and assistance to the militants and few daring to oppose them. In some places, people are still lining up for aid, indicating a certain resistance to Taliban strictures.

But many repeat the Taliban contention that the Americans are bent on long-term occupation of Afghanistan and seek to eradicate their religion, Islam, and impose an alien, Western-style democracy.

Villagers complained of indignities imposed by the foreign forces, the arrest and killing of civilians, house searches that violate the ethnic Pashtuns’ sense of honor and the sanctity of the home, and checkpoints where they are forced to lift up their shirts, which is deeply shaming for Afghans, to show that they are not carrying explosives.

Yet they also say that the American Marines are good with the people, only shoot at those who shoot at them, and are showing greater restraint than the British forces who came before them. Farmers tell stories of how the Marines pursue Taliban fighters but leave the farm workers alone, and how in the last week four known insurgents have been killed in airstrikes as they were laying roadside bombs at night.

Nevertheless Afghans express frustration that the American military, which defeated the Taliban so resoundingly in 2001, cannot clear Marja, a district of 100 square miles, of Taliban insurgents that residents estimate number no more than 200.

More Taliban fighters have arrived in recent weeks, slipping in with the itinerant laborers who came to work the poppy harvest and staying on to fight, villagers and officials said. Haji Gul Muhammad Khan, tribal adviser to the governor of Helmand Province, said he had reports of Taliban arriving in the area in the last three or four days.

Everyone in Marja knows the Taliban, since they are village men who never left the area although they quit fighting soon after the military operation. Gradually they found a stealthier way of operating, moving around in small groups, often by motorbike or on foot.

They fire several shots at an American patrol and then flee, or throw aside their weapons and pick up spades, posing as innocent farmers. At least three midlevel Taliban commanders were seen operating in the area in recent weeks, moving among the farms, staying in different houses every night, and asking for food and shelter from the villagers as they go.

The villagers do not dare give them away to the Americans because they are local men and can exact revenge, villagers said.

“We know who the Taliban are,” said Muhammad Ismail, 35, a farmer from Loye Charahi said. “When they attack the police or the Americans, they put down their weapons and sit down with ordinary people. We cannot say a word against them, they know us and we know them pretty well. We know Taliban are killing people and threatening people, but we cannot stand against them, or tell Americans or police about their whereabouts.”

Mr. Khan, the governor’s adviser, expects a further exodus of civilians. “People are just waiting for the harvest to be over and then they will leave,” he said.

C. J. Chivers and an Afghan employee of The New York Times contributed reporting from Marja, and Taimoor Shah from Lashkar Gah.

Terror Spreads in Bangkok

Manish Swarup/Associated Press

Thai policemen marched to remove a barricade put up by antigovernment protesters near the victory monument in Bangkok on Monday. More Photos »

By THOMAS FULLER and SETH MYDANS

BANGKOK — Chaotic gun battles in central Bangkok marked a new phase of the city’s spiraling violence Monday as residents hoarded food and the government warned die-hard protesters that they should leave their encampment or risk “harmful” consequences.

Protesters roaming the lawless streets of a strategically important neighborhood near the protest zone threatened to set fire to a gasoline truck as bonfires, some from piles of tires, sent large plumes of black, acrid smoke into the sky.

Security forces armed with assault rifles were deployed in greater numbers across the city after many firefights, including a nighttime grenade attack on the five-star Dusit Thani hotel, a landmark in the city.

The attack and a subsequent prolonged gun battle suggested that Thai security forces were up against more than just protesters with slingshots and bamboo staves. The mayhem of the crackdown, which follows two months of demonstrations by protesters who are seeking the resignation of the government, has made it difficult to understand who is battling whom.

A government official, Korbsak Sabhavasu, said late Monday that a protest leader had called him to discuss an end to the standoff, a development that offered a glimmer of hope that the violence might subside. The Associated Press reported that Mr. Korbsak said he had told the protest leader that the army would stop shooting if protesters returned to their base in the city.

But there have been many false starts in recent weeks, making a resolution to the crisis far from imminent.

The government suggested that Thaksin Shinawatra, the former prime minister who was ousted in a 2006 coup, was behind the shadowy forces battling the army on Bangkok streets.

Satit Wongnongtoei, a minister in the prime minister’s office, spoke of a “commander who lives overseas” who is intent on “causing violence and loss of life as much as they can by using weapons of war.”

The government on Sunday issued a ban on certain banking transactions linked to companies and accounts held by Mr. Thaksin and his family.

The protest movement defiantly encamped in Bangkok began as a reaction to Mr. Thaksin’s ouster but has expanded to resemble a large social movement by less affluent segments of Thai society rebelling against what they say is an elite that tries to control Thailand’s democratic institutions.

On Sunday, Mr. Thaksin issued a statement through his lawyer that called on “all sides to step back from this terrible abyss and seek to begin a new, genuine and sincere dialogue between the parties.”

It seems plausible that some of the attacks in recent days have been carried out by disaffected elements of the military or police. The attack on the Dusit Thani hotel in the early hours of Monday may have been a retaliatory move by a faction loyal to Khattiya Sawatdiphol, a renegade major general allied with the protesters who was shot on Thursday. Security experts speculate that General Khattiya, who died on Monday, was shot by a sniper stationed at the Dusit Thani hotel, which has served as a base for hundreds of security personnel members in recent weeks.

The government has insisted that soldiers fire only in self-defense, but the death toll has been lopsidedly among civilians since violence intensified last Thursday. Government statistics said that 34 civilians and two soldiers — including General Khattiya — had been killed since Thursday, and 256 people been wounded, almost all of them civilians.

Protesters have attributed some of the deaths to snipers who are stationed in several places around the city on top of tall buildings.

The Foreign Ministry explained in a memo distributed on Monday that the sharpshooters had been deployed to “look out for danger and protect others.”

The memo summarized in chilling detail a video taken of a military sniper shooting someone suspected of carrying a “bomb,” the memo said, without more detail.

“The shot was made in a controlled manner,” the memo said. One of the soldiers in the video is then quoted saying, “Man is down! I see it!”

Most of the violence has occurred in the streets that surround the protesters barricaded encampment, where protest leaders appear increasingly anxious.

Nattawut Saikua, a hard-line protest leader, said he was prepared to negotiate without preconditions if the government would accept a cease-fire. He dropped the demand he had made Sunday for mediation by the United Nations.

The government responded that there would be no talks while the violence continued.

With the apparent involvement of various armed groups, the fighting may have moved beyond the point where any protest leader can declare an effective cease-fire.

The protest site, in the heart of Bangkok’s main commercial district, which at its peak was filled with tens of thousands of demonstrators, had thinned to perhaps 2,000 on Monday afternoon. Where entire families had camped in a festive atmosphere, mostly men remained. Garbage was strewn everywhere.

Army aircraft circled above the site dropping leaflets urging people to leave. Guards in black with red scarves escorted people who chose to leave. A man circulated among the guards handing out small packets of sticky rice along with 100 baht bills, worth about $3.

