Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old October 6th, 2009 #1
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default Gabry Ponte's Strategy: Form a White Mafia

[Gabry Ponte]

I want to write many important articles but while I am living in the USA I am afraid to do this. Once I go to Europe and get another citizenship I can put out more detailed information with instructions concerning forming organizations. But what I can say is that:

The org must have a political branch as well as a paramilitary branch. They would work together to reach goals and enforce them. The paramilitary section must have an intelligence dept. Info would be gathered on enemies and government agencies both domestic and foreign. Cooperation with other foreign intelligence agencies would be done for specific aims. The org would have a branch that generates money to fund all operations. When force is required to either earn money (by making competitors close their business) or by making enemy politicians resign, the paramil branch together with the intell service would use various acts of coercion and blackmail.

If we want a bill to pass and don't have enough votes in parliment we force enemy politicians to vote for our bill or they will suffer grave consequences. Detailed files would be made on each opponent politician so we can make them act how we want. T

he same for public officials. The Stasi had excellent tactics which can be borrowed.
The intelligence service would be allowed to have it's own money generating plans seperate from the main org so it will receive money from the main organization as well as have it's own secret budget that is controlled by its chief and used at his discretion. Carte Blanch. Money won't be a concern. It will be generated by any means necessary.

A culture of constant war would be the modus operandi that the org follows. Similar to how Israel behaves. It is always under constant threat and things must be serious and perfect. Fuck ups are not tolerated. Top recruits from Europe and all white countries would be recruited as they leave military service. Additional training would be carried out by hiring trainers from SAS, CIA, MI5, MI6 and other special forces/Intell services. Since the org would have lots of cash it would be able to hire and retain the best people money can buy. Exactly like a private military company.

The political branch would push it's people into as many government and public depts as possible. Campaign financing would be taken care of and media would be bought or controlled. Editors, owners of papers or news agencies would be monitored, controlled or eliminated if they fail to follow instructions.

Jewish businesses that are worth while and useful would be forced to sell at low prices or taken by force. Cooperation = life. Jewish and nonwhite influence would be absolutely crushed from all aspects. Their political orgs would be wiped out and burned down. They would be forced to flee to Israel. Illegal muslims and other muds would be deported rapidly by simply passing bills through parliment. Then the police would follow orders and send them back. New rules and strict policing would make life miserable for others who are legal. Their political orgs would be shut down just like the jews. Laws would be designed by the political branch and then put up for vote in government. If certain politicians have problems with voting yes then they will be dealt with harshly and forced to comply. Cooperation = Life.

The object is to control government as well as media. Also to use tactics similar to counter insurgency but within boundaries. If certain enemies have accidents or health problems that is a quiet way. If people disappear the news won't mention it. We will force blackouts as needed. If people on radio, TV, or internet make statements that are against the org then they will be dealt with. Whether they are living in Europe or anywhere else in the world. The paramilitaries and intell agents will be ready to go anywhere and deal with anyone at anytime. Opponents must be silenced or shut down.

Only when you can attack all the various components of society can you reach a victory. And money is the most important factor. Something most WN simply can't comprehend. With money you can have a PMC private military company as well as all the other tools required to win.

These are just some basic ideas that have not been structured or put into any order yet.

*This is a hypothetical situation that I am not condoning or approving. This is fiction for entertainment*

http://vnnforum.com/showpost.php?p=1057910&postcount=12
 
Old October 6th, 2009 #2
COTW
Overseer
 
COTW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Land of Cotton
Posts: 2,602
COTW
Default

Resembles the method of operation of a James Bond villain.
__________________
"To speak his thoughts is every freeman's right, in peace and war, in council and in fight."
Homer-The Iliad

"The very aim and end of our institutions is just this: that we may think what we like and say what we think."

-Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

 
Old October 6th, 2009 #3
andy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 12,833
andy
Default

There is no European country that would allow this scenario to develop.The wild east with their still existing "stasi" would simply kill you,if they thought such a policy was a serious threat.
In the west there is no organisation that I know of that is not closely monitored and Policed.This includes the nearest to the scenario envisaged that has ever existed Northern Ireland.
A study of NI shows that para militaries were and probably still are controlled by the UK state.The apparent success of "the ballot box and the bullet" policy of Sinn Fein ignores the fact that they have only gained political influence when the UK state wound down its counter terrorism policy.
Anyone intending to follow the policy proposed in the above scenario really should make a detailed study of the only example available which is Northern Ireland.
I have lived in the US and on continental Europe,the most racially aware "man in the street" I have encountered is in the white neighbourhoods of Philadelphia,Boston,New York,Little Rock,Houston and ...........New Orleans !
I refuse to believe this nonesense I read daily on the internet that activists cannot engage with normal Americans in their own locales it cannot have changed that much since 2006

In UK terms the average white American is a more extreme BNP supporter.American activists have no excuse they should have an organisation millions strong.To some extent America's racial activists are held back by their own freedom.With free license comes responsibility in civilised societies.American activists do not realise that just because you can does not mean you have to do.So instead of a serious focused millions strong organisation America has a plethora of micro movements and parties all trying to outdoor each other in bizarre costume and outlandish statements and literature.

Rockwell was right in that the USA with its millions of Aryans will save the race,but only if they apply themselves.Use their strengths and jettison or overcome their weaknesses.A paramilitary organisation is superflous in an armed nation with the close at hand militia movement.In Europe those of us with military training have to leave it on the back burner indefinately and hope that like riding a bike you never forget when the balloon goes up.

What America lacks is as do we all probably is POLITICAL Leadership.Someone to take the time to assess what are and are not the targets for serious politicians to engage normal Americans with.As someone who was used to the European model of aesopian language and nuance I was amazed how even in the most respectable of circles one could call a spade a spade.American activists need to look to their European kith and kin but not for how to look cool in a hoodie but how to steal the ground from under the feet of existing mainstream politicians.

Recently it was spuriously reported by the enemy media that a hotshot American "nazi thug" was to attend the RWB I had never heard of him and cannot recall his name.Supposedly to instruct BNP 'ers in martial arts.More useful for the US "movement" would be if they sent a couple of interns to study up close and personal the BNP's methods and applications in the political arena.Then set about applying them within the US political system.
__________________
The above post is as always my opinion

Chase them into the swamps

Last edited by andy; October 6th, 2009 at 01:36 PM.
 
Old October 6th, 2009 #4
Julian Lüchow
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Kansas
Posts: 888
Julian Lüchow
Post

What did Ponte get banned for? I mean, I didn't exactly agree with the the guy. Otoh, it seems strange to discuss his ideas when he's been given the boot.
 
Old October 6th, 2009 #5
Thomas de Aynesworth
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,752
Default


In memorium
~Gabry Ponte: Aug. 2009 - Oct. 2009~
 
Old October 6th, 2009 #6
PeterKramer
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 344
Default

This plan is vulnerable to the SPLC counterattack. If your paramilitary wing slaps a jew in the face your political wing will be sued out of existence. Just because the jews can get away with their blackmail, intimidation, terrorism and assassinations doesn't mean you can use the same tactics within their strongholds. They are the establishment. There is a double standard.

Now of course if the paramilitary wing of this organization had thousands of killers it would be different. But that's a scenario for civil war. Jews know that violence is the most effective tactic to use against them. They've arranged things to make it almost impossible for any violent organization to run an above ground front. Long before you were able to build an insurgent army you and your associates would be in prison and the organization's assets in the hands of jewry.

The only way for a legal White organization to have bank accounts, take donations and distribute propaganda is to maintain an absolute separation from the underground, while at the same time never condemning the underground.

Just as black radicals say they understand the rage of black criminals a White organization should express sympathy with White insurgents but avoid any direct contact.

This requires intelligent leadership. If a loose cannon insurgent shows up with a suitcase full of cash you don't take it, you say thanks but no thanks and send him on his way.
 
Old October 7th, 2009 #7
Donnie in Ohio
Switching to glide
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Morrison Hotel
Posts: 9,396
Blog Entries: 11
Donnie in Ohio
Default

Reads like a comic book.

I especially like the part where we pay special forces vets to train WN.

Maybe we can get G.I. Joe to head up the NSM.
__________________
"When US gets nuked and NEMO is uninhabitable, I will make my way on foot to the gulf and live off red snapper and grapefruit"- Alex Linder
 
Old October 7th, 2009 #8
cillian
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,375
cillian
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie in Ohio View Post
Reads like a comic book.

I especially like the part where we pay special forces vets to train WN.

Maybe we can get G.I. Joe to head up the NSM.
Why do that when the fbi already trains so many wn...
 
