G4S Admits It Guards Dakota Pipeline as Protesters Get Attacked

This article is actually from a week ago, but I cannot find it posted, and it ties in with many subjects being discussed on ATS.

G4S Admits It Guards Dakota Pipeline as Protesters Get Attacked

G4S, a U.K.-based security multinational, admitted to having personnel deployed at “remote sites” where Native Americans are defending their lands from the planned US$3.8-million Dakota Access pipeline that they say would pollute the drinking water of millions.

GS4 is reportedly just one of many companies providing security, and claim a limited presence:

In an email to teleSUR, G4S Communications Director Monica Lewman-Garcia wrote, “G4S Secure Solutions is providing fewer than 10 security officers, assigned to remote sites, providing limited short-term unarmed patrol services.”

I'm not sure what -- if any -- significance this has, but I found it curious to say the least... and I'm not sure I believe their claims of limited "unarmed" involvement. But I do know where GS4 goes trouble follows.

Especially in light of this intriguing thread and excellent research by Matafuchs:

Link between Orlando Terror Shooting, San Bernadino and Washington Naval Yard...and more?

I don't have much more than that -- maybe I'm just stirring a pot that doesn't need stirring -- but I'd love to hear others' thoughts

Ah yes.

G4S again.

Haha so even if one day we fix our governments, we will still have to fear the mercs. Womp womp, our world is that of a messed up novel.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Without government funding (and cover) they will fall too... if we can actually get to that point...

who could have guessed a company called group four security would do, security?

a reply to: Boadicea

To be blunt, I'm not very surprised that the world's largest security firm is doing security on a high profile thing like a pipeline.

Or that their employees wind up in the news for doing stupid crap now and then.

originally posted by: stinkelbaum
who could have guessed a company called group four security would do, security?

Um... everyone... obviously.

I can't even comment further... just too fricking easy.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Boadicea

To be blunt, I'm not very surprised that the world's largest security firm is doing security on a high profile thing like a pipeline.

Me neither. I am surprised that they minimized their... what? Involvement? Contribution? I don't know what the right word is. That's one of the reasons I don't believe them.

Well, that, and because that's just how I roll.

Or that their employees wind up in the news for doing stupid crap now and then.

True as well. To be fair though, I believe they claimed no involvement in the attack dogs dispute. I should have pointed that out in the OP -- Sorry and thank you.

a reply to: Boadicea

Contract security is just that, contract. They supply whatever they were contracted to do. Typically either the client contacts the contractor and says "this is what we want, can you do it?" and the contractor does it, a variation of it, or doesn't do it for whatever reason.

Or the contractor makes a proposal and the client tailors it to what they want.

I'm sure G4S would love as big a piece of that pie as they could get, but who knows why they don't have more.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Thank you! But now my mind is going off on tangents... May I pick your brain a little more? (I hope that's a "yes" cause I'm going full speed ahead!!!)

I'm assuming that it would be fair to assume -- yes, that's a lot of assuming and I know I'm looking for trouble here! -- that some security firms would be under ongoing long-term contracts, and that others would be contracted with as needed...

So it would kind of make sense that maybe more local/regional security firms were under long-term ongoing contracts, and perhaps GS4 was brought in as the protests escalated in size and support? Perhaps local/regional security firms may not have enough employees perhaps to fill the increased need.

Or maybe something far more sinister...

a reply to: Boadicea

G4S has a large local/regional security presence across the country. My old roommate worked for them and guarded the cable company facility at night.

There is an excellent thread on the company, I'll edit it in in just a sec.

a reply to: Boadicea

The length of the contract is part of the contract. Take, for example, a construction site. If there's a lot of valuable materials being stored on site, the company may ask for no more than a literal night watchman: somebody to come and sit at the site from 6 pm to 6 am.

G4S has the capability to fulfill a seven day a week perpetual contract or weekend/overnight contract and anything in between.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Boadicea

There is an excellent thread on the company, I'll edit it in in just a sec.

Thanks -- I appreciate that

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Boadicea

The length of the contract is part of the contract. Take, for example, a construction site. If there's a lot of valuable materials being stored on site, the company may ask for no more than a literal night watchman: somebody to come and sit at the site from 6 pm to 6 am.

G4S has the capability to fulfill a seven day a week perpetual contract or weekend/overnight contract and anything in between.

Understood!

But with my tinfoil hat firmly in place, I cannot help but wonder if there's something more we're not being told.

For example -- remember the tinfoil hat! -- I found it very suspicious that the feds asked the company to temporarily stop work on the pipeline. I don't believe that this is the end of it. More like just a regrouping and arming up on the Feds' part for the battle to come.... So it of course occurs to me that the feds & corps (working hand in hand) may very much want to get their favorite security firm firmly in place before that happens...

This may just be a pre-emptive leak intended to throw folks off the track. They may just have a few employees in remote areas now... they may not be directly involved in the protest now... but that could change at the drop of a hat.

a reply to: Boadicea

I can't find it unfortunately, it was incredible though and had alot of allegations to alot of ties to G4S and alot of bad recent events. I took it with a grain of salt but the thread was beautifully done with tons of information links and pictures. Anyone remember the one I'm talking about?

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Are you looking for the one by Matafuchs that I linked in the OP?

Link between Orlando Terror Shooting, San Bernadino and Washington Naval Yard...and more?

My first link isn't working for some reason and it's too late to edit the OP, but hopefully this one works.

ETA: Yes, this link is working.

a reply to: Boadicea

No that one is good, but the one I remember had maps showing how close outposts were to many events. I'll be looking till I find it this Is killing me.

a reply to: Boadicea

There's a pretty healthy (read that as good sized) g4s armed officer presence where I'm at. I don't interact with them a whole lot, but I've been told that the company has response teams that can be pretty much anywhere they're needed in 24 hours. I don't think they'd need a ton of time to get people in place.

I didn't ask any questions because frankly I just don't care (lol) but I don't imagine they would need an indefinite pause or even a lengthy pause to be setup.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Boadicea

No that one is good, but the one I remember had maps showing how close outposts were to many events. I'll be looking till I find it this Is killing me.

Wow! Now it's killing me too!!!

Keeping my fingers crossed for you...

a reply to: Shamrock6

Very interesting... and good to know. Twenty-four hours, eh?

I wouldn't be asking too many questions either... if any at all! Sometimes ignorance really is bliss -- at least much healthier in the long-term!