Neil Livingstone, Republican candidate for Governor

Below are three resumes for Neil Livingstone.

from American Program Bureau

Neil C. Livingstone is the Chairman and CEO of GlobalOptions, a diversified international business solutions company headquartered in the nation’s capital.

Dr. Livingstone is the author of nine books on terrorism and security topics, including Inside the PLO, The War Against Terrorism, Rescue My Child (which was an NBC movie-of-the-week), Fighting Back: Winning the War Against Terrorism, America the Vulnerable: The Threat of Chemical/Biological Warfare, The Complete Security Guide for Executives, and The Cult of Counterterrorism.

He has written more than 200 articles that have appeared in such publications as The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, Newsday, U.S. News & World Report, and various academic journals. For nearly eight years he wrote the only monthly column on terrorism in the United States for Sea Power.

His monograph The Poor Man’s Atomic Bomb, which appeared in 1984, was the first major open source publication on the terrorist use of chemical and biological agents.

He has appeared on 800 television programs, including Nightline, Meet the Press, The Newshour with Jim Lehrer, Primetime, Dateline, and the evening news on all of the major networks. Following the September 11 attacks, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and during the 1996 Atlanta Olympics, he served as an on-air commentator for NBC News. He also worked for ABC’s 20/20.

For nearly ten years, Dr. Livingtone was an Adjunct Professor of National Security Studies at Georgetown University. He is President of Watergate South and a member of several boards of directors. He also serves on numerous advisory boards, including Sun Trust/Asset Management and No Great Love, which honors fallen members of the U.S. military and victims of terrorism. In 1984 he was one of three founding members of the Solidarity Endowment, established in the U.S. to promote the goals and purposed of Polish Solidarity, and he served on the organization’s board of directors for six years. During the 2000 election, he was a member of the Bush-Cheney Entertainment Industry Task Force.

He has served in an advisory capacity to the Pentagon, the Chief of Naval Operations, and the Secretary of State, and testifies before Congress. A former assistant to two U.S. Senators, Dr. Livingstone was President of the Institute on Terrorism and Subnational Conflict and has also held a number of senior corporate positions prior to founding GlobalOptions. During the late 1970’s, he and his partners operated a Latin American flag carrier airline.

Much in demand as a public speaker, he has delivered nearly 500 major addresses to audiences around the world.

Dr. Livingstone holds an A.B. (with Honors in Government) from the College of William and Mary; and M.A. in Political Science from the University of Montana; and an M.A., M.A.L.D., and Ph.D. from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. He received an Honorable Discharge from the USAR, 1969.


from Executive Action

Neil C. Livingstone

Neil C. Livingstone is the Chairman and CEO of ExecutiveAction LLC. He was the founder and, until November, 2006, CEO of GlobalOptions Inc., which went public in 2005 and currently has sales of more than $80 million.

Livingstone is also Lead Director of Erickson Air-Crane, a $186 million helicopter company headquartered in Central Point, Oregon, and a member of the M&A committee.

Livingstone was described by former NBC anchor Tom Brokow as “one of this nation’s preeminent authorities on terrorism.” He is a familiar face on the nation’s newscasts as a commentator on terrorism, intelligence, and national security issues.

A veteran of more than 1300 television appearances, he has appeared on such programs as “Nightline,” “Meet the Press,” “Today,” “The Early Show,” “Crossfire,” “Newsmaker Sunday,” “The Charlie Rose Show,” “Hardball,” “Dateline,” “The Newshour with Jim Lehrer,” “The O’Reilly Report,” and the evening newscasts on all of the major networks.

He served as an on-air commentator for NBC News during the Atlanta Olympics and in the aftermath of the Oklahoma City and 9/11 terrorist attacks. He predicted the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center on CNBC six months before they occurred, said the terrorists would drop both towers, and that Osama bin Laden would be behind the attacks.

He is the author of nine books on terrorism, security, and foreign policy, including Inside the PLO, The War Against Terrorism, and Rescue My Child, which was an NBC movie-of-the-week. In addition, he has published more than 200 articles in such publications as The Wall Street Journal, New York Times, The Washington Post, Newsday, USA Today, and The Los Angeles Times.

Leading corporations and institutions routinely seek his views on a variety of topics, and he has delivered more than 500 major addresses, both in the U.S. and abroad, including recent talks at the House of Commons and the United Nations. He has advised top government officials and testified before Congress.