Old October 7th, 2009 #9
Tonny
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 16
Tonny
Default

Gabry Ponte = DELUSIONAL

For god's skae have you seen his threads about Gypsy Hunting and Poisoning gypsies with rat poison this guy has no life at all, all he does is stay online all day long and fantasize stuff, besides I read the text and let me tell you that idea is retarded no one in Europe will allow you do and implement that kind of thing.

Gabry Ponte is a teenager who wastes his time online and comes up with unreal and retarded ideas all the time and if you people take him seriously then you really have a problem, plus the last thing I saw on the forum was him getting banned.
 
Old October 12th, 2009 #10
Gabry Ponte
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,024
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cracker oftheWhip View Post
Resembles the method of operation of a James Bond villain.
For over 18 years I have researched organized crime as well as various intelligence services world wide. After reading about actual events I learned that all this was not only possible but is happening right now as we speak.

The most successful groups are the Commora in Naples Italy. They are more powerful then the Sicilian La Cosa Nostra. From the region of Campania they control a multi BILLION dollar criminal empire. They are involved with every aspect of legal and illegal business in Italy. They also operate in every continent.

They control the media, politicians, police, local and regional government. Even national government. They also are entrenched in international banking. Their hands are in everything. You can't do business without them. They control goods coming from the factory to the market. They decide which international brands are allowed to be sold in Italy. If Hershy's chocolate wants to sell candy bars in Italy they must first deal with a distributor that is controlled by the Commora. If a politician speaks against them he will be hushed by his colleagues who are in the pockets of the Commora. If he still wants to speak then his children might be picked up and brought home from school by a stranger as a warning. If he still wants to speak then he will die.

Mayors, govenors are put into place by the Commora. Senators are financed and helped into power. Opponents of a Commora politician are dealt with during election periods. Almost all aspects of commerce and politics are connected with mafia.

I was very impressed by their accomplishments. The South American drug cartels have budgets that exceed many federal agencies by 10 times. Infact during the 80's and 90's the drug cartels even made as much as the entire DOD budget. They can acquire almost any weaponry or technology that exists. They can hire the best trained soldiers and agents from the USA, Israel, Russia, and the UK. They manipulate politics in South America but they are mostly focused on coca export and production. Whereas the Italians are into everything and control everything with greater skill and organization.


Before anyone says what can or can't be done they first need to stop themselves from commenting on issues in which they are ignorant. Then they need to do their own research and see for themselves what has been documented and what is happening now. I can recommend one book in particular called Gommorah by Roberto Saviano. He now lives under police protection for the rest of his life because of this book.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/25/bo...Donadio-t.html

 
Old October 12th, 2009 #11
Gabry Ponte
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,024
Default

Hi Andy,
As I have stated before there are already criminal organizations that operate all over the world with similar powers that I wrote of. The only difference I am saying is instead of being a criminal organization whose goals are to make money, a political organization can adopt the same tactics which obviously are working just fine. They are proven and exist right now as we speak. Governments don't like it but they can't stop it. Greed is human nature. Can the police stop cocaine and other drug sales in the UK? No they can't. So it is clear that these scenarios are already happening. The UK could not stop the IRA as well. They kill them but more pop up to take their place. You can kill criminals but money and power are an allure that can not be stopped. Remember that the IRA financed their operations from cocaine/heroin sales.




Quote:
Originally Posted by andy View Post
There is no European country that would allow this scenario to develop.The wild east with their still existing "stasi" would simply kill you,if they thought such a policy was a serious threat.
In the west there is no organisation that I know of that is not closely monitored and Policed.This includes the nearest to the scenario envisaged that has ever existed Northern Ireland.
A study of NI shows that para militaries were and probably still are controlled by the UK state.The apparent success of "the ballot box and the bullet" policy of Sinn Fein ignores the fact that they have only gained political influence when the UK state wound down its counter terrorism policy.
Anyone intending to follow the policy proposed in the above scenario really should make a detailed study of the only example available which is Northern Ireland.
I have lived in the US and on continental Europe,the most racially aware "man in the street" I have encountered is in the white neighbourhoods of Philadelphia,Boston,New York,Little Rock,Houston and ...........New Orleans !
I refuse to believe this nonesense I read daily on the internet that activists cannot engage with normal Americans in their own locales it cannot have changed that much since 2006

In UK terms the average white American is a more extreme BNP supporter.American activists have no excuse they should have an organisation millions strong.To some extent America's racial activists are held back by their own freedom.With free license comes responsibility in civilised societies.American activists do not realise that just because you can does not mean you have to do.So instead of a serious focused millions strong organisation America has a plethora of micro movements and parties all trying to outdoor each other in bizarre costume and outlandish statements and literature.

Rockwell was right in that the USA with its millions of Aryans will save the race,but only if they apply themselves.Use their strengths and jettison or overcome their weaknesses.A paramilitary organisation is superflous in an armed nation with the close at hand militia movement.In Europe those of us with military training have to leave it on the back burner indefinately and hope that like riding a bike you never forget when the balloon goes up.

What America lacks is as do we all probably is POLITICAL Leadership.Someone to take the time to assess what are and are not the targets for serious politicians to engage normal Americans with.As someone who was used to the European model of aesopian language and nuance I was amazed how even in the most respectable of circles one could call a spade a spade.American activists need to look to their European kith and kin but not for how to look cool in a hoodie but how to steal the ground from under the feet of existing mainstream politicians.

Recently it was spuriously reported by the enemy media that a hotshot American "nazi thug" was to attend the RWB I had never heard of him and cannot recall his name.Supposedly to instruct BNP 'ers in martial arts.More useful for the US "movement" would be if they sent a couple of interns to study up close and personal the BNP's methods and applications in the political arena.Then set about applying them within the US political system.
 
Old October 12th, 2009 #12
Gabry Ponte
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,024
Default

The mafia doesn't give a rats ass what the jew thinks or does. It doesn't care what anyone thinks or does. However if you interfere with cash flow or business you will be dealt with. It is that simple. The police are shot and killed all the time. Their police stations are blown up.

Jews only have power when the central government that they manipulate is in complete control. Remember the jew is a parasite. It can't live without it;s host. When the host is weak then the parasite is vulnerable. The mafia is not interested in race. Only money. So the jews are safe in Italy. If however the jews interfered in something that the mafia has interests in then they would be dealt with just like anyone else. A bullet doesn't care what you look like or your religion. It kills people without thought.


A WN org that uses criminal tactics could not operate in the USA, UK, France, Germany. Smaller European countries are vulnerable. Their budgets for defense, intell, and interior are pathetic. Look what happened in Sweden a few weeks ago. Some bank robbers used military tactics and took off with millions via helicoptor. They disabled the police completely.

The reason things have not happened is that criminals focus on making money and they don't have ideals. People with idealism often do not have money to make their ideals reality. Then you have idiot do gooders on SF and some here that would not take part in such an organization because it wasn't the "Christian" thing to do.

Like it or not there will be NO going forward unless WN are willing to get BLOOD on their hands. And it's going to take ALOT of blood....




Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterKramer View Post
This plan is vulnerable to the SPLC counterattack. If your paramilitary wing slaps a jew in the face your political wing will be sued out of existence. Just because the jews can get away with their blackmail, intimidation, terrorism and assassinations doesn't mean you can use the same tactics within their strongholds. They are the establishment. There is a double standard.

Now of course if the paramilitary wing of this organization had thousands of killers it would be different. But that's a scenario for civil war. Jews know that violence is the most effective tactic to use against them. They've arranged things to make it almost impossible for any violent organization to run an above ground front. Long before you were able to build an insurgent army you and your associates would be in prison and the organization's assets in the hands of jewry.

The only way for a legal White organization to have bank accounts, take donations and distribute propaganda is to maintain an absolute separation from the underground, while at the same time never condemning the underground.

Just as black radicals say they understand the rage of black criminals a White organization should express sympathy with White insurgents but avoid any direct contact.

This requires intelligent leadership. If a loose cannon insurgent shows up with a suitcase full of cash you don't take it, you say thanks but no thanks and send him on his way.
 
Old October 12th, 2009 #13
Gabry Ponte
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,024
Default

I don't understand why you are so ignorant. Who do you think works for PMC's? Do you even know what a PMC is??? PRIVATE MILITARY COMPANY. Those are the people that work for BlackWater and all the other contractors working in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other hot spots. They get out of the military and go make $200k per year training private soldiers or fighting. There are PMC all over Europe. There used to be some in South Africa. Sandline was a popular one. Also Executive Outcomes.

