This is bizarre. The context is an article saying, among other things, "He is alarmed by the prospect, not least because he feels that in a truly free market mercenary armies might be encouraged to seek profits by starting new wars". You're the one who brought up assassination politics; in which anyone sufficiently unpopular would get a price on their head. This is not an improvement.
I'm not trying to defend anything other than the status quo, in which unaccountable private paramilitaries are fairly rare and frowned on.
I agree, people thinking other thoughts and drawing different conclusions can be unsettling.
The article also touches on the idea of efficiency, which you will see is the point of my top post - before you somehow linked assassination markets to Islamic terrorism. While I welcome a debate on the merit and feasibility of assassination markets, I don't think it would be a very productive conversation to have with you - as you've already expressed your interest in simply defending the status quo. Also, PMCs are not rare or frowned on - so your situation awareness is off as well (lets not get into a redefinition of "rare" or "frowned on" either).
I'm not trying to defend anything other than the status quo, in which unaccountable private paramilitaries are fairly rare and frowned on.