He serves on a number of fiduciary and advisory boards. Among the advisory boards are Supercom Inc., NeoStem, Inc., Digital Ally, the Africa Society, and No Greater Love (a non-profit, non-political humanitarian organization dedicated to programs of remembrance, friendship, and care for families who have lost loved ones in service to the country or through acts of terrorism).

In the past, he was a Founding Member and Incorporator of the Solidarity Endowment, formed in the West to promote the goals of Polish Solidarity. He also was the Founder and Chairman of the Institute on Terrorism and Subnational Conflict. He served as President of Watergate South for more than seven years. Over the years, he has advised the Secretary of State, the Chief of Naval Operations, and the Pentagon.

He is a member of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers, the George Town Club, the Cosmos Club, the Writers Guild of America, and Iran Policy Committee.

An Honors graduate of the College of William and Mary, he has earned three Masters Degrees, as well as a Ph.D. from the Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy.


Protect Yourself in an Uncertain World: A Comprehensive Handbook for Your Personal and Business Security. (New York: Mastermedia, Sept., 1996).

Rescue My Child: The Story of the Ex-Delta Force Commandos Who Bring Home Children Abducted Overseas. (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1992). Literary Guild book club alternate selection, Doubleday book club selection, 4 foreign language printings. (Was made into an NBC movie-of-the-week.)

Inside the PLO, with David Halevy. (New York: Morrow, 1990). Also soft cover edition by Quill/Morrow, 1991. Published in the United Kingdom by Robert Hale, 1991.

The Complete Security Guide for Executives. (Lexington: Lexington Books, 1989). Soft cover edition by Lexington Books, 1991.

The Cult of Counterterrorism. (Lexington: Lexington Books, 1989).

Beyond the Iran/Contra Crisis: The Shape of U.S. Counter-Terrorism Policy in the Post-Reagan Era, with Terrell E. Arnold. (Lexington: Lexington Books, 1988). Soft cover edition by Lexington Books, 1988.

America the Vulnerable: The Threat of Chemical/Biological Warfare, with Joseph D. Douglass Jr. (Lexington: Lexington Books, 1987. Two printings. First soft cover edition by Lexington Books, 1990.

Fighting Back: Winning the War Against Terrorism, with Terrell E. Arnold. (Lexington: Lexington Books, 1985. Introduction by Robert C. McFarlane. Four printing in hard cover, six printings in soft cover. First printing in Portuguese (Brazil, 1987).

The War Against Terrorism. (Lexington: Lexington Books, 1982). Two printings in hard cover, eight in soft cover by Lexington Books, 1982.

Major Monographs

Failure: America’s Misdirected Efforts to Combat Terrorism and Recommendations for a More Effective Policy, (Washington, D.C.: The Center for Global Security and Cooperation, 1997).

American Bhopals: The Threat of Catastrophic Refinery Accidents and Sabotage to Hydrofluoric Acid Alkylation Units, (Lincolnshire, Ill.: Energy Safety Council, 1991).

CBW: The Poor Man’s Atomic Bomb, with Joseph D. Douglass, Jr., (Cambridge, Mass.: Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, 1984). Introduction by Senator John Tower.

Personal Security Hints for Business and Government Employees, (Washington, D.C.: Joseph J. Cappucci Assocs., Inc., 1979.

Crisis Management for Kidnap and Extortion Incidents, (Washington, D.C.: Josephy J. Cappucci Assocs., Inc., 1979.

A Collection of the Wit and Wisdom of Leo Gross, with Farrokh Jhabvala, (Hull, Mass.: The Friends of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, 1976).

Other Publications

Nine chapters in books.

Major Scholarly papers.

More than 200 articles in publications such as: New York Times, Washington Post, Los angeles Times, U.S. News & World Report, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Newsday, Sea Power, Army,, Justice, Counterterrorism & Security, Washington Times, Soldier of Fortune, Reader’s Digest, International Freedom Review, Washingtonian, Washington Jewish Week, National Review, This World, World Affairs, Detroit News, Defense and Foreign Affairs, Air University Review, Conflict, Leaders, International Security Review, Strategic Review, World & I, Officer Review, The Center Magazine, Roll Call, The Sunday Times (Singapore), and Adventure Unlimited.


from AIE Speakers Bureau

Dr. Neil Livingstone is Co-Chairman and CEO of a crisis management firm in Washington, DC. During the past two decades he has served as a “corporate equalizer” on a variety of investigative assignments including kidnappings, homicides, industrial espionage, celebrity stalking, missing CEOs and threats against top executives.