What do you know about Mercenaries? What do you know about international private military operations Donnie from Ohio? Before attacking an idea you need to atleast have some basic fucking understanding of what you are talking about.



http://www.sandline.com/site/index.html

Concept: our experience is the key

The best trained personnel are the best disciplined and the best prepared. Continuous improvement in the skills, capabilities and awareness of your personnel provides an essential advantage in times of crisis. Create immediate and long-term advantage by making use of some of the best general and specialist training available anywhere in the world.

Design: practical and realistic

All the courses provided by Sandline contain substantial practical skills components. Conflict does not take place within the sterile confines of a classroom - our courses reflect this and are designed to prepare the attendees to apply their newly acquired skills in the real world. The programmes are rigorous and demanding - at times students will not be able to differentiate between exercise and reality.

Trainers: the best in the world

Sandline's training teams typically comprise ex-Special Forces or equivalent personnel who are responsible for designing the course programmes and conducting the training of the trainers in first world armies such as the US and UK. In other words, they are the best of the best in their specialities and they know how to coax maximum effort and maximum results out of their students.

Courses: comprehensive and complete

Training programmes are available exclusively to our clients, such as internationally recognised governments and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). We do not provide training to individuals, etc. Please click here here to view a selection of courses.

Syllabus: thorough and effective

We have not published any course syllabus on the website because this level of detailed information is proprietary. However, this detail is, of course, available to prospective clients making genuine enquiries. If you would like further information and course literature please write to Graham Sutherland at [email protected] giving your name, position and contact details and the name of the government or organisation that you represent.



So Donald from Ohio, maybe you should learn about something instead of speaking out of your ass. That is the modus operandi or WN. Talking out their asses when they don;t fucking know what they are discussing.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie in Ohio View Post
Reads like a comic book.

I especially like the part where we pay special forces vets to train WN.

Maybe we can get G.I. Joe to head up the NSM.
 
Old October 12th, 2009 #14
Gabry Ponte
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,024
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cillian View Post
Why do that when the fbi already trains so many wn...


LOL!


Yes and even some posters on here!
 
Old October 12th, 2009 #15
Gabry Ponte
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,024
Default

To educate the masses I have posted some general information about private corporations that hire private soldiers and carry out military as well as intelligence operations. They work for anyone that can pay them. But most prefer working for ZOG because ZOG has the best contracts and starts all the wars.




Executive Outcomes



From SourceWatch
Jump to: navigation, search
Executive Outcomes could be considered the progenitor of the modern private military company. They operated in Africa through out the 1990's and closed shop in 1999.

They were started by Luther Eeben Barlow, a member of the South African Defence Force, in 1989. Barlow, who had extensive experience in SA's wars in neighboring countries in the 70's and 80's, headed the European Section of the Orwellian named Civil Co-operation Bureau.

It is alleged EO's beginnings were as a front company for the CCB to circumnavigate arms embargos against South Africa. As the CCB began to break under investigations, many members made their way over to EO.

EO's first contract that led them to becoming the role model for copy-cat companies was with DeBeers and Branch Heritage Group via the goverment of Angola. Branch's oil site in Soyo, Angola had been captured and retained by UNITA forces. Through contacts with Simon Mann, Barlow met Branch CEO Anthony Buckingham and the idea of how to recapture control of the site led to a deal with the Angolan government (backed by DeBeers), EO and Branch.

The success EO had in Angola instigated a flood of PMCs in Africa, many of them formed by ex-EO officers. EO was also a part of a corporate maze created, in part at least, by accountant and CEO of Plaza 107, Michael Grunberg, and designed to obscure the relationships between soldiering companies, mineral and oil extraction companies, and key people in government positions.

EO and EO related companies along with Branch Oil and other mineral related companies worked all through out Africa in 1990s. Some of the hotspots were Angola, Sierra Leone, Burundi, and the Congo. When the criticisms began to get heavy, many of EO's work went to side-formed Sandline International headed by Lt.-Col Tim Spicer, which operated with the system already in place.

Subsidiaries like air support firm Ibis Air were owned by Barlow's umbrella company, Strategic Resources Corporation, the same company whose directors managed EO profits. Ibis provided air support for all of EO's operations and subsequently for Sandline International. The operator of Ibis, Crause Steyl, was recently the operator of Air Ambulance Africa which provided air logistical support for the 2004 failed coup attempt in Equatorial Guinea.

This is the nature of the legacy of Executive Outcomes. Among the companies formed by ex-officers are:

Alpha 5
Stabilco
Omega Support Ltd.
Panasec Corporate Dynamics
Bridge Resources
COIN Security
Corporate Tracking International
Safenet
Southern Cross Security
Among Executive Outcomes subsidiaries, sometimes via SRC have been:

Saracen International
Bridge International
Shibata Security
Teleservices International
Lifeguard
Ibis Air
Ibis Air and other subsidiaries were housed in the Plaza 107 maze run by Michael Grunberg. Grunberg was also a partner with Buckingham in DiamondWorks as well Barlow served as director on the Branch Energy board, a Branch Heritage subsidiary. All companies stood to benefit from the actions of the rest, and though they tried to remain as publicly distant from each other, their obvious proximity stands as the modern model between business ventures and the extreme edge of the private military industry. (1)

Relations Denied

Many of the relationships pieced together here by the source cited below have been denied in a release by Sandline

SourceWatch Resources

Simon Mann
Tim Spicer
Aegis Defence Services
Coup attempt in Equatorial Guinea
War profiteering
Defence Systems Limited
Control Risks Group
Southern Cross Security
Northbridge Services Group, Ltd.

Last edited by Gabry Ponte; October 12th, 2009 at 11:43 PM.
 
Old October 12th, 2009 #16
Gabry Ponte
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,024
Default PMC's

Private Military Corporations


From SourceWatch
Jump to: navigation, search
Private military corporations, private military firms, private security companies, military services providers, the privatized military industry are all attempts to label the phenomena of private companies offering services on the world market that have normally been duties of national military forces or involve armed security detail for business in unstable regions.[1] Every service caters to security, and the growing need for security in a world wrought with differing economic, strategic, and military interests has provided a marketplace that is rapidly expanding.

These services include risk advisory, training of local forces, armed site security, cash transport, intelligence services, workplace and building security, war zone security needs, weapons procurement, personnel and budget vetting, armed support, air support, logistical support, maritime security, cyber security, weapons destruction, prisons, surveillance, psychological warfare, propaganda tactics, covert operations, close protection and investigations.

The industry is best defined by the services offered, and not by the company in particular. Companies may offer a vast range of services, not all of which, or in some cases, most of which do not fall into the loosely defined category of private military services. Other companies may only offer services in the security and logistics fields with few or any options outside those specialities. Many security companies have been around for quite some time and have adapted to 21st century necessities involving terrorism and business ventures in unstable regions. Others have been recently created to fill the market niche left by downsized militaries coupled with military endeavors in Iraq and Afghanistan. And others concentrate on peacekeeping missions and post-war civil training.

The companies of today are used by governments, corporations, humanitarian groups and NGOs, media personnel, and the UN. Private military contractors are the second largest force in Iraq with over twenty thousand active personnel in the country. The industry is growing with some estimating annual contracts in the $10-$20 billion range and others citing numbers as high as $100 billion. Though a worldwide phenomena, the United States and Great Britain account for over 70% of the world's market for their services.

The single largest issue introduced by the evolution of military services by the private sector is the degree to which corporations are now transcending the power of governments, rising as an influential variable within international and regional diplomacy, and redefining sovereignty in the 21st century. Advocates of the industry claim they are economically efficient and point towards the failure of the UN and the system of world governments to cease violence, genocide and civil war around the world. Those who are cautious of the emerging industry see this market as an encroachment into inherent government functions and question the real economic efficiency heralded as a true result of privatization. And there are, of course, many in between, who see benefits and drawbacks to the variety of services out there now on the world market.

Contents [hide]
1 History of private military companies
2 The War on Terror and the 21st Century
3 Points of Interest
4 Outsourcing the Pentagon
5 Corporate warriors
6 Recruiting candidates
7 Creating distance
8 Accountability
9 Trade association view
10 Resources and articles
10.1 List of PMCs
10.2 Related SourceWatch articles
10.3 References
10.4 External articles

[edit]History of private military companies
“The mercenaries and auxiliaries are useless and dangerous, and if anyone supports his state by the arms of mercenaries, he will never stand firm or sure, as they are disunited, ambitious, without discipline, faithless, bold amongst friends, cowardly amongst enemies, they have no fear of God, and keep no faith with men,” wrote Machiavelli in The Prince.