Protesters filled small Red Bull energy drink bottles with gasoline and then demonstrated their plan to propel them by swinging a golf club. Small groups of people occasionally looked up and pointed at surrounding department stores where they said they believed snipers were hidden.

Outside the site of the sit-in, on Rama IV road where much of the worst fighting has taken place, trucks loaded with tires raced in, unloaded them as if at a racetrack pit stop, and sped away. Crowds watching from a safe distance applauded. The tires were stacked by the road to replenish a continually burning barricade.

At one point in mid-afternoon, the crowd, at a new makeshift stage near the Khlong Toey slum, faced the burning wall of tires and sang the national anthem.

Tension radiated from battle zone, and at one point unknown gunmen carried out an attack on a hospital.

Hundreds of businesses and bank branches were closed after the violence caused the government to declare a national holiday and postpone the opening of schools.

The American Embassy in Bangkok canceled a “town hall” meeting about the security situation scheduled for Tuesday because of the risk that those attending would be put in “harm’s way,” a statement from the embassy said Monday. Embassy officials will instead address concerns of Americans living in Bangkok on the Internet.

One American photographer, Paula Bronstein of Getty Images, described being trapped in the Dusit Thani when the attacks occurred.

“If you’ve ever heard the sound of a grenade, it’s really loud if it goes off really close,” she said. “It didn’t take long before we realized the hotel was under attack. The gunfire was just indescribable. It was just nonstop. And it was coming from both directions.”

After the attack guests were told to go into the basement of the hotel, where they remained until morning.

“There was a woman who had fainted, and they were trying to make her come to and it was really just more confusion and everyone was yelling,” Ms. Bronstein said.

The hotel closed its doors to guests Monday afternoon.

Mariko Takayasu contributed reporting.

May 16, 2010

Singapore Democrats - When rights can mean life and death

Tuesday, 11 May 2010 Chee Soon Juan

"Are you Dr Chee Soon Juan?" an elderly woman asked tentatively.

"I need to talk to you," she continued as she confirmed my identity. "I have been found guilty of poisoning my husband. But I was forced into confessing. The officer who questioned me was very harsh."

"She was not allowed to call me when she was at the station," her son jumped in. "She couldn't even have a lawyer present unlike in Hong Kong or London." The following day the media reported on the case (here).
This is a little known fact in Singapore. Most people are not aware that if you are called up for questioning by the police, you don't have the right to a counsel while you are being interrogated. And if you are forced into confessing to the crime, in its exceedingly difficult to get the court to accept your retraction of the confession and that it was made under duress.

This seemed to be the case when District Judge Ng Peng Hong threw out Madam Fong Quay Sim's (pictured above) defence that she was forced into confessing that she had poisoned her husband by lacing his food and drink with arsenic.

The 68-year-old granny said during the trial that Station Inspector Faisal Sheik Abdul had pressured her into signing the confession by interrogating her in a very harsh manner. Judge Ng concluded that "there was no intense interrogation", threw out Mdam Fong's defence and convicted her. Sentencing was postponed.

Is Mdm Fong telling the truth? How did the Judge know that there was no intense interrogation? He had only the word of the interrogation officer. Which raises another question: Would the police sink so low as to force confessions from suspects?

They have in the past.

In 1989, Mr Zainal Kuning was charged together with two accomplices, brothers Mohd Ismail and Salahuddin Ismail, for savagely stabbing a coffee shop caretaker to death. During the trial the prosecution produced a signed statement from Mr Zainal confessing to the crime.

At the hearing Mr Zainal retracted his confession and contended that he was forced into signing it. He said that he was denied food and drink for several hours when he was questioned, and claimed that he was repeatedly marched to the toilet where he was drenched, and then made to stand on a chair under the air-conditioner holding two telephone books with arms outstretched.

The accused even said that at one point, an officer grabbed his hair and banged him against the wall. After 24 hours, the accused gave in and confessed.

Rather fortuitously, however, during the three years in remand awaiting trial, Mr Zainal learned from one of his fellow inmates that the inmate had overheard a man by the name of Man Semput boasting how he had killed the caretaker. He even showed off the scars on his chest when the victim threw boiling water at him.

Mr Zainal engaged the late J B Jeyaretnam as counsel. Jeyaretnam argued that the police had no evidence linking his client to the murder scene. There was only the confession which his client had said was forced out of him.

Hight Court Judge (the late) T S Sinnathuray rejected Jeyaretnam's argument and like, Judge Ng Peng Hong in Mdm Fong's case, ruled that the confession was made voluntarily.

During the late stage of the trial, the police managed to locate a man by the name of Mohd Sulaiman aka Man Semput. Fingerprints lifted at the scene of crime confirmed that Mr Sulaiman was their man, not Mr Zainal.

DPP Bala Reddy had no choice but to withdraw the prosecution's case.

After more than three years in prison and coming close to death, Mr Zainal and the Ismail brothers walked free.

The three men subsequently sued the police officer who interrogated them and accused the police of torture, malicious prosecution and defamation. They lost. The media gave scant coverage to the matter.

Mr Chris Lydgate, in his book Lee's Law: How Singapore crushes dissent, chronicled the case. He wrote:

What was more perplexing was the wall of silence surrounding the case...The entire country, it seemed, was unwilling or unable to to discuss the issue. The trial might as well never have happened.

This leads me back to my original point. How is it that suspects can be left with police interrogators for questioning during which confessions can be involuntarily extracted with no witnesses around? How can judges accept such an arrangement?

Abuses by police officers who are under pressure to deliver results can, and have been shown to, occur. Without a lawyer present during interrogation, suspects are at the mercy of their captors. Innocent people like Zainal Kuning, Mohd Ismail and Salahuddin Ismail can be victimised.

In the present case, did Mdm Fong really poison her husband? Did Inspector Faisal force her to confess? Only Mdm Fong and Mr Faisal know.

Here comes the million-dollar question: Why not remove all doubt by ensuring that suspects have lawyers and/or witnesses present during interrogation? If the evidence is strong enough the suspect may want to voluntarily confess on the advice of his/her lawyer. At the very least, accusations of confession under duress can be eliminated.

Such butchery of due process must be reviewed without which we could be wrongly convicting innocent people and even sentencing them to their deaths. With the mandatory death penalty in play in Singapore, such a review is all the more urgent.

Calling Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong, Law Society and Singaporean lawyers...

God and democracy - Inside Indonesia

A Christian church is asserting its democratic rights by suing the mayor of Depok

Melissa Crouch

The construction of the church has been on hold

Sukron Hadi

Places of worship are an extremely sensitive subject in contemporary Indonesia. Recent years have seen radical Islamic groups take the law into their own hands as they damage the places of worship of religious minorities, or force others to close by threats of violence. Local government leaders are also becoming more proactive against religious minorities, sometimes cancelling permits for places of worship that have already been granted. One of the first victims was the Christian Batak Protestant Congregation of Cinere, a town in the province of West Java. In May 2009, the mayor of Depok cancelled their permit to build a place of worship, despite the fact that construction of the building had already commenced. In response, the church asserted their democratic rights by filing a legal case in the Administrative Court of Bandung.