Dr. Neil Livingstone taught for ten years at Georgetown University and has served on advisory panels to the Secretary of State, the Chief of Naval Operations and the Pentagon. He was an assistant to Senators Stuart Symington and James Pearson.

In addition, Dr. Neil Livingstone has written nine books and more than 200 articles and monographs, while finding the time to appear on more than 600 television programs and give more than 400 major speeches on national security topics, both here and abroad.

33 thoughts on “Neil Livingstone, Republican candidate for Governor”

  1. I am not enthusiastic about Livingstone or Zink.
    After more than one face to face with Livingstone he failed to impress me as someone who was speaking with the integrity of someone with a full knowledge of and respect for the US Constitution. Frankly he came off sounding like Brian Schweitzer [had enough of him for sure] – he said wanted to "fly the skull and crossbones" over the State Capitol building. What?! The sovereign State of Montana has a beautiful flag with a wonderful moto, 'Plata y Oro'. Livingstone says what he thinks voters want to hear, but under the surface he is something for Montanan’s to fear.
    Zink’s voting record last MT 62nd Legislative Session was 34% constitutional on the Conservative TAB SCORCARD, which supports my personal evaluation after intense focus on that session.
    I really can’t understand why anyone would be enthusiastic about a gubernatorial team comprised of an Internationalist and a weak ‘conservative’.

  2. Lark does a good job of summing up this situation. Why would anyone choose to carry Neil Livingstone's water?

    Where is it in this man's resume that he has stood up for individual rights?
    Where is it in this man's resume where he has defended and upheld the U.S. Constitution?
    What is it about this man's resume that would make one think he is a constitutional conservative?

    The war on terror is a joke, but many Americans bought into the need for this "war" based on the many expert opinions like those of Neil Livingstone which tended to strike fear in the hearts and minds of many. Helping to create the fear of an anthrax attack by the use of his "expert" opinion and then profitearing on the backs of the American people through arms shipments around the world is not something I want on the resume of the next Goveneor of Montana.

    Helping to push Americans into these debt based wars around the world, all in the name of spreading "democracy", in order to create a safer world for us all has only served to further dilute the value of our currency and to hyper inflat our economy robing the very good people of this nation of what thay have labored so hard to earn. This process of promoting fear as a means to create constant war has destroyed any chance for Americans to have a sense of security here in their own back yards. I find this very disturbing and would suggest that any readers of this column do a little of their own legwork. Dig in, it won't take long to peal back the layers of this man not so mysterious. See for yourself the man behind the mask.

    The thought that someone might suggest that Neil Livingstone has credibility because of his associations with the likes of Oliver North and Paul Valiley is both startling and frightening.

  3. @2 John,

    These are business resumes, not constitutional resumes, so your comments are out of context. If you are looking for a constitutional resume, show me an example resume of your favorite candidate that demonstrates he is a constitutional conservative?

    Where is your evidence Neil Livingstone promoted The Patriot Act? In fact, Neil Livingstone was among the first to speak against The Patriot Act when it was being proposed.

    You have MG Paul Vallely completely wrong, which shows you have not done your research. Therefore, your claims against Livingstone have no credibility.

    Read Paul Vallely's website, and his 54 articles published on

    In fact, Paul Vallely is exactly the opposite of how you frame him. He is among the most constitutional and patriotic of all military officers. Even though he is retired, he is still leading the fight to save your freedom. Paul has led the fight to reveal Obama's ineligibility. He promotes state sovereignty. He is totally against "nation-building" wars.

    The only thing you are correct about is Paul Vallely is associated with Neil Livingstone, as follows: Paul Vallely and I are forming a Kitchen Cabinet of advisors for Neil Livingstone. These advisors will be the most constitutional and patriotic people in their respective fields. Neil's Kitchen Cabinet will help demonstrate to you and others that Neil is a constitutional conservative.

    You say,

    Dig in, it won’t take long to peel back the layers of this man not so mysterious. See for yourself the man behind the mask.