As Peter W. Singer says in his book, Corporate Warriors: The Rise of the Privatized Military Industry (ISBN 0801441145), "[T]he monopoly of the state over violence is the exception in world history, rather than the rule. The state itself is a rather new unit of governance, appearing only in the last four hundred years. Moreover, it drew from the private violence market to build its public power."

And as Lt. Col. Tim Spicer says in his book, An Unorthodox Soldier: Peace and War in the Sandline Affair (ISBN 1840183497), "Mercenary soldiering has a long and honorable history...When something is both widespread and long lasting, there must be some fundamental reason for it. In the case of mercenaries, the reasons why they have continued to survive and prosper down the centuries can be reduced to just two: efficiency and technology."

[edit]The War on Terror and the 21st Century
The modern private military company has evolved from a hybrid of the wild activities of rogue white officers, and their African recruits, often linked with intelligence agencies running around Africa, and their more legitimate counterparts working under contract from Cold War hero countries. This coupled with the risk advisory services offered to corporations by companies like Kroll, Inc. and CRG and the introduction of more legitimate players from the high ranks of big militaries have come together to offer security to companies doing business in hostile regions and to countries seeking to upgrade their militaries.

The war in Iraq and Afghanistan along with the promised long global war against terror has created a boom in the security and risk advisory market. Trained and experienced military personnel from Special Forces units in the US, UK, Israel and South Africa are retiring to take part. The same is true for the intelligence agencies as companies aiding business ventures in Iraq like GlobalOptions and Diligence see executives on the boards from the CIA, DIA, FBI, the Secret Service, FEMA and MI6.

Many companies are subsidiaries of larger firms. MPRI and Titan were bought by L-3 Communications which is traded on the NYSE. Defence Systems Limited was bought by Armor Holdings, Inc., renamed ArmorGroup than bought out by its board. Group 4 Securicor is a merger between Group 4 Falck and the Wackenhut Corporation providing services from armed prison guards to guarding embassies to supplying electronic surveillance. Computer Sciences Corporation acquired DynCorp.

Many of these companies, while paid with taxpayer money when working under government contracts, are often registered offshore somewhere, escaping tax on many profits from re-entering the representative, public Treasury.

Other companies provide specialized advice and training for maritime concerns such as Executive Solutions International, LLC (ESI). The threat to port cities where liquefied natural gas comes in on container ships could be severe. Pirating and other attacks on the high seas are a threat in many areas of the world. Companies are developing to meet the security needs of cities and companies subject to terrorist or other attacks on shipments.

The laws surrounding hired soldiers and civilian contractors is not clear and not well defined under international agreements. This is a reason why increasingly the focus is regulation at the national level; e.g. as the licensing mechanisms used by the United States and South Africa demonstrate. Yet many of the hired soldiers are not American; they could be from the country of conflict, or flown in from Chile, El Salvador, or South Africa. Exactly what jurisdiction, aside from their employer, they are under is, according to some commentators, uncertain. [1]

This is true for American contractors as well. Civilian contractors working for Dyncorp in the Balkan wars were implicated by a fellow employee for indulging in a child prostitution and sale ring in the war torn country. [2] Those who turned in the employees were fired, and later the offending employees were fired , however not charged with anything. [3]

Some of the interrogators in the Abu Ghraib crimes were civilian contractors provided by Titan and CACI. They have yet to be charged for any crimes, however they are being sued as are the two companies. [4][5][6] All three companies have continued to receive large wartime contracts from the US government.

In 2006, the US Congress published an official report on US enterprises that had signed contracts with the State Department or the Defense Department so as to carry out anti-narcotics activities as a part of Plan Colombia. Most the private contract enterprises are under the responsibility of the Defense Department, but the largest contract (DynCorp) is in the hands of the State Department. [7]

[edit]Points of Interest
The Center for Public Integrity: Making A Killing: The Business of War

"At least 90 companies that provide services normally performed by national military forces but without the same degree of public oversight have operated in 110 countries worldwide." [8]
"Arms dealers have profited from a massive unregulated sell off of low price surplus armaments into the most fragile, conflict-ridden states and failed states. The weapons, mostly from state-owned Eastern European factories, have found their way to Angola, Sudan, Ethiopia, Colombia, Congo-Brazzaville, Sri Lanka, Burundi and Afghanistan where conflicts have led to the deaths of up to 10 million people during the past decade." [9]
"Since 1994, the U.S. Defense Department has entered into 3,061 contracts with 12 of the 24 U.S.-based PMCs identified by ICIJ, a review of government documents showed. Pentagon records valued those contracts was more than $300 billion. More than 2,700 of those contracts were held by just two companies: Kellogg Brown & Root and Booz Allen Hamilton. Because of the limited information the Pentagon provides and the breadth of services offered by some of the larger companies, it was impossible to determine what percentage of these contracts was for training, security or logistical services." [10]
"The International Traffic in Arms Regulations Law (ITAR) requires PMCs to obtain approval from the State Department before selling their services to a foreign government. State's Office of Defense Trade Controls reviews contract proposals to ensure they do not violate sanctions or other U.S. policy. However, PMCs can also sell their services abroad through the Defense Department's Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program, which does not require any licensing by State. Under FMS, the Pentagon pays the contractor for services offered to a foreign government, which in turn reimburses the Pentagon." [11]
[edit]Outsourcing the Pentagon
The following is according to the Center for Public Integrity's Outsourcing the Pentagon:

"In April [2002], the Army told Congress that its best guess was that the Army had between 124,000 and 605,000 service contract workers. In October, the Army announced that it would permit contractors to compete for "non-core" positions held by 154,910 civilian workers (more than half of the Army's civilian workforce) and 58,727 military personnel." [12]
"In 2003, the IG [Inspector General] reported that out of 113 service contract actions reviewed (with an estimated value of $17.8 billion), at least 98 had one or more problems, including inadequate competition, lack of surveillance, or inadequate price reasonableness determinations." [13]
"The Freedom of Information Act applies to "agency" records. Contractors, in this context, are not "agencies," even where they perform decisional roles. Similarly, government officials are subject to a body of conflict of interest provisions, pay caps, limits on political activity, and labor rules that do not similarly constrain contractors who perform similar, even the same, work." [14]
"Between 1998 and 2003, the Pentagon awarded more than $47 billion in contracts designated for small businesses to companies that have each earned more than $100 million from Defense Department contracts alone during that six year period." [15]
"The homeland security industry is currently the fastest growing sector of the U.S. economy, predicted to grow from a $5 billion industry in 2000 to $130 billion in 2010, according to the Homeland Security Research Corporation, a private California think tank." [16]
[edit]Corporate warriors
In 2002, Peter W. Singer wrote the following in "Corporate Warriors: The Rise and Ramifications of the Privatized Military Industry" by Peter W. Singer. (Links to 91K/46 page .pdf file.)

"With the rise of the privatized military industry, actors in the global system can access capabilities that extend across the entire spectrum of military activity-from a team of commandos to a wing of fighter jets-simply by becoming a business partner."? (pg. 1-2)
"Many PMFs operate as "virtual companies." Similar to Internet firms that limit their expenditure on fixed (brick and mortar) assets, most PMFs do not maintain standing forces but draw from databases of qualified personnel and specialized subcontractors on a contract-by-contract basis." (pg. 15)
"The unrestricted access to military services ushered in by the rise of the privatized military industry has clearly enhanced the role of nonstate groups which at one time had been at a disadvantage in a system dominated by states. PMFs provide these groups with new options and new paths to power not imagined until very recently." (pg. 31)
"The ultimate problem with PMFs is that they diffuse responsibility. Questions about who monitors, regulates, and punishes employees or companies that go astray are still to be fully answered. That many of these firms are chartered in offshore accounts complicates the matter further." (pg. 34)
[edit]Recruiting candidates
In "Transfering Costs of War to Latin America is Morally, Politically Wrong" in The Miami Herald, January 29, 2005, Geoff Thale observes:

"In El Salvador, the security firms are said to be pleased with the candidates they have found. Many of them served in the Salvadoran armed forces; they are highly motivated, because they are being paid several times what they could earn in the Salvadoran economy; and they are cheap, because even paying five times what an average Salvadoran earns means that the security firms are paying far less than they would have to pay to recruit U.S. civilians to do this work."
"The U.S. military contracts out elements of security operations to U.S. companies, who recruit relatively low-cost Latin Americans to fill the jobs. The contractors keep labor costs down, thus helping their bottom line. The Latin Americans are poor, need the work and benefit from what are -- by their standards -- high salaries."
"Latin America and other less-developed regions shouldn't serve as a cheap labor pool to recruit people for dangerous jobs that are part of the U.S. military mission in Iraq. It may be tempting to pay others to take risks for us. It may be particularly tempting to pay people from foreign countries such as El Salvador, Colombia or Chile, so that we don't experience the human cost of casualties or deaths ourselves. But it's not morally acceptable."
"U.S. military and government officials are attempting to avoid paying the political cost in the United States of the war in Iraq by hiring poor Latin Americans to do part of the fighting and the dying in place of U.S. citizens. Whether one supports or opposes the U.S. war in Iraq, one can agree that it is the U.S. military that ought to bear the burden of fighting a war that the United States initiated. Allies may join in and send their own troops in support if they so choose. But U.S. contractors working for the Pentagon shouldn't be recruiting civilians in Latin America to bear the burden of carrying out a U.S. military mission."
"When a U.S. soldier is wounded or killed in combat, his or her family, neighbors and community feel the weight of the war and ask themselves, Is it worth it? In a democracy such as the United States, it is important for citizens to share the burden related to military action abroad, feel the impact and make the judgment about whether it's worthwhile."
[edit]Creating distance
The July 3, 2003 cover feature, Soldiers of Good Fortune by Barry Yeoman for The Independent Weekly makes the following assertions:

"Private military corporations become a way to distance themselves and create what we used to call 'plausible deniability,'" says Daniel Nelson, a former professor of civil-military relations at the Defense Department's Marshall European Center for Security Studies. "It's disastrous for democracy."
"The lack of oversight alarms some members of Congress. "Under a shroud of secrecy, the United States is carrying out military missions with people who don't have the same level of accountability," says Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), a leading congressional critic of privatized war. "We have individuals who are not obligated to follow orders or follow the Military Code of Conduct. Their main obligation is to their employer, not to their country."
"An analysis shows that 17 of the nation's leading private military firms have invested more than $12.4 million in congressional and presidential campaigns since 1999."
"In 2001, according to the most recent federal disclosure forms, 10 private military companies spent more than $32 million on lobbying."
"Federal law bans U.S. soldiers from participating in Colombia's war against left-wing rebels and from training army units with ties to right-wing paramilitaries infamous for torture and political killings. There are no such restrictions on for-profit companies, though, and since the late 1990s, the United States has paid private military companies an estimated $1.2 billion, both to eradicate coca crops and to help the Colombian army put down rebels who use the drug trade to finance their insurgency."
"The Pentagon has become so dependent on private military companies that it literally cannot wage war without them. Troops already rely on for-profit contractors to maintain 28 percent of all weapons systems."
"There are some weapons systems that the U.S. military forces do not have the capability to do their own maintenance on," concedes David Young, a deputy commander at the Defense Contract Management Agency."
[edit]Accountability
Lt. Col. Tim Spicer makes the following remarks in his book, An Unorthodox Soldier: Peace and War and the Sandline Affair:

"Another frequent allegation about PMCs is that they are "not accountable." Not accountable to whom? World opinion? Outside politicians? I can only speak for Sandline, but we are always accountable, to our own policies and ethos and to our client government, with whom we always have a binding contract."? (pg. 24)
"[T]he majority of legitimate PMCs are quite capable of continuing to operate and grow without the introduction of a regulatory regime. PMCs will accept external regulation if it is manageable and adds to their commercial aspirations and operational effectiveness. [ ] I would suggest that since PMCs operate in an international setting and in high-risk, volatile situations, the sort of heavy-handed regulation employed in other areas of public concern might not be entirely appropriate." (pg. 27)
"Any PMC must adhere to the law of armed conflict, as defined by the Geneva Convention, and show a respect for human dignity and human rights. Although our operatives are always enlisted in the forces of the governments who employ us, not least to ensure a clear chain of command, if one of our people were told, for example, to attack a village, an action which would unnecessarily endanger innocent lives, he would not do it." (pg. 53)
[edit]Trade association view
Doug Brooks, president of the International Peace Operations Association, a representative group for PMCs makes the following statements:

Contrary to various media reports, private security company (PSC) employees in Iraq are not becoming overnight millionaires. Sensational reports of $1500 or even $3500 per day salaries tax free float around in the media, but the reality is far different. Private security professionals with the highest qualifications and suffering the greatest risk may earn as much as $700 per day, far below the sensational salaries many experts have been claiming. [17]
Skilled private contractors in Iraq are doing everything from rebuilding the education system and electrical grids to protecting fledgling democracy efforts. It is critical that the industry spearhead efforts challenging rogue companies and contractors who violate the public trust. [18]
The reality is that every UN or regional peace operation in existence today requires and utilizes the services of the private sector. IPOA members have proven their effectiveness and value in these operations. [19]
In a globalized economy, all transnational companies, whether their focus is manufacturing, mining, transportation or even security, look for employees with the required skill sets from local, regional, and international sources. [20]
[edit]Resources and articles
[edit]List of PMCs
[edit]Related SourceWatch articles
Abu Ghraib
Blackwater Watch
British Association of Private Security Companies
Coalition Provisional Authority
Col. Theodore S. Westhusing
Coup Attempt in Equatorial Guinea
Defense contractors
DESECON - Defence and Security Consultants
Facilities engineering
International Convention Against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries
International Peace Operations Association
Loose Cannon Pentagon
Military-industrial complex
Northrop Grumman
Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization
Post-war Iraq
Prison-industrial complex
Private Security Company Association of Iraq
Privatization of Iraq
Reconstruction of Iraq contractors
Simon Mann
Surveillance-industrial complex
Joe Ryan Abu Ghraib diary April 2004
Tim Spicer
War in Iraq
War profiteering
 
Old October 12th, 2009 #17
Gabry Ponte
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,024
Default More on EO

Executive Outcomes
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Executive Outcomes logo.Executive Outcomes was a private military company founded in South Africa by former Lieutenant-Colonel of the South African Defence Force Eeben Barlow in 1989. It later became part of the South African-based holding company Strategic Resource Corporation.[1]

Executive Outcomes (EO) provided military personnel, training and logistical support to officially recognized governments only. They were however often accused of providing the military strength for corporations to control natural resources in failed states or conflict-ridden areas. Where assistance was given to corporations in conflict areas, EO claims to have had the host government’s approval to provide such assistance.

These claims have been highly contested, however. Scholar James Ferguson has demonstrated how murky the political/social/economic space organizations like the EO occupy is in practice. It is often unclear. He quotes an Amnesty International report which wonders, "what legal framework, if any, [these companies] are operating within [2]." For example, the EO provided the military force to back the ARRC's (Africa Rainforest and River Conservation) efforts to raise its own money through trading diamonds dug up in "its" conserved territory, a practice which is certainly "paralegal" and not at all conforming to the NGO's own purported mission in the Central African Republic. As recently as 2002, Bruce Hayse, founder of the ARRC, was quoted as saying "Diamonds looked like a way to develop the project with some kind of secure financial foundation, and to provide a more equitable means for the local people to sell the diamonds they pick up.[3]" The EO case is not necessarily unique, Ferguson argues, as such "paramilitary" private militias have been employed all across the continent since IMF and World Bank reforms, which encouraged the "disengagement" of the state in favor of the "free market," left governance open to contestation among NGOs, warlords, and private firms which were able to capitalise on the newly deregulated market and rapidly deteriorating state authority.


Contents [hide]
1 History
1.1 Mission statement
1.2 Background
1.3 Formation
1.4 Activities
1.5 Key personnel
2 Dissolution
3 Sandline International
4 References
5 See also
6 External links


[edit] History
[edit] Mission statement
Executive Outcomes' mission statement was described by the company as[4]:

“ To provide a highly professional and confidential military advisory service to legitimate governments.
To provide sound military and strategic advice.
To provide the most professional military training packages currently available to armed forces, covering aspects related to sea, air, and land warfare.
To provide advice to armed forces on weapon and weapon platform selection.
To provide a total apolitical service based on confidentiality, professionalism, and dedication.


[edit] Background
In 1989, following the conclusion of South African Border Wars in Angola and Namibia, the apartheid regime in South Africa was beginning to dissolve. The South African Defence Force was looking at broad cuts in its personnel. African National Congress leader Nelson Mandela demanded that then South African President Frederik Willem de Klerk dismantle some of the South African and South-West African Special Forces units such as 32 Battalion, Koevoet and the Reconnaissance Regiments. One of these was the Civil Cooperation Bureau (CCB), a unit that carried out covert operations which included assassinations of government opponents, and worked to bypass the United Nations apartheid sanctions by setting up overseas front companies.