This case is significant for two main reasons. First, it is highly symbolic because the church belongs to the largest protestant denomination in Indonesia, with an estimated 3.5 million members across Indonesia. Second, this is one of the first court actions taken by a church against a mayor in relation to a dispute over a permit for a place of worship in Indonesia.

History of the dispute

On 13 June 1998, the mayor of Bogor granted the church a permit to build a place of worship. Four months later, the construction of the church commenced. Throughout 1999, however, large demonstrations by various radical Islamic groups such as the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) were held in opposition to the building of the church. In July 2000, the then mayor of Depok, Badrul Kamal, sent a letter to the church recommending that construction cease temporarily until the opposition died down. This effectively caused all construction works to grind to a halt until 2008, when the church decided to recommence building. The church wrote to the mayor of Depok, Nur Mahmudi Ismail, on three separate occasions asking for clarification of the validity of their permit and for protection. They had only completed the foundations and the first level of the building before their plans were again thwarted by demonstrations held in opposition to the church.

Then on 27 March 2009, with no prior warning to the church, the mayor issued a decision which cancelled the church’s original permit. Betty Sitorus, the current deputy chair of the church building committee, suspects that this decision was made to gain support for the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) in the 2010 local elections in the city of Depok. According to her, when the church questioned the mayor about his decision, he emphasised the fact that he made the decision as a Muslim and as a representative (and former chair) of PKS.

Local groups opposed to the building of the church

Sukron Hadi

The mayor’s decision was based on submissions from various government bodies and community groups, such as the Muslim Community Solidarity Forum, an Islamic group that claims to represent the aspirations of local Muslims in Depok. According to the forum head, they demanded that the church permit be revoked because it had acted unfairly by failing to comply with the Joint Regulation of 2006 on Places of Worship, which outlines the process to obtain a permit.

The mayor also relied on letters from the local branch of the Ministry of Religion and from the newly-established Inter-religious Harmony Forum, a body established by the reforms introduced by the 2006 joint regulation at the provincial and city/district level to facilitate the application process for permits for establishing places of worship and to assist in the prevention and resolution of disputes. In fact, the ministry’s brief letter simply recommended that it was the responsibility of the mayor to take action to resolve the conflict. Similarly, the Inter-religious Harmony Forum of Depok in fact did not suggest that the mayor cancel the existing permit, as explained by Dr Lodewijk Gultom, one of the forum’s two Protestant representatives. According to Gultom, the forum has been unable to prevent escalating tensions and, through a misinterpretation of its recommendation, was used by the mayor to legitimise his decision. This eventually led the church to take court action.

Resistance through the courts

The church, represented by its current national leader, Reverend Bonar Napitupulu, and the Cinere church pastor, Reverend Mori Sihombing, filed a lawsuit in the State Administrative Court of Bandung on 6 May 2009 challenging the decision of the mayor to cancel the building permit. Represented by lawyer Junimart, they argued that the church had obtained the permit legally and had fulfilled the conditions of both national and local building laws. They claimed that the mayor had no legal basis on which to cancel their permit, and that his decision was against the right to freedom of religion under Indonesia’s constitution. Junimart pointed out that the church had obtained the signatures of over 100 local residents as evidence of local support for the court – more than is required under Joint Regulation of 2006.

The mayor tells a different story. In responding to the church’s allegations, he referred to the changes that have taken place since decentralisation and the introduction of the joint regulation. He points out that the village of Cinere was only formed in 1999 as part of the process of decentralisation, and that the permit was obtained before this time. This means the head of the village of Cinere never had the opportunity to consider the application. Further, he argues that the original permit could no longer be valid because it was issued under an old regulation concerning places of worship that is no longer in operation.

However, Joint Regulation of 2006 confirms that permits issued prior to 2006 are still valid and legal. According to Fatmawati Djugo, lawyer for the Indonesian Christian Church of Bogor in a similar case in 2008, this provision clarifies that a place of worship which holds a permit under the old system does not need to obtain another permit. In addition, she emphasised that a mayor or district head does not have the power to cancel permits merely because there is opposition from the local community. A clear dispute resolution process is set out under the Joint Regulation. If there is dispute over a proposal for a place of worship, a meeting must first be held by the local community. If that fails to resolve the dispute, consultations are to be arranged with the local division of the Ministry of Religion and the local Inter-religious Harmony Forum. If that is not successful, the case can then be taken to court.

The Cinere case is among the first examples of a church congregation taking its case to court

In the Depok court case, the evidence was inconclusive at best. Both sides produced local Muslim residents as witnesses. Those for the plaintiff testified that they did not have any objections to the construction of the church, while the witnesses for the defence testified to the history of opposition to the church. Large crowds of people turned up in force at the court hearings demanding the closure of the church, many wearing clothes bearing the words ‘Front Pembela Islam’ (Islamic Defenders Front), the name of a radical Islamic group infamous for its use of violence.

After ten years of uncertainty, the court stepped in. On 29 October 2009, the court found that the church had obtained the permit legally under the old regulation and that the building fulfilled the requirements of national and local building laws. The court found that the church was not misusing the permit, which is the only ground on which a mayor could legitimately cancel a permit. On this basis, the court ruled in favour of the church. The mayor has since appealed the decision.

Regulating places of worship

As this incident suggests, local authorities continue to use conflict over places of worship as opportunities for political gain in the highly competitive political atmosphere that has developed since the downfall of Suharto in 1998. The church in Cinere is not the only example. The permit of the Indonesian Christian Church of Bogor was cancelled in 2008, as was the permit of the Santa Maria Catholic church of Purwakarta in October 2009. Both of these incidents occurred in the province of West Java, which has a high rate of church closures by radical Islamic groups. According to the Indonesian Christian Communication Forum, 70 of the 400 churches closed under the New Order (1966-98) occurred in West Java. In 2005 alone, the National Indonesian Communion of Churches recorded that about 50 churches were destroyed or forced to close in the province. Against this background, this case is notable because a religious minority turned to the legal process to assert their newly-found democratic rights. It is even more significant that they won the case.

Regulating the construction of places of worship and containing conflicts arising in the process remains a significant challenge for the national government. As these cases show, the Joint Regulation introduced in 2006 has largely failed to prevent attacks or closures on the places of worship of religious minorities. The outcome of the mayor’s appeal against the church in Cinere is a significant test case in this regard – even if the church is successful, the real issue is whether the court decision will have any effect in practice.

Melissa Crouch (m.crouch@unimelb.edu.au) is writing a PhD at the University of Melbourne’s Law School. She is a research assistant on Professor Tim Lindsey’s Federation Fellowship project, ‘Islam and Modernity’ in the same faculty.