    Yet you provide no quotes and no references to back up your claims. Since you say "it won't take long," how about providing evidence to back up your claims?

    Also, I understand your turned down your invitation to personally meet Neil Livingstone on March 6. Is that the way you do your research?

  4. @1 Lark,

    It's possible you would not have been "enthusiastic" about General Patton either. I am not sure he would have passed your "Constitutional" test, but he sure did a lot to save your freedom and our Constitution.

    Similarly, we need a governor who can actually win our war against the environmentalists and the enemies of our freedom, not just talk about it. Just as we should choose a general who can best lead an army to win our battles, so also should we choose a governor who can best lead our state to win our battles.

    General Patton made a lot of statements that you may not have liked. But he did his job remarkably well. He did so, not because he talked about it or served hambergers and candy, but because he was a damn smart general. We will do much better if we choose a governor who has demonstrated talent to do the required job than to elect a governor who impresses us with his talk.

    Regarding the TAB scores,

    1. Have you reviewed all the 96 bills and amendments used for the scoring?
    2. Have you reviewed all 71 Senate and 78 House votes used for the scoring?

    I have not but perhaps you have. I would raise the following questions:

    3. Which of the bills and votes are really relevant to making a conservative score?
    4. How can Derek Skees get an 81 and Art Hinkle an 83? This is based upon Koopman scoring 100%.
    5. Do you agree with Koopman or with Skees and Hinkle?
    6. Is it possible there is a 20 percent error, by your own conservative standards, in the TAB scores?
    7. If we selected those votes that truly mattered, is it possible Zinke might have scored greater than 50?
    8. Since you are using scores of Lt Governor candidates, how do you score Bill Gallagher?

  5. "Dr. Ed", Let us back up just a bit here.You have laid the claim out to the public that "you" have investigated "all" the claims regarding Livingtone as a "threat". That they all come from liberal sources. What claims are those that you refer to? Where are your results. You did not list any facts to substantiate this claim. I would personally like to know this information, especially in light of the fact that you are holding Mr. Livingstone out as "the" candidate for conservatives. I am not holding him out, you are, so I am holding you responsible for your claims.

    As far as "turning down" my oportunity to meet Livingstone on March 6, I think I can choose where and when and if I have any interest in speaking directly to Mr. Livingstone without risking my credibility to do my own research and to form my own opinion about who he is. I also turned down my oportunity to meet G.H.W. Bush face to face and yet somehow I have been able to research and discover the facts about who he really was and is. Meeting him face to face will not change who he is. I'm sure that were I to meet Barack Obama face to face and ask him to look deeply into my eyes and tell me the truth about his birth certificate and selective service cards he would tell me that they are legit and yet I would still not believe him. If we had to meet face to face in order to "know" history we would be rather limited in our scope of learning, would we not?

    Olli North and Livingstone! Because MG Paul Vallely holds oliver north out as a patriot certainly lends no credibility to Mr. North in my eyes and your assertion that this somehow lends credibility to Livingstone really causes me to chuckle. I know the congressional testimony of Mr. North and others involved in Iran/Contra, I know the connections between Olli North, George H.W. Bush, Drugs, CIA, and the Mafia. I don't need a guy with a web site, "Stand up America" bells and whistles to convert my opinion from reality to fantasy.
    Do your own homework ED! And by all means if you want to meet eye to eye with me I would welcome the opportunity to speak directly to you. I don't have a problem with you Ed, but I do have my own opinion formed by my research of the facts of history.

  6. General Patton fought in America’s last constitutional war. His enemies were declared enemies of America; with no constitutional rights. General Patton protected our constitutional rights.

    Today’s politicians who refuse to be constitutionalists and freedom fighters are at best defaulting to tyranny. At worse they are aiding and abetting tyranny. Tyranny’s enemy is American’s constitutional rights.

    I have not yet chosen a gubernatorial candidate but I have ruled out Mr. Livingstone. With rare exceptions such as Ron Paul, DC insiders are the last people I want in Montana. The Feds would love nothing more than a Governor who will keep Montana under their thumbs.

  7. @5 John, Thank you for being a worthy challenger. May I review our discussion so far?

    I began by introducing Neil Livingstone's professional qualifications. Then I said

    Clearly, he is the most qualified candidate for governor. Yet some claim he is a threat. I have investigated every such claim I know and found them all to be untrue.