Only Koevoet — being part of the South West African Police (SWAPOL) — was disbanded as part of independence negotiations for South-West Africa (now Namibia). Many members of the other units, or simply former national servicemen, were recruited by Executive Outcomes (EO).

[edit] Formation
Eeben Barlow, formerly in charge of the Western European section of the CCB,[5] established Executive Outcomes (EO) in 1989. Its aim was to provide specialised covert training to Special Forces members. Barlow was also awarded a contract by Debswana to train a selected group of security officers to infiltrate and penetrate the illegal diamond dealing syndicates in Botswana. When Debswana discovered EO was training the Angolan Armed Forces (FAA), it promptly cancelled EO’s contact.

Many of Barlow’s Special Forces students would later join him at EO after he started recruiting men to assist with the training of the Angolan forces Say's Walter Halicki one of Eeben's associates in the FAA.

The company also went on to recruit many of its personnel from the units President F. W. De Klerk disbanded. Within a short period, EO could boast of having 500 military advisers and over 3000 highly-trained military personnel at its disposal. Although EO was approached by many foreign soldiers for work, it only recruited men from South Africa who had either served in the SADF, Koevoet or the ANC’s armed wing Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK).

Barlow registered Executive Outcomes Ltd in the UK on the insistence of the South African Reserve Bank.

[edit] Activities
Executive Outcomes initially trained and later fought on behalf of the Angolan government against UNITA after UNITA refused to accept the election results in 1992. This contract was awarded to the company after EO had assisted Ranger Oil with an equipment recovery operation in the harbour town of Soyo. Dubbed by the South African media as an attempt to assassinate the rebel leader Dr. Jonas Savimbi, EO found itself under constant UNITA attacks where it lost three of its men. This action saw EO as being recognised by the FAA and a contract to train its forces was duly awarded. In a short space of time, UNITA was defeated on the battlefield and sued for peace. The Angolan government, under pressure from the UN and the USA, were forced to terminate EO’s contract. EO was replaced by the UN’s peacekeeping force known as UNAVEM. Angola returned to war shortly thereafter.

In March 1995, the company contained an insurrection of guerrillas known as the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) in Sierra Leone, regained control of the diamond fields, and forced a negotiated peace.[4] In both these instances they are credited with rescuing the legitimate government in both countries from destabilizing forces. In the case of Angola this led to a cease fire and the Lusaka Protocol, which ended the Angolan civil war — albeit only for a few years.[6] As is characteristic of one of the first Private Military Companies (PMCs), Executive Outcomes was directly involved militarily in Angola and Sierra Leone. The company was notable in its ability to provide all aspects of a highly-trained modern army to the less professional government forces of Sierra Leone and Angola. For instance, in Sierra Leone, Executive Outcomes fielded not only professional fighting men, but armor and support aircraft such as a single Mi-24 Hind and two Mi-8 Hip helicopters, and the BMP-2 infantry fighting vehicle. It also possessed medevac capabilities for the wounded to airlift out of combat zones via Boeing 707 aircraft. These were bought from sources in the worldwide arms trade within Africa as well as Eastern Europe. [7]. Executive Outcomes had contracts with multinational corporations such as De Beers, Chevron, JFPI Corporation, Rio Tinto Zinc and Texaco. The governments of Angola, Sierra Leone, and Indonesia were also clients.

[edit] Key personnel
Apart from Eeben Barlow, other senior Executive Outcomes personnel were Lafras Luitingh and Nic van der Bergh.

[edit] Dissolution
EO actively encouraged the SA government to enforce a regulation of PMCs as several South African and international companies were masquerading for work under the banner of Executive Outcomes. Additionally, EO was actively engaged in providing input into the formulation of the bill which became known as “Regulation of Foreign Military Assistance Act” in 1998.

EO was duly provided with a license stipulating that it met the requirements of the newly introduced Act.

Executive Outcomes was dissolved on 31 December 1998.

The aim of the Act was to stop mercenary activities by the dual actions of:

preventing direct participation as a combatant in armed conflict for private gain including the training, recruitment and use of mercenaries; and,
requiring approval of the National Conventional Arms Control Committee for offering of military assistance overseas.[8]
Many of the company’s members went on to seek employment with other PMCs and PSCs such as Lifeguard, Sandline and Saracen. Despite numerous allegations in the media, these companies were never proven to be a reconstituted Executive Outcomes.

[edit] Sandline International
Executive Outcomes was often loosely linked with the United Kingdom private military company Sandline International, but in 1997 Sandline directly subcontracted Executive Outcomes for their operation in Papua New Guinea to oust the rebels holding the Pangua mine on Bougainville Island which led to the so-called "Sandline affair" when news of the government's intention to hire mercenaries was leaked to the Australian press.

The Commander of the Papua New Guinea Defence Force, Jerry Singirok - who had not been consulted - ordered the detaining of all the mercenaries on their arrival, and forced the Prime Minister Sir Julius Chan with Papua New Guinea coming close to a military coup.[1]
 
Old October 12th, 2009 #18
Gabry Ponte
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,024
Default

PMC in IRAQ



A private military company (PMC) provides specialized expertise or services of a military nature, sometimes called or classified as mercenary ("soldiers for hire").[1] Such companies are equally known as private military contractors, Private Security Contractors (PSCs), Private Military Corporations, Private Military Firms, Military Service Providers, and generally as the Private Military Industry.

The services and expertise cover those typically found in governmental military or police forces, but most often on a smaller scale. While PMCs often provide services to train or supplement official armed forces in service of governments, they are also employed by private firms. However, contractors who use offensive force in a war zone could be considered unlawful combatants, thereby referring to the "concept" being implicitly mentioned in the Geneva Conventions and explicitly specified by the Military Commissions Act.[2]

Private military companies supply bodyguards for the Afghan president and pilot armed reconnaissance planes and helicopter gunships to destroy Coca crops in Colombia.[3] [4] They are licensed by the State Department, they are contracting with foreign governments, training soldiers and reorganizing militaries in Nigeria, Bulgaria, Taiwan, and Equatorial Guinea. The PMC industry is now worth over $100 billion a year.[5]

Contents [hide]
1 General terms
2 United States
2.1 U.S. administration policy on PMCs
2.2 New U.S. law on PMCs
3 Recruitment
4 PMC activities in Iraq
4.1 Events involving PMCs in Iraq
4.2 Legal position
5 PMC activities elsewhere
6 List of PMCs
6.1 U.S. companies
6.2 U.K. companies
6.3 Others
7 See also
8 Resources
8.1 Academic publications
8.2 Non-academic publications
9 References
10 External links


[edit] General terms
PMCs are also known as security contractors, although this term usually refers to individuals employed or contracted by PMCs. Services are mainly rendered for other business corporations, international and non-governmental organizations, and state forces.

Private military companies are sometimes grouped into the general category of defense contractors. However, most defense contractors supply specialized hardware and perhaps also personnel to support and service that hardware, whereas PMCs supply personnel with specialized operational and tactical skills, which often include combat experience.

The 1949 Third Geneva Convention (GCIII) does not recognize the difference between defense contractors and PMCs; it defines a category called supply contractors. If the supply contractor has been issued with a valid identity card from the armed forces which they accompany, they are entitled to be treated as prisoners of war upon capture (GCIII Article 4.1.4). If, however, the contractor engages in combat, he/she can be classified as a mercenary by the captors under the 1977 Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions (Protocol I) Article 47.c, unless falling under an exemption to this clause in Article 47. If captured contractors are found to be mercenaries, they are unlawful combatants and lose the right to prisoner of war status. Protocol I was not ratified by the United States because, among other issues, it does not require "freedom fighters" to obey the convention in order to be granted its protections.

[edit] United States
The United States State Department employs several companies to provide support in danger zones that would be difficult for conventional U.S. forces. The military employs many of them as guards to high ranking U.S. government officials in high risk areas all around the world. The term most often refers to the two dozen U.S. firms that provide services for the Pentagon and indirectly assist in overseas theaters of operation. Some contractors have served in advisory roles that help train local militaries to fight more effectively instead of intervening directly. Much of the peacekeeper training the United States provides to African militaries is done by private firms, and with the increasing absence of Western military support to international peace operations, the private sector is commonly utilized to provide services to peace and stability operations from Haiti to Darfur.