Inside Indonesia 100: Apr-Jun 2010

Malaysiakini - DAP Wins Sibu By-election

DAP wins Sibu, majority 398

LIVE REPORTS [PHOTO GALLERY] Earlier reports

Small, big and giant steps for Pakatan

'Political tsunami' finally reaches East M'sia

A 'historic' victory, says Kit Siang

NONE 11.30pm: Speaking at a press conference, a beaming Wong Ho Leng says: "This victory is one small step in Sibu, one big step to (state administrative capital) Petrajaya, and one giant step to Putajaya."

Robert Lau, meanwhile, expresses sadness: "I'm sad, because Sibu is going to lose out on a lot of things. I have said in my campaign that if we lose, we lose the confidence of the federal government.

"But my heart is still with the people of Sibu and I will serve them in whatever capacity that I can," says the SUPP leader.

NONE 11.10pm: A crowd of 3,000 gather outside the main tally centre at Dewan Suarah to celebrate DAP's victory in Sibu. They shout, "Dacing tipu".

Independent Narawi Haron forfeited his RM10,000 deposit for failing to obtain at least one-eighth of the total vote cast.

The Election Commission has revised the voter turnout. It now says the turnout was 70% instead of 59.86% (which is higher than the 68% in the 2008 general elections).

Votes cast - 37,919 votes
Turnout - 70%
Spoilt votes - 395 votes
Majority - 398 votes
Postal votes - 2,429 votes

azlan 10.58pm: Election Commission makes official announcement:

DAP - 18,845
BN - 18,447
Ind -232

Majority - 398

The two-hour delay in the announcement of the result was due to a dispute in the postal ballots where 208 votes were rejected. This however did not change the final result. According to the EC, the dispute was over the validity of witnesses' signature for postal votes.

DAP leaders claimed that there is a discrepancy in the postal vote tally between what they have and the Election Commission's, which caused much anxiety among the opposition that their win could be "stolen".

The final result of the postal ballots:

DAP - 70
BN - 2,323
Ind - 36

Rejected postal votes - 208

10.55pm: Election Commission is expected to announce that DAP has won the Sibu by-election with a majority of 398.

On the spot analysis:

Pakatan Rakyat has managed to reverse its series of losses (Bagan Pinang and Hulu Selangor) with this win in Sibu.

Of the 11 by-election since March 2008, Pakatan has won eight while BN three. Sibu is also Pakatan's first victory in East Malaysia (PKR lost in Batang Ai in April last year).

For DAP, this is the first by-election which the party has won in 13 years. Sibu will be the party's second parliamentary seat in Sarawak to its existing Bandar Kuching.

With the defeat in Sibu, BN may delay the Sarawak state election to next year. Sarawak will need to call the state polls by middle of next year.

NONE 10.35pm: It appears that there was some minor dispute over the postal ballots. However, it is learnt that the Election Commission will be announcing the result soon.

It is almost certain that DAP has won this closely fought by-election by between 300 and 400 votes.

10.30pm: SUPP Sibu chief Wong Soon Koh at Wisma Sanyan criticised Lim Guan Eng for acting rude by "leading people to come to 'kacau'."

"This is not a healthy culture," he said.

Robert Lau is also reported to be dissatisfied that Lim and four other DAP members met with the SPR officer without the presence of Barisan people. They said they will "consider taking the election dispute to court."

10.15pm: At the main tally centre in Dewan Suarah, two SUPP officials are meeting with returning officer Wong See Meng. It is believed that they are discussing about the delay in the announcing of postal vote results.

They are later joined by DAP officials Ng Wei Aik, Lim Lip Eng and Ronnie Liu.

It is still raining in Sibu. The rain began about two hours ago. Supporters from both sides, many of them holding umbrellas, are waiting calmly outside Dewan Suarah.

10.10pm: Election Commission chief Abdul Aziz Yusof tells Malaysiakini in an SMS message that the postal ballots Form 15 is on its way to the main tally centre in Dewan Suarah.

"EC is waiting for the official postal ballot result," he says.

Meanwhile, EC deputy chief Wan Ahmad Wan Omar says the commission will explain the delay soon.

"I'll explain after we announce the result shortly," he tells Malaysiakini.

10.09pm: All top DAP leaders are waiting at Wisma Sanyan, where the postal ballots were counted.

Lim Guan Eng tells Malaysiakini that he is worried “something suspicious could be going on” and he hopes that the Election Commission officials can release the Form 15, a document which certifies the final result of the postal ballots.

Should it be true that BN has won the postal votes by a margin of 2,300, then DAP will be declared the winner of the Sibu by-election with a tissue-thin majority of 300 votes.

It is confirmed that Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin has returned to Kuala Lumpur.

There is no movement at the main tally centre in Dewan Suarah in Sibu. The official tally still indicates that 16 boxes, including the postal votes, are yet to be sent to be included in the final result.

9.50pm: DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang questions the hold-up in the Election Commission's announcement of the 2,571 postal ballots.

"The postal ballot counting started at 5.30pm and finished at 8.30pm."

He asks why there is more than an hour delay in the announcement of results.

"Up to some trick?" he wonders aloud.

9.35pm: The counting of postal votes has ended. However, DAP scrutineers are unable to get Form 15 - the official tally signed by the returning officer.

It is understood that BN has won 2,300 out of a total 2,571 postal votes. This will translate into a DAP victory with a margin of 300 votes.

DAP candidate Wong Ho Leng refuses to claim victory as yet.

"I don't want comment. Please wait for the official announcement," he told Malaysiakini.

9.24pm: The final result may not be announced anytime soon. The 2,571 postal votes are still being counted. All DAP leaders leave the party's operations room in Sibu for Wisma Sanyan where the postal votes are being tallied.

DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang wants to know what is holding up the Election Commission from announcing the by-election result.

9.21pm: Election Commission chief Abdul Aziz Yusof sends a SMS message to Malaysiakini saying that the voter turnout "could be more than 60 percent".

Malaysiakini has earlier asked him to confirm whether the voter turnout was 59.86% as announced by the EC a few hours ago.

9.10pm: Penang Chief Minister and DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng and other party leaders are set to leave the party's operations room in Sibu.

But instead of going to main tally centre at Dewan Suarah, they plan to go to Wisma Sanyan, where the postal votes are being counted.

8.57pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, BN has reduced DAP's lead down to 2,590 votes. A total of 109 out of 110 polling streams have been counted thus far.

DAP - 18,570
BN - 15,980
Ind - 201

Majority - 2,590

On the spot analysis:

Only one polling stream and 2,571 postal votes yet to be included. BN is expected to win over 90% of these votes but will it be enough for it to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat?

8.40pm: An umbrella revolution is swelling outside of the main tally centre at Dewan Suarah, with 200 people standing in the rain to show their support for DAP's Wong Ho Leng.

