September 11 Commission Report - Gnostic Liberation Front

This is not normal.
3.1 Working for Gulf Services
Both gentlemen worked for a major US defense contractor that won the largest of four
contracts to build ‘bases’ in Iraq. They were not there to build schools, repair utilities, or
rebuild Iraq, as they had informed their friends and family. In fact, their work and the
contract won by their employer are ‘classified.’ All we know is what they told their
friends and family, and that appears to be contradictory with the official documentation.
Why the lies?
Second, they were not living on a secure construction site as foreigners usually do under
such contracts, but rather “lived in a wealthy Baghdad neighborhood of villas surrounded
by walls and protected by metal gates and armed guards outside the high-security area
known as the Green Zone.” As one security guard in Iraq noted regarding a contractor
that would live under such conditions: “It is unbelievably naïve.” Interviewing a fellow
employee, an African newspaper quoted the fellow contractor: “Those who have no
military experience almost never travel outside the camps of the military zone designated
Multi-National Division (South East) without an escort. The majority are accompanied by
soldiers in "snatch wagons" - armoured Land Rovers - providing cover with heavy
machine guns and SA80 rifles. Ex-military types, armed to the teeth, also provide
escorts. He took an unnecessary risk. We live on camp and travel with green fleet [the
British army]. There are no ifs, buts and ands about it. It's company policy, we don't
travel without the army. If the army say you don't move, you don't move.”
In fairness, it must be noted that the three kidnapped gentlemen had private security
guards. They were not totally reckless. However, in the week prior to their kidnapping,
they were notified by their guards that the lives of their guards had been threatened, and
that the guards then actually abandoned them. This situation raises significant questions:
1. Why would either government or private guards not be replaced or reinforced by their
employing agency? The scenario suggests the guards were ‘private’ in nature, and
not provided by an agency, but rather by the three hostages themselves.
2. Why would three gentlemen – working hard to send money home (“to make ends
meet”) be taking risks and unnecessarily be spending their own cash on ‘guards’?
3. Why would these gentlemen remain at this home, in a war zone, in an unsecured
region of the city, after being advised of death threats specifically targeted at them?
These are conditions which suggest that the three kidnapped men were involved in
activities above and beyond ‘helping the people of Iraq, and taking care of their families.”
The company that employed them is Gulf Supplies and Commercial Services. The
contract was for $46 million, and was largest of four similar contracts in Iraq, larger than
the other three combined. One would think a major defense contractor is subject to
public scrutiny – but not so Gulf Commercial Services. They have no website that
distributes information, nor is there another single reference to them on the Internet
search engines, other than their linkage to this atrocity. When approached by the media,
the normal media report is that “GSCS has not replied to requests for further
information.”
One reporter was able to gain some insight into Gulf Supplies from confidential sources,
but this information is not verified by another source. Gulf Supplies is a 13-year-old firm
THE SEPTEMBER 11 COMMISSION REPORT Page 50