    I did not say I have investigated "all" claims, only those I know about. How can I investigate claims I do not know about?

    Let's put our discussion in perspective. You have made claims against Livingstone, thereby acting as prosecuting attorney. I am acting as defense attorney. Our readers are the jury.

    In this context, you cannot put me in the position to "prove" Livingstone's "innocence." He is innocent until you prove him guilty, and it takes more than claims to prove someone guilty.

    Here are your key claims, so far, as I understand them. You claimed Livingstone:

    1. Supports the War on Terror and the Patriot Act.
    2. Helped create the fear of an anthrax attack with his expert opinion.
    3. Profiteered through arms shipments around the world.
    4. Helped push Americans into debt-based wars.
    5. Promoted spreading Democracy via our wars.
    6. Helped dilute the value of our currency.
    7. Promoted fear as a means to create constant war.
    8. Is bad because he associates with MG Paul Vallely, whom you claim is bad, partly because he associates with Oliver North.

    In response, I asked you to produce evidence to back up your claims. Evidence consists of much more than telling me to "do my homework."

    On #8, although your attempted proof by associations is always a weak proof, I responded with facts showing MG Paul Vallely is really on our side, contrary to your claims. You have not provided evidence to dispute my claims in favor of Paul Vallely.

    You have assumed I am defending Oliver North, which is untrue. I consider Oliver North to be completely off subject and irrelevant to your attempt to support your claims against Livingstone. Even if you were to "prove" Oliver North is bad, it is too much of a leap to claim Livingstone is bad because he knows Vallely and Vallely knows North. Such methods would put us all in jail.

    So let's get back on subject.

    I have produced evidence to counter your claim #8, which you have not disputed.

    I counter-claimed your claim #1 on the basis that Livingstone was among the first to speak out against the Patriot Act after Bush proposed it.

    You have provided no evidence, worthy of convincing a jury, to support your claims #1 through #7.

    It is not sufficient for you to tell me to "do my homework." As "prosecuting attorney," the onus is on you to produce facts to support your claims. You said this was easy. I challenged you to do it, and so far you have not done so. I cannot defend against your claims until you produce facts.

    Again, thank you very much for being a worthy challenger.

  8. @6 MontanaGuy,
    1. Who is more of a DC insider: Neil Livingstone or Rick Hill?
    2. To restore Montana, why should we exclude people who have DC contacts?
    3. Do DC contacts prove one is not faithful to Montana?
    4. If Livingstone were a tool of the feds, then where is all the insider money and media that would be backing him?

  9. montanaconservative

    The John Swenson Weltanschauung

    One very common position, such as John Swenson’s, is that the US should pull her troops back from foreign lands and stop funding American imperialism. Then this phrase is often followed by, “we don’t need to export democracy” or as John Swenson states, “spreading democracy.” The answer to these statements, should be, that’s "dangerously silly" and "flat out wrong," respectively.

    John Swenson and his position on the “war on terror” are essentially identical to one of the most radical leftist visionaries in history…Noam Chomsky! John Swenson presents himself as a noninterventionist, but what really comes through is naive pacifism. His view that the war on terror is a joke and that we just go and fight wars for no good reason is illogical. John Swenson’s view is exactly the same as every other leftist’s view of America. Thus, leaving his rhetoric on a conservative blog inapt or at best extraneous. If Noam Chomsky was Socrates then John Swenson is Plato!

    John Swenson obviously would assert that the Middle East poses no threat because they are surrounded by Israeli missiles. Let me ask you something Lark…Do you think Ahmadinejad cares if he is surrounded by missiles? Ahmadinejad and all other radical Islamic fundamentalists would invite the opportunity to become a martyr or a shaheed! Ahmadinejad and all other radical Islamic fundamentalists think that if you kill Americans and Jews you go to heaven?

    As far as the “spreading democracy” thing goes, Japan, Germany and The Philippines seem to demonstrate that “spreading democracy” works. Obviously US involvement had nothing to do with other Democracies like Israel or Singapore (WRONG)! But once again none of that matters to people such as John Swenson. John Swenson probably thinks that foreign involvements were not part of the founding Father’s plans. However, that being said, during the Revolutionary War and the war of 1812, I’m sure glad the French weren’t in the same mind set as John Swenson.