Around 200 cops estimated in area, but no untoward incidents so far. No top leaders from either BN or Pakatan Rakyat are there at the moment.

NONE 8.33pm: DAP members and some leaders at its Sibu operations room are celebrating, but top party leaders are still waiting for confirmation and refuse to declare victory.

8.14pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, DAP has increased its lead to 3,944 votes. A total of 103 out of 110 polling streams have been counted thus far.

DAP - 18,211
BN - 14,267
Ind - 138

Majority - 3,944

NONE Postal votes are still being counted. In addition, no results yet to come in from BN stronghold Kg Ilir Nangka. In the 2008 general elections, DAP lost by 1,272 votes in Kg Ilir Nangka and 2,571 in postal votes.

However, two DAP MPs - Anthony Loke and Jeff Ooi - have claimed victory.

"Sibu Pakatan Rakyat set to win by wafer-thin majority... probably less than one hundred!" says Loke in his tweet message.

On the spot analysis:

DAP is close to victory but it is still too close to call. By all estimates, the margin of victory will be in the hundreds.

8.13pm: A crowd of supporters stand with umbrellas in the rain outside the counting centre compound, chanting "Wong Ho Leng" (DAP candidate) off and on as they wait for the official result to be announced.

The projector outside the centre however has gone offline, and no
updates available so far.

8.10pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, DAP has increased its lead to 3,279 votes. About 95.5% of votes have been counted so far.

DAP - 17,120
BN - 13,841
Ind - 137

Majority - 3,279

8.04pm: Unconfirmed reports on the final few thousand votes - DAP lost Malay/Melanau-majority Ilir Nangka by 1,354 votes but won Chinese-majority Oya Lane by 665.

It now hinges on the 2,571 postal votes.

If BN can win 2,441 of these postal votes, which is possible, it will win the by-election. The margin of victory will be less than 100 votes.

7.58pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, DAP has increased its lead to 3,130 votes. About 93.9% of votes have been counted so far.

DAP - 16,786
BN - 13,656
Ind - 136

Majority - 3,130

7.52pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, DAP has increased its lead to 3,048 votes. About 92.6% of votes have been counted so far.

DAP - 16,538
BN - 13,490
Ind - 136

Majority - 3,048

NONE DAP leaders and supporters, who are watching the unofficial results displayed by a LCD projector, are biting their nails.

On the spot analysis:

BN stronghold Kg Ilir Nangka and postal votes still yet to be announced. In the 2008 general elections, DAP lost by 1,272 votes in Kg Ilir Nangka and 2,571 in postal votes.

7.40pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, DAP's lead breaks the 3,000 mark for the first time - it is now 3,022 votes. About 90.5% of votes have been counted so far.

DAP - 16,178
BN - 13,156
Ind - 135

Majority - 3,022

On the spot analysis:

DAP appears close to victory, but with postal votes and a key Malay/Melanau area yet to be tallied, BN can still win this by-election.

Whatever the result, it will be close either way.

7.35pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, DAP has again increased its lead to 2,920 votes. About 90% of votes have been counted so far.

DAP - 15,981
BN - 13,061
Ind - 134

Majority - 2,920

7.30pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, DAP has again increased its lead to 2,817 votes. About 87% of votes have been counted so far.

DAP - 15,655
BN - 12,838
Ind - 132

Majority - 2,817

On the spot analysis:

The 2,571 postal votes are now being counted. This is where BN is banking on clawing back into lead. In the 2008 general elections, SUPP won 94% of the postal votes.

7.15pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, DAP has again increased its lead to 2,236 votes. About 81% of votes have been counted so far.

DAP - 14,283
BN - 12,047
Ind - 129

Majority - 2,236

7.13pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, BN has narrowed DAP's lead to 1,577 votes. About 75% of votes have been counted so far.

DAP - 12,966
BN - 11,389
Ind - 126

Majority - 1,577

7.07pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, DAP has further increased its lead to 2,091. About 67% of votes have been counted so far.

DAP - 11,941
BN - 9,850
Ind - 99

Majority - 2,091

On the spot analysis:

BN stronghold Kg Ilir Nangka and postal votes yet to be announced. In the 2008 general elections, DAP lost by 1,272 votes in Kg Ilir Nangka and 2,571 in postal votes.

In addition, also yet to be counted is Rejang Park, a major DAP stronghold.

7.02pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, DAP has further increased its lead to 1,544. So far, 66 out of 110 polling streams, or about 62% of votes, have been counted.

DAP - 10,773
BN - 9,229
Ind - 97

Majority - 1,544

On the spot analysis

It appears that DAP has benefitted from a slight swing of Chinese voters. However, there is no change in Iban and Malay/Melanau vote. Indeed, BN could have won more votes from these two groups.

DAP will need to a sizable lead if it is to win this by-election as it is expected that BN will get the lion share of the 2,537 postal votes, which are yet to be counted.

According to DAP sources, they won in all Chinese-majority polling streams but the turnout was low, especially among young voters.

MCA Youth chief Wee Ka Siong says in a tweet that DAP has won over 66% of the Chinese votes. BN will need to bag at least 80% of the Malay/Melanau vote to win this by-election.

6.50pm: Rain starts to fall in Sibu as ballot boxes continue to stream into the counting centre at the main tally centre in Dewan Suarah.

NONE A crowd of onlookers has swelled to about 100 people in surrounding
shops, mostly curious about the hive of activity at the hall.

6.46pm: The Election Commission announces that the voter turnout for today's by-election is 59.86% or 32,742 voters. The total in postal votes are 2,537.

6.42pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, DAP has further increased its lead to 914. So far, 59 out of 110 polling streams, or about 54% of votes, have been counted.

DAP - 9,188
BN - 8,274
Ind - 89

Majority - 914

6.38pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, DAP has increased its lead to 838. So far, 57 out of 110 polling streams, or about 52% of votes, have been counted.

DAP - 8,888
BN - 8,050
Ind - 87

Majority - 838

6.35pm: EC deputy chairman Wan Ahmad Wan Omar is chairing a closed-door meeting to discuss an objection raised by DAP candidate Wong Ho Leng over discrepancies in postal votes.

Dapsy chief Anthony Loke said the objection was over inconsistencies in signatures of witnesses, and DAP are claiming fraud.

"The EC are not happy about it. We don't know what the intend to do," Loke said when contacted through SMS.

It is understood that Wong has walked out of the postal votes counting centre but no decision has been announced yet by the EC.

6.24pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, DAP is leading for the first time as the Chinese-majority areas are being counted.

DAP - 7,026
BN - 6,243
Ind - 52

Majority - 783

So far, 44 out of 110 polling streams, or about 43% of votes, have been counted.

"It's a clear sign that Chinese votes have swung in favour of us," says DAP leader Anthony Loke. "The question is whether this is enough to carry us through."

DAP sources say that ballot boxes of Malay/Melanau areas yet to be counted. They comprise 10.5% of the Sibu electorate.