The Center for Public Integrity reported that since 1994, the Defense Department entered into 3,601 contracts worth $300 billion with 12 U.S. based PMCs. Some view this as an inevitable cost cutting measure and responsible privatization of critical aspects of a military. However, many feel this is a troubling trend, since these private companies are not directly accountable to a legislative body and may cost more than providing the same functions within the military. Seventeen of the nation's leading private military firms have contributed $12.4 million in congressional and presidential campaigns since 1999.[5]

Another issue of concern has been the recent high-profile operation of various PMCs within the United States, specifically during the initial response after Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. Supporters are quick to point out the stabilizing influence that the operators of these companies put into place in the first few days provided, whereas detractors have levied claims of abuse and unlawful activities. Neither side has provided much proof to back their claims, however, beyond anecdotal evidence.

Domestic operations are generally under the auspice of state or federal agencies such as the Department of Energy or the Department of Homeland Security rather than the Department of Defense. Driven by increasingly greater fears of domestic terror attacks and civil unrest and disruption in the wake of disasters, more conventional security companies are moving into operations arenas that would fall within the definition of a PMC.

[edit] U.S. administration policy on PMCs
On December 5, 2005, U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld held a lecture dubbed "The Future of Iraq" at Johns Hopkins Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies.[6] During a Q&A session afterwards he was asked a question by graduate student Kate Turner regarding PMCs.

Turner: "There are currently thousands of private military contractors in Iraq and you were just speaking of rules of engagement in regards to Iraqi personnel and US personnel. Could you speak to, since the private contractors are operating outside the Uniform Code of Military Justice, can you speak to what law or rules of engagement do govern their behavior and whether there has been any study showing that it is cost effective to have them in Iraq rather than US military personnel. Thank you."

Rumsfeld: "Thank you. It is clearly cost-effective to have contractors for a variety of things that military people need not do, and that for whatever reason other civilians, government people, cannot be deployed to do. There are a lot of contractors, a growing number. They come from our country but they come from all countries, and indeed sometimes the contracts are from our country or another country and they employ people from totally different countries including Iraqis and people from neighboring nations. And there are a lot of them. It's a growing number. Of course we've got to begin with the fact that, as you point out, they're not subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. We understand that. There are laws that govern the behavior of Americans in that country. The Department of Justice oversees that. There is an issue that is current as to the extent to which they can or cannot carry weapons, and that's an issue. It's also an issue, of course, with the Iraqis. But if you think about it, Iraq’s a sovereign country. They have their laws and they're going to govern, the UN resolution and the Iraqi laws, as well as U.S. procedures and laws govern behavior in that country depending on who the individual is and what he's doing. But I personally am of the view that there are a lot of things that can be done for a short time basis by contractors that advantage the United States and advantage other countries who also hire contractors, and that any idea that we shouldn't have them I think would be unwise."

[7]

[edit] New U.S. law on PMCs
According to the FY2007 Defense Budget appropriation bill, the text of the UCMJ has been amended to allow for prosecution of military contractors who are deployed in a "declared war or a contingency operation."

"SEC. 552. CLARIFICATION OF APPLICATION OF UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE DURING A TIME OF WAR. Paragraph (10) of section 802(a) of title 10, United States Code (article 2(a) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), is amended by striking 'war' and inserting 'declared war or a contingency operation'." [8][9]

Farah Stockman of the Boston Globe, (7 January 2007) writes: "Previously, the code applied to "persons serving with or accompanying an armed force in the field" only during a war, which US courts interpreted to mean a war declared by Congress. No such declaration was made in the Iraq conflict. Now, Congress has amended the code to apply to persons accompanying an armed force during a "declared war or contingency operation."

But the provision might also have unintended consequences, if the military chooses to use its new power to court-martial civilians. For instance, the language in the law is so broad that it can be interpreted as saying that embedded journalists and contract employees from foreign countries would also be liable under the military code. Other punishable offenses under the code include disobeying an order, disrespecting an officer, and possession of pornography in a combat zone."[10]

[edit] Recruitment
In light of the above issues, some commentators have argued that there has been a recent exodus from many special operations forces across the globe towards these private military corporations. The British Special Air Service,[11][12] the US Special Operations Forces [13] and the Canadian Joint Task Force 2[14] have allegedly been severely affected. Finding work in the industry is not difficult for most former soldiers as their personal network of fellow and ex-soldiers is enough to keep them informed of available contracts.

[edit] PMC activities in Iraq
Currently in Iraq there are thought to be at least 100,000 contractors working directly for the United States Department of Defense which is a tenfold increase in the use of private contractors for military operations since the Persian Gulf War, just over a decade earlier.[15] The prevalence of PMCs has led to the foundation of trade group the Private Security Company Association of Iraq. In Iraq, the issue of accountability, especially in the case of contractors carrying weapons is a sensitive one. Iraqi laws do not hold over contractors. Just before leaving office as head of the Coalition Provisional Authority, Paul Bremer signed Coalition Provisional Authority Order 17 where it is stated that:

Contractors shall not be subject to Iraqi laws or regulations in matters relating to the terms and conditions of their Contracts, including licensing and registering employees, businesses and corporations; provided, however, that Contractors shall comply with such applicable licensing and registration laws and regulations if engaging in business or transactions in Iraq other than Contracts. Notwithstanding any provisions in this Order, Private Security Companies and their employees operating in Iraq must comply with all CPA Orders, Regulations, Memoranda, and any implementing instructions or regulations governing the existence and activities of Private Security Companies in Iraq, including registration and licensing of weapons and firearms.[16]

PMCs supply support to U.S. military bases throughout the Persian Gulf, from operating mess halls to providing security. They supply armed guards at a U.S. Army base in Qatar, and they use live ammunition to train soldiers at Camp Doha in Kuwait. They maintain an array of weapons systems vital to an invasion of Iraq. They also provide bodyguards for VIPs, guard installations, and escort supply convoys from Kuwait. All these resources are called upon constantly due to the war in Iraq.[5]

[edit] Events involving PMCs in Iraq
Employees of private military company CACI and Titan Corp. were involved in the Iraq Abu Ghraib prison scandal in 2003, and 2004. The U.S. Army "found that contractors were involved in 36 percent of the [Abu Ghraib] proven incidents and identified 6 employees as individually culpable",[17] although none have faced prosecution unlike US military personnel.[17]
On March 31, 2004, four American private contractors belonging to the company Blackwater USA were killed by insurgents in Fallujah as they drove through the town. They were dragged from their car in one of the most violent attacks on U.S. citizens in the conflict. Following the attack, an angry mob mutilated and burned the bodies, dragging them through the streets before they were hung on a bridge. (See also: 31 March 2004 Fallujah ambush, Operation Vigilant Resolve)
On March 28, 2005, 16 American contractors and three Iraqi aides from Zapata Engineering, under contract to the US Army Corps of Engineers to manage an ammunition storage depot, were detained following two incidents in which they allegedly fired upon U.S. Marine checkpoint. While later released, the civilian contractors have levied complaints of mistreatment against the Marines who detained them.
On June 5, 2005, Colonel Theodore S. Westhusing committed suicide, after writing a report exonerating US Investigations Services of allegations of fraud, waste and abuse he received in an anonymous letter in May.
On October 27, 2005, a "trophy" video, complete with post-production Elvis music, appearing to show private military contractors in Baghdad shooting Iraqi civilians sparked two investigations after it was posted on the Internet.[18][19][20] The video has been linked unofficially to Aegis Defence Services. According to the posters, the man who is seen shooting vehicles on this video in Iraq was a South African employee of Aegis Victory team named Danny Heydenreycher. He served in the British military for six years. After the incident the regional director for Victory ROC tried to fire Heydenreycher, but the team threatened to resign if he did. As of December 2005, Aegis is conducting a formal inquiry into the issue, although some concerns on its impartiality have been raised.
On September 17, 2007, the Iraqi government announced that it was revoking the license of the American security firm Blackwater USA over the firm's involvement in the deaths of eight civilians in a firefight that followed a car bomb explosion near a State Department motorcade. Blackwater is currently one of the most high-profile firms operating in Iraq, with around 1,000 employees as well as a fleet of helicopters in the country. Whether the group may be legally prosecuted is still a matter of debate.[21]
[edit] Legal position
Two days before he left Iraq, L. Paul Bremer signed "Order 17"[22] giving all Americans associated with the CPA and the American government immunity from Iraqi law.[23] A July 2007 report from the American Congressional Research Service indicates that the Iraqi government still has no authority over private security firms contracted by the U.S. government.[24]