    The John Swenson view of the Founding is more than likely a pretty selective historical recollection. To buy that assertion one would have to ignore the history of the Founding Fathers. Monroe oversaw the relocation of slaves to Africa (nation building anyone), Hamilton pushed for the creation of the first federal Army, and Washington accepted command of it, if nominally. During Adam’s Presidency many of the Founding Fathers were pushing for American involvement in the war between France and England (wouldn‘t that have been intervention?)

    People with the same mind set as John Swenson are even criticizing the creation of the Navy and Jefferson’s “questionable” involvement in the Barbary Coast wars. However, nearly every time a person with the screwed minset pours himself a cup of morning coffee, buys his wife a diamond ring or watches Casa Blanca, he distantly benefits from those wars.

    Criticizing the Louisiana Purchase was an executive overstep is another argument of people with the same mindset as John Swenson. That is certainly a case of Thursday morning quarterbacking, can you imagine what the US would be like if France or even Spain had kept a large segment of the South? Now a John Swenson probably wouldn’t support the inevitable war that would have resulted. Or, in the mind of a John Swenson the Monroe Doctrine was probably an executive overstep? Man those Founding Fathers should have listened to the, well…um…Founding Fathers?

    Reasonable people can disagree about the wisdom of any given war, but we must be prepared to fight when necessary. The notion that neutrality is always the answer sadly does not comport with reality.

    Lark…from my perspective you have 2 choices either:
    A) Stand up and accept the invitation for a face-to-face discussion with Livingstone and let Montanans see who hides behind your mask and decide for themselves who is more competent, or
    B) Stay put and let yourself be perceived as scared and cowardly

  10. Well at least Dr. Ed has b alls enough to use his own name while providing an opinion and I noticed that Mr. John Swenson used his own name while providing his opinion. As for "montanaconservative", well I guess we know where his b alls are don't we. Give your wife a call and ask her where she left them Neil (or your hooker).

    Dr. Ed made the remark about my passing on an opportunity to meet livingstone face to face with the obvious intention of calling me a worm. Now montanaconservative has done the same to Lark in a more direct fashion, while he hides behind a screen name of course. C'mon out of the closet worm let the rest see who it is that hides his face while providing an opinion.

    Take a look on the the map moron I'm sure you will find my address. Show up here and we will have that face to face you are talking about.

  11. Dr. Ed, maybe you are correct. After reviewing the long list, which you have enumerated, of my claims against him for accomplishments that he clearly is not competant enough to have completed, maybe you are correct in that I'm giving livingstone way too much credit.

    Let's just say he was in the right place at the right time and fell into a very lucrative business deal that had something to do with the shipping business. Happens all the time. Take montanaconservative for instance. He receives a very timely inheritance, makes good use of it, and is now a big deal.

    He still does not get my vote.

    Dr. Ed, your opinion is that I should vote for livingstone and you give reasons based on his resume and on your vetting of claims against him.

    I respond to you that I will not vote for him and I give reasons based on my own rersearch of the man.

    But my opinion is not good enough.

    Now you would like to go to court over the matter. Can you tell me, if you win will I have to vote for livingstone?

  12. Dr. Ed. I can't resist.

    livingstone hasn't a chance in hell of being elected to any office in Montana, let alone the Govemnors office.

    Kind of about the same chance as we all have of getting the real name of the worm better known as montanaconservative.

  13. @10 @11 @12 John,
    I am not at all trying to tell you how to vote. I believe everyone should vote as they choose and I do not take any personal difference with anyone who has a different opinion than I do.

    My goal with this discussion, and all discussions on PolyMontana, is to encourage intelligent discourse and communication of different opinions. And I thank you for your contributions. This way, I hope we all learn, and I hope we get closer to the truth.

  14. Dr. Ed, You are in this for the truth, as you say, however I am affraid, like Jack Nicholson said to Tom Cruise "you can't handle the truth".

    If you are not willing to open your eyes to certain facts of history then you will not be able to see truth when it stares you in the eyes.

    Fact is that the CIA has had for a very long time rogue elements involved in secret wars. These wars need arms suppliers, they need cash, they need the ability to launder cash and they need men who will do these things. Men like George H.W. Bush, Ed Wilson, Ted Shackley, Michael Harari, et al.