Also the estimated 2,000 postal votes, where BN is expected to win over 90% of the votes, are not factored in yet.

6.16pm: A crowd of 150 gather at the DAP operation room in Sibu. As the unofficial results stream in, the crowd cheer.

6.09pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, BN is leading by 1,869 votes. So far, 26 out of 110 polling streams, or about 20% of votes, have been counted.

BN - 4,303
DAP - 2,434
Ind - 41

Majority - 1,869

6.01pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, BN is leading by 1,957 votes. So far, 25 out of 110 polling streams, or about 20% of votes, have been counted.

BN - 4,205
DAP - 2,248
Ind - 41

Majority - 1,957

It appears that DAP is slowing bridging the gap as polling streams from Chinese-majority areas are now being counted.

5.50pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, BN is leading by 1,985 votes. So far, 22 out of 110 polling streams, or about 18% of votes, have been counted.

BN - 3,804
DAP - 1,819
Ind - 37

Majority - 1,985

EC chair Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof says he was not satisfied with the lower voter turnout which fell lower than the 67% recorded in the 2008 general election.

Meanwhile, Sibu police chief ACP Shafie Ismail says polling went smoothly except for a minor incidents of heckling among supporters of the contesting parties.

5.40pm: A few ballot boxes arrive at main tally centre in Dewan Suarah. Dark storm clouds and strong winds coming in, heavy rain expected in Sibu.

5.25pm: Election Commission workers are seen going into the main tally centre at Dewan Suarah in Sibu town. This is where all the votes from the 54 polling centres in today's by-election are tallied.

The final result will be announced by the returning officer later tonight.

DAP sources say the party appeared to have performed worse in Iban areas compared to the 2008 general election.

5.05pm: According to the latest unofficial tally, BN has increased its lead to 2,097 votes. So far, 19 out of 110 polling streams, or about 13% of votes, have been counted.

BN - 3,493
DAP - 1,396
Ind - 33

Majority - 2,097

5pm: The remaining 22 polling stations close. Another 23 pollings stations had closed earlier and counting is in progress.

4.50pm: A total of 31,119 have voted by 4pm. Voter turnout is 56.9% with one hour to go before the closing of the remaining 22 polling stations.

The voter turnout is expected to be far below the 68% in the 2008 general elections.

4.30pm: According to the latest unofficial tally in the polling stations which have closed early, BN has increased its lead to 1,930 votes. So far, 16 out of 110 polling streams have been counted.

BN - 2,959
DAP - 1,029
Ind - 18

Majority - 1,930

Of the 16 polling streams counted, at least 10 are from Iban areas where DAP is expected to lose. Iban comprise

NONE 4.29pm: Umno vice-president Shafie Apdal (left in pix) denies a scuffle ever occurred at Sekolah Kebangsaan Sg Aup as alleged by DAP MP for Bakri Er Teck Hwa (see below - 12.30pm).

“There wasn't a scuffle (as reported). I was there (to request the DAP supporters) to disperse. There was no scuffle,” the minister told Malaysiakini.

Shafie said that he was there with a group of BN supporters.

“The MP (Er) was in the middle of the road distributing leaflets to voters. That can't happen,” said the Umno vice-president, referring to election laws against campaigning on polling day.

“I told him (Er) that he wasn't allowed to do such a thing. In the election laws, it is prohibited. As a member of Parliament, he should know the laws.

4.20pm: According to the latest unofficial tally in the polling stations which have closed early, DAP is trailing by 1,784 votes.

BN - 2,808
DAP - 1,024
Ind - 18

Majority - 1,784

It is still too early to spot the trend as the result is from 15 polling streams out of 110 polling streams in areas which BN is expected to do well.

4.14pm: DAP youth chief Anthony Loke tweets about his altercation with EC officials tallying the votes. He describes them, particularly those coming from Kuala Lumpur, as being “rude” and accusing them of “harassing” the DAP polling agent for “complaining too much.”

NONE They are upset because, fighting “for every vote,” the agent is questioning too much.

To the EC officer's complaint that the agent is being 'leceh' (demanding), Loke says he “shot back” with the words: “Don't we have rights to complain? Dah biasa makan gaji buta!” ('You've become used to earning an easy salary!').

3.40pm: According to latest unofficial results from 12 polling stations which has closed, DAP is trailing by 1,029 votes.

BN - 1,839
DAP - 810
Ind - 15

Majority - 1,029

In Bangkok, Gunfire Outside a Reporter’s Window - NYTimes.com

I’M lying as flat as I can on the 15th-floor sun deck of my fancy apartment building wearing a set of ill-fitting body armor and a ballistic helmet. Below me, over the ledge, is Bangkok, a twinkling city that I’ve always thought looked better in the dark.

But not tonight. The darkness on this Friday is terrifying. Explosions boom across Lumpini Park and bursts of gunfire carry through the small alleys across the street. There is some unexplained shouting and the tinny, amplified voice of a woman who seems to be warning people to stay indoors. Bangkok is a battlefield.

Athit Perawongmetha/Getty Images

Thai security forces confronting antigovernment protesters in Bangkok. More Photos »

By THOMAS FULLER

Published: May 14, 2010

Bangkok

My first impression of Bangkok, when I lived here for a stint in the 1990s, was that it looked poor but did not act poor, a colossal failure in urban planning yet a place that managed to remain seductive, remarkably friendly — and safe.

Much has happened since then to bring Bangkok to a totally different state, one of political chaos and spiraling violence. The country has been in a long, slow burn. In recent years, there has been a military coup, anxiety over the declining health of the country’s king and the rise of protest movements that push their agendas in the streets rather than in Parliament. But if any one idea can sum up the troubles, it is that Thailand’s politics have failed to develop as fast as its rising wealth.

Over the past two months, as a debilitating protest in Bangkok took hold and shadowy groups have operated with impunity, I have crouched behind furniture in hotels when grenades exploded on the street outside. I stood on a wide avenue as dozens of dead and wounded protesters were carried from the carnage of a failed military crackdown. I hid behind a telephone pole during an hourlong crackling barrage of gunfire. And on Thursday, a man I was interviewing was struck in the head by an assassin’s bullet and collapsed at my feet.

Bangkok today has many more high-rise condominiums and much more luxury than the city I knew 15 years ago, but is plagued by its dysfunctional politics. Is there any other city in the world today that has so many cloth-napkin restaurants, spas — and periodic grenade attacks? How many other world capitals have streets filled with fleets of luxury cars and armies of protesters apparently willing to die for their convictions? On Friday alone, 16 civilians were killed in clashes with the military that took place a few hundred yards from my apartment. Patrons were stuck in restaurants for hours because they were terrified to walk into the streets.

When I sat down to write this article in my apartment, I slipped on my ballistic helmet, a piece of equipment left over from a spell covering the Iraq war that is probably more useful to me in the streets of Bangkok.

