Omar Mateen, the reported ISIS terrorist who committed the worst mass shooting in U.S. history, worked for the past nine years for G4S, which boasts of being “the leading global integrated security company.” The 29-year-old Mateen (shown), who was investigated by the FBI on at least two occasions due to suspected ties to the al-Qaeda and Al Nusra Front terrorist groups, killed 49 and wounded dozens more in an attack on a homosexual night club in Orlando, Florida, in the early hours of Sunday morning.
Mateen’s employment with G4S is especially troubling, particularly in light of the recent exposure of the company’s involvement in the Department of Homeland Security’s catch-and-release program for third-country “OTM” (Other Than Mexican) illegal aliens captured crossing our southern border. As Raven Clabough reported for The New American on June 6, an investigation by Judicial Watch exposed the Obama administration and DHS violating our immigration laws by transporting illegal aliens from the Mexican border and releasing them in Phoenix without even processing their paperwork, keeping track of their locations, or requiring them to make a court appearance. G4S, the London-based global conglomerate, was hired by DHS to transport these OTMs — some of whom may be terrorists — from the border to their designated release points.
According to the Judicial Watch report, “A security company contracted by the U.S. government is driving the OTMs from the Border Patrol’s Tucson Sector where they were in custody to Phoenix.” Judicial Watch continued: “The firm is called G4S and claims to be the world’s leading security solutions group with operations in more than 100 countries and 610,000 employees.”
According to a G4S corporate news release, Omar Mateen “was subject to detailed company screening when he was recruited in 2007,” and again in 2013. The company released a statement to the media on Sunday, which reads:
G4S is deeply shocked by the tragic events in Orlando this weekend and the thoughts of everyone at G4S are with the victims and their families.
Omar Mateen was employed by G4S at a residential community in South Florida and was off-duty at the time of the incident. Mateen was subject to detailed company screening when he was recruited in 2007 and re-screened in 2013 with no adverse findings. He was also subject to checks by a U.S. law enforcement agency with no findings reported to G4S.
G4S is providing its full support to all law enforcement authorities in the USA as they conduct their investigations.
Who is G4S?
According to the G4S corporate “Who We Are” Web page, “G4S is the leading global integrated security company specialising in the provision of security products, services and solutions.”
The company’s profile continues:
The group is active in more than 110 countries, and is the largest employer quoted on the London Stock Exchange with over 623,000 employees and has a secondary stock exchange listing in Copenhagen.
We specialise in outsourced business processes and facilities in sectors where security and safety risks are considered a strategic threat.
“From risk assessment to delivery, we work in partnership with governments, businesses and other organisations to provide integrated solutions to security challenges,” G4S claims, noting that it provides protection to rock stars, sports stars, stadiums, arenas, banks, ATMs, retailers, as well as prison and parole management — and much more.
In light of the recent Judicial Watch exposure of the G4S role in Obama’s catch-and-release policy, the following claim on the company’s website is particularly noteworthy: “From ensuring travellers have a safe and pleasant experience in ports and airports around the world to secure detention and escorting of people who are not lawfully entitled to remain in a country; In more ways than you might realise, G4S is securing your world.”
"Securing your world"? Even before the Orlando terror attack and the DHS catch-and-release scandal, G4S was having serious credibility problems. The company’s epic mishandling of the 2012 Summer Olympics in England (G4S was the official "security services provider") became a staggering fiasco, causing CEO Nick Buckles to resign. Then, there were many other corruption and brutality charges. Nevertheless, the mega-corporate private police force has developed tentacle-like oligarchic relationships with governments and global companies that reach around the world, and has boasted such gold-plated institutional investors as Blackrock, Invesco, Mondrian Investment, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (However, the Gates Foundation sold its shares in the company in 2014, in response to a campaign alleging human rights abuses by G4S prison guards.)
Where Was the FBI in All of This?
In a press statement released Monday, FBI Director James B. Comey said that “the FBI is working non-stop to understand what led a man to commit a mass shooting in Orlando, Florida that left 49 people dead and dozens more injured.”
According to the FBI media release:
Director Comey also described the FBI’s prior contacts with the killer, beginning in May 2013. The FBI opened an investigation when the shooter, then working as a contract security guard, made some inflammatory comments to co-workers and claimed a family connection to Al Qaeda. The shooter was interviewed twice during the preliminary investigation, where he admitted making the statements but said he had done so in anger at his co-workers, who he believed were discriminating against him. The case was closed after 10 months.
Two months later, the shooter’s name surfaced as a casual acquaintance of the Florida man who blew himself up in Syria for the terrorist group al Nusra Front. “Our investigation turned up no ties of any consequence between the two of them,” Comey said. “We will continue to look forward in this investigation, and backward. We will leave no stone unturned.”
Comey said the Bureau is reviewing those cases to see if anything was missed. “We’re also going to look hard at our own work to see whether there is something we should have done differently. So far, the honest answer is: I don’t think so. I don’t see anything in reviewing our own work that our agents should have done differently.