    If you can't get your mind around the fact that the secret CIA is in the drug running, cash laundering and arms smuggling business to support secret wars, and that these men who carry out these acts are also the same men whom profit very handsomely from their inside knowledge of these events, then what good is it to have a discussion with you about Neil Livingstone.

    What say you?

    p.s. as for montanaconservative? Well we know he is certainly a muslim hater and he wants you to be one also because it fits in with the weltanschauung he wants you and all other Americans to adopt.

  15. @15 John, I don't like the CIA any more than you do. I even think the CIA was involved in assassinating JFK. Does that mean everyone involved with the CIA is bad? NO.

    Look, I worked as a top-secret consultant for the Department of Defense. Does that make me responsible for the bad things the DOD may have done?

    I worked for the National Science Foundation for 4 years. I was a consultant for the California Energy Commission and the US Border Control for several years. You can find some really stupid or bad things these agencies have done. Does that make me guilty of these things? Absolutely not. I never once even saw any of these agencies do bad things.

    When you are talking about large, complex government agencies, you cannot validly claim everyone involved in any way with the agency – employed, consultant or cooperator – is "bad."

    To make your case, you must show that Livingstone was directly involved in any of the claims you have made against him.

    On the flip side, in my involvements I list above, I learned a whole lot about how government agencies work. This is valuable experience, far more valuable than if I had warmed a seat in our state legislature. Similarly, Neil Livingstone's experience adds to his qualifications for being Governor of Montana. I will choose someone with Neil Livingstone's experience any day over the other, mostly inexperienced, naive, candidates we have running for governor.

    As I said at the beginning of this post, Neil Livingstone is by far the most qualified candidate running for governor. Morrie Shechtman says Neil Livingstone is the most qualified candidate we have ever had running for any office in the history of Montana. That is quite a statement.

    The only possible downside to Livingstone is IF he is a "bad" guy guilty of whatever you or others may claim he is guilty of. But, you have rambled on for many comments now and have yet to show one shred of evidence to back up your claims. Livingstone is innocent until you can prove him guilty.

  16. @10 johnswenson, your opinions expressed in @2 were excellent. Why risk losing credibility with questionable language and personal insults? Also, you can bet your Birkenstocks that Big Brother has polymontana under surveillance. Hence using handles instead of real names is justified. Discretion is not necessarily weakness.

    John, American desperately needs Patriots who stand up for the Constitution. I think we are in the same foxhole. When we start shooting I’ll give you my real name.

  17. Dr. Ed, Here's one who did not get away, "merchant of death" that is. Of course this guy is just a patsy anyway so he was expendable.

    NY judge gives ex-Soviet arms dealer 25 years
    By LARRY NEUMEISTER and TOM HAYS | Associated Press – 17 hrs agoView PhotoClick image for more photos
    EmailtweetShare27PrintRelated Contentprevnext View GalleryAlleged arms smuggler Viktor Bout from Russia looks on from behind bars at a criminal …

    FILE – This Tuesday Nov. 16, 2010 …

    FILE – In this Tuesday Nov. 16, …
    NEW YORK (AP) — A defiant Russian arms dealer dubbed the Merchant of Death was sentenced Thursday to 25 years in prison, far short of the life term prosecutors sought for his conviction on terrorism charges that grew from a U.S. sting operation.

    Viktor Bout's sentence was the mandatory minimum he faced and well below the life prison term called for by federal sentencing guidelines.

    U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin in Manhattan said it was sufficient and appropriate because Bout's crimes originated only because of an elaborate sting operation created by the Drug Enforcement Administration to catch one of the world's most notorious arms dealers.

    She said there was no evidence the 45-year-old Bout had ever planned to harm Americans or commit a crime punishable in U.S. court until the sting was created.

    "But for the approach made through this determined sting operation, there is no reason to believe Bout would ever have committed the charged crimes," she said.

    As Bout left the courtroom, he hugged his lawyer and waved to his wife.

    Minutes earlier, he had appeared angry when he interrupted a prosecutor who said he agreed to sell weapons to kill Americans, shouting: "It's a lie!" He told the judge he "never intended to kill anyone" and said, "God knows this truth."

    The sentencing came four years after his arrest in Thailand, where he was held before his extradition to the U.S. for trial in late 2010, and months after a jury convicted him of four conspiracy charges relating to his support of a Colombian terrorist organization.

    The judge also ordered a $15 million forfeiture.