I donned the helmet because my desk faces floor-to-ceiling windows with no curtains or shutters and outside is the neighborhood where protesters are battling with troops. (Gunfire erupted when I typed the word “protesters.”) I have come to view my windows as an emblem of the turmoil. The architects of this city’s gleaming apartment blocks and office towers did not anticipate gunfire. They thought about prestige and the liberating feeling of floating above a sprawling metropolis, separated only by glass.

A city with floor-to-ceiling windows is a confident city. Sheets of glass, unlike the thick walls and tiny windows of centuries past, send a message: We are not worried about what lurks outside.

But from my desk, it seems as if Bangkok’s architecture has outpaced its political maturity. Who in Bangkok today would feel confident behind a wall of glass when explosions rip through the night?

The protesters battling security forces this week are known as red shirts and draw their strength from the urban and rural poor. Their arch-rivals are the yellow shirts, a group whose core support comes from the elite and middle class. The Reds and Yellows are hardly the only factions in Thailand’s highly fissured society. But they share a legacy of radicalizing Thailand’s democracy by bringing politics into the streets.

The red shirts, who have demanded new elections, have built barricades around one of Bangkok’s glitziest neighborhoods and have forced the closure of shopping malls with combined floor space several times the size of the Mall of America in Minneapolis. This is not quite the Paris Commune, but it is the closest Bangkok has come to a lawless zone patrolled and managed exclusively by protesters.

The Thai government is trying to take back this area — the commercial heart of Bangkok — in an ongoing military operation, block by block.

Over the past two months, about 50 people have been killed and more than a thousand injured in acts of violence like the failed crackdown and a grenade attack on an elevated train station.

And then there was the attempted assassination on Thursday of Maj. Gen. Khattiya Sawatdiphol, a radical red-shirt leader and renegade officer in Thailand’s fractured military.

The shooting was a measure of the depth of the country’s divisions and the treacherous effect they have on Bangkok as a city, the hub of mainland Southeast Asia.

I spotted General Khattiya as he was greeting supporters on Thursday inside the encampment that protesters have built in central Bangkok.

He lingered for at least half an hour at a spot near a makeshift barricade of tires and bamboo spikes, answering questions from a group of reporters.

By 6:50 p.m., the other reporters had drifted away, allowing me and my interpreter to fire away with questions. What turned out to be my last was about the likely outcome of a military crackdown. Would the army be able to penetrate the protesters’ fortifications?

“The military cannot get in here,” answered General Khattiya.

Then there was a loud bang and he fell backward to the ground. There was no scream, no sign of agony, just his crumpled body on a slab of sidewalk with his eyes wide open.

From what I could see, the bullet struck General Khattiya somewhere on the top of his head, near the intersection of the temple and the forehead. The general was facing me, so my best guess is that the shot came from behind me, possibly from a sniper located somewhere in the business district across a busy road.

When calm returns to Bangkok’s streets, ballistic experts will presumably lead a more precise investigation.

But the thought occurs to me: How many more bullets will fly through the Bangkok sky before Thailand’s democracy reaches a level of maturity equal to the modernity and grandeur of its capital city?

Rogue Private Intelligence Networks Used by US in AfPak

U.S. Is Still Using Private Spy Ring, Despite Doubts - NYTimes.com

By MARK MAZZETTI

WASHINGTON — Top military officials have continued to rely on a secret network of private spies who have produced hundreds of reports from deep inside Afghanistan and Pakistan, according to American officials and businessmen, despite concerns among some in the military about the legality of the operation.

Earlier this year, government officials admitted that the military had sent a group of former Central Intelligence Agency officers and retired Special Operations troops into the region to collect information — some of which was used to track and kill people suspected of being militants. Many portrayed it as a rogue operation that had been hastily shut down once an investigation began.

But interviews with more than a dozen current and former government officials and businessmen, and an examination of government documents, tell a different a story. Not only are the networks still operating, their detailed reports on subjects like the workings of the Taliban leadership in Pakistan and the movements of enemy fighters in southern Afghanistan are also submitted almost daily to top commanders and have become an important source of intelligence.

The American military is largely prohibited from operating inside Pakistan. And under Pentagon rules, the army is not allowed to hire contractors for spying.

United States Air Force

Michael D. Furlong, the supervisor who set up the contractor network, is now under investigation.

Military officials said that when Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top commander in the region, signed off on the operation in January 2009, there were prohibitions against intelligence gathering, including hiring agents to provide information about enemy positions in Pakistan. The contractors were supposed to provide only broad information about the political and tribal dynamics in the region, and information that could be used for “force protection,” they said.

Some Pentagon officials said that over time the operation appeared to morph into traditional spying activities. And they pointed out that the supervisor who set up the contractor network, Michael D. Furlong, was now under investigation.

But a review of the program by The New York Times found that Mr. Furlong’s operatives were still providing information using the same intelligence gathering methods as before. The contractors were still being paid under a $22 million contract, the review shows, managed by Lockheed Martin and supervised by the Pentagon office in charge of special operations policy.

Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary, said that the program “remains under investigation by multiple offices within the Defense Department,” so it would be inappropriate to answer specific questions about who approved the operation or why it continues.

“I assure you we are committed to determining if any laws were broken or policies violated,” he said. Spokesmen for General Petraeus and Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top American commander in Afghanistan, declined to comment. Mr. Furlong remains at his job, working as a senior civilian Air Force official.

A senior defense official said that the Pentagon decided just recently not to renew the contract, which expires at the end of May. While the Pentagon declined to discuss the program, it appears that commanders in the field are in no rush to shut it down because some of the information has been highly valuable, particularly in protecting troops against enemy attacks.

With the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the expanded role of contractors on the battlefield — from interrogating prisoners to hunting terrorism suspects — has raised questions about whether the United States has outsourced some of its most secretive and important operations to a private army many fear is largely unaccountable. The C.I.A. has relied extensively on contractors in recent years to carry out missions in war zones.

The exposure of the spying network also reveals tensions between the Pentagon and the C.I.A., which itself is running a covert war across the border in Pakistan. In December, a cable from the C.I.A.’s station chief in Kabul, Afghanistan, to the Pentagon argued that the military’s hiring of its own spies could have disastrous consequences, with various networks possibly colliding with one another.

The memo also said that Mr. Furlong had a history of delving into outlandish intelligence schemes, including an episode in 2008, when American officials expelled him from Prague for trying to clandestinely set up computer servers for propaganda operations. Some officials say they believe that the C.I.A. is trying to scuttle the operation to protect its own turf, and that the spy agency has been embarrassed because the contractors are outperforming C.I.A. operatives.

The private contractor network was born in part out of frustration with the C.I.A. and the military intelligence apparatus. There was a belief by some officers that the C.I.A. was too risk averse, too reliant on Pakistan’s spy service and seldom able to provide the military with timely information to protect American troops. In addition, the military has complained that it is not technically allowed to operate in Pakistan, whose government is willing to look the other way and allow C.I.A. spying but not the presence of foreign troops.