[edit] PMC activities elsewhere
In 1994 and 1995 South African based PMC Executive Outcomes was involved in two military actions in Africa. In the first conflict, EO fought on the behalf of the Angolan government against UNITA after a UN brokered peace settlement broke down. In the second action EO was tasked with containing a guerrilla movement in Sierra Leone called the Revolutionary United Front. Both missions involved personnel from the firm training 4-5 thousand combat personnel for the Angolan government and retaking control of the diamond fields and forming a negotiated peace in Sierra Leone.
In 1999, an incident involving DynCorp in Bosnia was followed by a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) lawsuit was filed against DynCorp employees stationed in Bosnia, which alleged that: "employees and supervisors from DynCorp were engaging in perverse, illegal and inhumane behavior and were illegally purchasing women, weapons, forged passports and participating in other immoral acts."
In 2000, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's ABC Television international affairs program "Foreign Correspondent (tv series)|Foreign Correspondent]]" broadcast a special report "Sierra Leone: Soldiers of Fortune", focussing on the exploits of South African pilot Neall Ellis and his MI-24 Hind gunship.[25] The report also investigated the failures of the UN Peacekeeping Force, and the involvement of mercenaries/private military contractors in providing vital support to UN operations and British military Special Operations in Sierra Leone in 1999-2000.[26]
On April 5, 2005, Jamie Smith, CEO of SCG International Risk announced the expansion of services from the traditional roles of PMCs of protection and intelligence to military aviation support. SCG International Air would provide air support, medevac (medical evacuation), rotary and fixed-wing transportation, heavy-lift cargo, armed escort and executive air travel to "any location on earth." This marks a unique addition and expansion of services to rival the capabilities of some country's armies and air forces.
On March 27, 2006, J. Cofer Black, vice chairman of Blackwater USA announced to attendees of a special operations exhibition in Jordan that his company could now provide a brigade-size force for low intensity conflicts. According to Black, "There is clear potential to conduct security operations at a fraction of the cost of NATO operations".[27]
In mid-May 2006, police in the Democratic Republic of the Congo arrested 32 alleged mercenaries of different nationalities; 19 South Africans, 10 Nigerians and three Americans. Half of them worked for a South African company named Omega Security Solutions and the Americans for AQMI Strategy Corp. The men were accused of plotting to overthrow the government but charges weren't pressed. The men were deported to their home countries.[28][29]
In 2006, a U.S. congressional report listed a number of PMCs and other enterprises that have signed contracts to carry out anti-narcotics operations and related activities as part of Plan Colombia. DynCorp was among those contracted by the State Department, while others signed contracts with the Defense Department. Other companies from different countries, including Israel, have also signed contracts with the Colombian Defense Ministry to carry out security or military activities.[4]
[edit] List of PMCs
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (April 2008)

[edit] U.S. companies
Name HQ Portfolio Details
AirScan Titusville, FL US Department of Defense, US Air Force, NASA, US Forest Service, National Test Pilot School, National Response Corporation, US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Reclamation, Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, Maximum Protective Services, ECOPETROL: the national oil company of Colombia, Occidental Petroleum Corporation, Cabinda Gulf Oil Company (Angola), SONANGOL: national oil company of Angola Provides airborne surveillance and security
Custer Battles McLean, Virginia Iraq and oil sector (at present, have ceased operations in Iraq)
Defion Internacional
DynCorp Falls Church, VA Iraq
ITT Corporation White Plains, NY Kosovo
KBR Houston Formerly a Division of Halliburton
Military Professional Resources Inc. Alexandria, VA
MVM, Inc. Vienna, Virginia CIA and NSA contractor
Northbridge Services Group Turkmenistan, Somalia, Nigeria
Northrop Grumman Los Angeles
Paratus World Wide Protection Charlotte, New Jersey Iraq
Raytheon Cambridge, MA
Triple Canopy, Inc. Herndon, Virginia South America, Iraq
Sharp End International Mainly uses Australian and New Zealand ex-special forces instructors
Titan Corporation San Diego, CA Benin Triple Canopy Iraq

Vinnell Corporation Fairfax, Virginia Turkey, Saudi Arabia
Xe Moyock, NC Iraq, Afghanistan, New Orleans, Louisiana, and others Formerly Blackwater Worldwide
Pathfinder Security Services Casper, Wyoming Oil, gas and mining sector; mainly in the US

[edit] U.K. companies
Name HQ Portfolio Details
Aegis Defence Services Iraq, Afghanistan, and others
ArmorGroup Now part of G4S
Control Risks Group Provider of security and armed guards for British Embassies and Consulates
Erinys International Joint South Africa-Britain company
Sandline International Ceased operations on April 16, 2004
PMC Trust Provides risk management

[edit] Others
Executive Outcomes, South Africa (ceased operations on January 1, 1999)
Omega Group - Norway
Integrated Risk Management Services - Ireland, protecting of Shell oil in Ireland and Bolivia
Unity Resources Group, Australia, Based in Dubai - Special Forces veterans from Australia, the US, New Zealand and Great Britain - as well as former law enforcement officers from those countries.
[edit] See also
Arms trade
Blackwater Watch
Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army
Command responsibility
Jus in bello
Mercenaries
Military-industrial complex
Personal Security Detachment
Private defense agency
Privateer
Shadow Force
The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot
UN Mercenary Convention
Unlawful combatant#Mercenaries
 
Old October 12th, 2009 #19
Gabry Ponte
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,024
Default

[IMG][/IMG]



Private intelligence agency

A private intelligence agency is a private sector (non-governmental) organization devoted to the collection and analysis of information, most commonly through the evaluation of public sources (OSINT or Open Source INTelligence) and cooperation with other institutions. Some private agencies make their services available to governments as well as individual consumers; however, most of these agencies sell their services to large cooperations with an interest or investment in the category (e.g. crime, disease, corruption, etc.) or the region (e.g. Middle East, Vietnam, Prague, etc.). Some private agencies also provide related services, such as security personnel, surveillance equipment, medical evacuation or traveler's insurance.

The private intelligence industry has boomed due to shifts in how the US government is conducting espionage in the War on Terror. Functions previously performed by the CIA and other intelligence agencies are now outsourced to private intelligence corporations.

[edit] List of Private Intelligence Agencies
Zariba Security
ASI Group
Le Cercle
Control Risks Group
Global Strategies Group
GlobalSource
IANO Group
IISIA(JAPAN)
iJET
International Regional Security Agency
Jane's Information Group
NC4
Olive Group
Secure Solutions International
SIASS - Specialist Intelligence and Security Services
Simplified Information Solutions
Strategic Insight Group
Stratfor
Tangiers International
The Steele Foundation
TranSecur
World-Check
Open Source Intelligence
Private investigator
Think tank
Competitive intelligence
 
Old October 12th, 2009 #20
Gabry Ponte
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,024
Default

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Scahil..._new_0731.html

Scahill: Blackwater now in the private intelligence businessDavid Edwards and Muriel Kane
Published: Thursday July 31, 2008





Print This Email This



Jeremy Scahill, author of Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army, is worried about the giant mercenary firm's latest foray into private intelligence. "They're marketing their services to not only foreign governments, but to Fortune 500 corporations," he recently told an interviewer.

The forthcoming paperback edition of Scahill's book on Blackwater, which appeared in hardcover in February 2007, will include 100 pages of new material, including a discussion of last September's shooting spree in Baghdad by Blackwater operatives -- which killed 17 Iraqi civilians but for which nobody has ever been charged.

"This is a company that has been accused of murdering Iraqi civilians," Scahill pointed out, "of shooting the bodyguard to the Iraqi vice-president, of causing blowback attacks on United States troops, of hurting the morale of the United States military -- that has cost United States taxpayers over a billion dollars for its operations in Iraq."

However, Scahill's greatest concern at present appears to be Blackwater's venture into the private intelligence business.

"Blackwater started a private intelligence company," he explained, "a private CIA essentially, called Total Intelligence Solutions. And the man running Total Intelligence Solutions is J. Cofer Black. He's a thirty-year veteran of the Central Intelligence Agency. He also was the guy who ran the CIA's extraordinary rendition program, the government-sanctioned kidnap-and-torture program."

"His thirty-year CIA career, his network of contacts, his knowledge that was gained through his work in the most sensitive areas of the United States government is now on the open market for hire," Scahill said sadly.

"This isn't a liberal or conservative thing," concluded Scahill. "You have a lot of traditional conservatives who are outraged at what they see as the degradation of the United States armed forces. ... This has everything to do with the future of war-making and global stability."
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:11 PM.
Page generated in 0.39553 seconds.