Paul Gimigliano, a C.I.A. spokesman, dismissed reports of a turf war.

“There’s no daylight at all on this between C.I.A. and DoD,” he said. “It’s an issue for Defense to look into — it involves their people, after all — and that’s exactly what they’re doing.”

Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the Pentagon has used broad interpretations of its authorities to expand military intelligence operations, including sending Special Operations troops on clandestine missions far from declared war zones. These missions have raised concerns in Washington that the Pentagon is running de facto covert actions without proper White House authority and with little oversight from the elaborate system of Congressional committees and internal controls intended to prevent abuses in intelligence gathering.

The officials say the contractors’ reports are delivered via an encrypted e-mail service to a “fusion cell,” located at the military base at Kabul International Airport. There, they are fed into classified military computer networks, then used for future military operations or intelligence reports.

To skirt military restrictions on intelligence gathering, information the contractors gather in eastern Afghanistan and Pakistan’s tribal areas is specifically labeled “atmospheric collection”: information about the workings of militant groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan or about Afghan tribal structures. The boundaries separating “atmospherics” from what spies gather is murky. It is generally considered illegal for the military to run organized operations aimed at penetrating enemy organizations with covert agents.

But defense officials with knowledge of the program said that contractors themselves regarded the contract as permission to spy. Several weeks ago, one of the contractors reported on Taliban militants massing near American military bases east of Kandahar. Not long afterward, Apache gunships arrived at the scene to disperse and kill the militants.

The web of private businesses working under the Lockheed contract include Strategic Influence Alternatives, American International Security Corporation and International Media Ventures, a communications company based in St. Petersburg, Fla., with Czech ownership.

One of the companies employs a network of Americans, Afghans and Pakistanis run by Duane Clarridge, a C.I.A. veteran who became famous for his role in the Iran-Contra scandal. Mr. Clarridge declined to be interviewed.

The Times is withholding some information about the contractor network, including some of the names of agents working in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

A spokesman for Lockheed said that no Pentagon officials had raised any concerns about the work.

“We believe our subcontractors are effectively performing the work required of them under the terms of this task order,” said Tom Casey, the spokesman. “We’ve not received any information indicating otherwise.” Lockheed is not involved in the information gathering, but rather administers the contract.

The specifics of the investigation into Mr. Furlong are unclear. Pentagon officials have said that the Defense Department’s inspector general is examining possible contract fraud and financial mismanagement dating from last year.

In his only media interview since details of the operation were revealed, with The San Antonio Express-News, Mr. Furlong said that all of his work had been blessed by senior commanders. In that interview, he declined to provide further details.

Officials said that the tussle over the intelligence operations dated from at least 2008, when some generals in Afghanistan grew angry at what they saw as a paucity of intelligence about the militant groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan who were regularly attacking American troops.

In October of that year, Mr. Furlong traveled to C.I.A. headquarters with top Pentagon officials, including Brig. Gen. Robert H. Holmes, then the deputy operations officer at United States Central Command. General Holmes has since retired and is now an executive at one of the subcontractors, International Media Ventures. The meeting at the C.I.A.’s counterterrorism center was set up to inform the spy agency about the military’s plans to collect “atmospheric information” about Afghanistan and Pakistan, including information about the structure of militant networks in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

Mr. Furlong was testing the sometimes muddy laws governing traditional military activities. A former Army officer who sometimes referred to himself as “the king of the gray areas,” Mr. Furlong played a role in many of America’s recent adventures abroad. He ran psychological operations missions in the Balkans, worked at a television network in Iraq, now defunct, that was sponsored by the American government and made frequent trips to Kabul, Eastern Europe and the Middle East in recent years to help run a number of clandestine military propaganda operations.

At the C.I.A. meeting in 2008, the atmosphere quickly deteriorated, according to some in attendance, because C.I.A. officials were immediately suspicious that the plans amounted to a back-door spying operation.

In general, according to one American official, intelligence operatives are nervous about the notion of “private citizens running around a war zone, trying to collect intelligence that wasn’t properly vetted for operations that weren’t properly coordinated.”

Shortly afterward, in a legal opinion stamped “Secret,” lawyers at the military’s Centcom headquarters in Tampa, Fla., signed off on a version of Mr. Furlong’s proposed operations, adding specific language that the program should not carry out “inherent intelligence activities.” In January 2009, General Petraeus wrote a letter endorsing the proposed operations, which had been requested by Gen. David D. McKiernan, the top commander in Afghanistan at the time.

What happened after that money began flowing to Afghanistan remains a matter of dispute. General McKiernan said in an interview with The Times that he never endorsed hiring private contractors specifically for intelligence gathering.

Instead, he said, he was interested in gaining “atmospherics” from the contractors to help him and his commanders understand the complex cultural and political makeup of the region.

“It could give us a better understanding of the rural areas, of what people there saying, what they were expressing as their needs, and their concerns,” he said.

“It was not intelligence for manhunts,” he said. “That was clearly not it, and we agreed that’s not what this was about.”

To his mind, he said, intelligence is specific information that could be used for attacks on militants in Afghanistan.

General McKiernan said he had endorsed a reporting and research network in Afghanistan and Pakistan pitched to him a year earlier by Robert Young Pelton, a writer and chronicler of the world’s danger spots, and Eason Jordan, a former CNN executive. The project, called AfPax Insider, would have been used a subscription-based Web site, but also a secure information database that only the military could access.

In an interview, Mr. Pelton said that he did not gather intelligence and never worked at the direction of Mr. Furlong and that he did not have a government contract for the work.

But Mr. Pelton said that AfPax did receive reimbursement from International Media Ventures, one of the companies hired for Mr. Furlong’s operation. He said that he was never told that I.M.V. was doing clandestine work for the government.

It was several months later, during the summer of 2009, when officials said that the private contractor network using Mr. Clarridge and other former C.I.A. and Special Operations troops was established. Mr. Furlong, according to several former colleagues, believed that Mr. Pelton and Mr. Jordan had failed to deliver on their promises, and that the new team could finally carry out the program first envisioned by General McKiernan. The contractor network assumed a cloak-and-dagger air, with the information reports stripped of anything that might reveal sources’ identities, and the collectors were assigned code names and numbers.

Ginger Thompson and Eric Schmitt contributed reporting. Barclay Walsh contributed research.

May 15, 2010

Testing Twitter as An Alternative to Facebook

Image via CrunchBase

by John MacDougall

After deleting my Facebook account, I am gradually exploring the many other social networking alternatives. It takes a little while to see if a specific new network supports enough of the features I want, has a good up-time record, and shows no signs of 'going rogue' like Facebook.

After rejecting a few networks, I am focusing now on Twitter where anyone can 'follow' me as johnamacdougall and see my tweets. Type that in Twitter's own search box, or type it in the Twittersearch gadget at the bottom of the last posting here.

Voila! http://twitter.com/#search?q=johnamacdougall