    The government had portrayed Bout as one of the world's worst villains, capable of empowering dictators in war-torn countries by supplying weapons that they could turn on their own people. The defense had countered that Bout was a political prisoner, a victim of a sting operation that made it seem as if he hated Americans and was willing to sell surface-to-air missiles to a Colombian organization to shoot down American helicopters.

    The government had asked for Bout to be imprisoned for life. A defense lawyer requested that the jury verdict be reversed and the charges dismissed.

    Bout told the judge he was "not guilty" and said allegations against him were false.

    Prosecutors said that Bout's weapons fueled armed conflicts in some of the world's most treacherous hot spots, including Rwanda, Angola and the Congo and that he was looking for new arms deals in places such as Libya and Tanzania when he was arrested. Bout, the inspiration for an arms dealer character played by Nicolas Cage in the 2005 film "Lord of War," has maintained that he was a legitimate businessman who wasn't selling arms when the American operatives knocked on his door.

    Federal prosecutors said the government initiated its investigation in 2007 because Bout "constituted a threat to the United States and to the international community based on his reported history of arming some of the world's most violent and destabilizing dictators and regimes."

    "Although Bout has often described himself as nothing more than a businessman, he was a businessman of the most dangerous order," prosecutors said in their pre-sentencing memo. "Transnational criminals like Bout who are ready, willing and able to arm terrorists transform their customers from intolerant ideologues into lethal criminals who pose the gravest risk to civilized societies."

    Defense attorney Albert Dayan wrote in a letter to the judge that the United States targeted his client vindictively because it was embarrassed that his companies helped deliver goods to American military contractors involved in the Iraq War.

    The deliveries occurred despite United Nations sanctions imposed against Bout since 2001 because of his reputation as a notorious illegal arms dealer, Dayan said.

    The lawyer noted that the U.S. Department of the Treasury imposed its own ban on dealings with Bout in July 2004, citing in part the "unproven allegation" that Bout made $50 million in profits from arms transfers to the Taliban when Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida were based in Afghanistan.

    The Merchant of Death moniker was attached to Bout by a high-ranking minister at Britain's Foreign Office, who had drawn attention to his 1990s notoriety for running a fleet of aging Soviet-era cargo planes to conflict-ridden hotspots in Africa.

    The nickname was included in the U.S. government's indictment of Bout, and U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara referenced it when he announced Bout's extradition in late 2010, saying: "The so-called Merchant of Death is now a federal inmate."

  18. "Reporters were paid by the CIA, sometimes without their media
    employers' knowledge, to get the material in print or on the air.
    But other news organizations ordered their employees to cooperate
    with the CIA, including the San Diego-based Copley News Service.
    But Copley was not alone, and the CIA had `tamed' reporters and
    editors in scores of newspaper and broadcast outlets across the
    country. To avoid direct relationships with the media, the CIA
    recruited individuals in public relations firms like H&K to act as
    middlemen for what the CIA wanted to distribute.

  19. Former CIA official Robert T. Crowley, the Agency's long-time liaison
    with corporations, sees it differently. "Hill and Knowlton's overseas
    offices," he acknowledged, "were perfect `cover' for the
    ever-expanding CIA. Unlike other cover jobs, being a public relations
    specialist did not require technical training for CIA officers." The
    CIA, Crowley admitted, used its H&K connections "to put out press
    releases and make media contacts to further its positions. …H&K
    employees at the small Washington office and elsewhere, distributed
    this material through CIA assets working in the United States news
    media." Since the CIA is prohibited from disseminating propaganda
    inside the U.S., this type of "blowback"- which former CIA officer
    John Stockwell and other researchers have often traced to the
    Agency-is illegal. While the use of U.S. media by the CIA has a long
    and well-documented history, the covert involvement of PR firms may be
    news to many. According to Trento:

  20. This close association and dependence upon the intelligence community
    by reporters has created a unique situation which has shielded PR
    executives and firms from closer scrutiny by the media and Congress.
    According to Trento, "These longstanding H&K intelligence ties and
    CIA-linked reporters' fears that Gray might know about them might
    partially explain why Gray has escaped close media examination, even
    though he was questioned about his or his associates' roles in one
    major scandal after another during his long Washington career."

  21. Over the years, Hill and Knowlton and Robert Gray have been implicated
    in the BCCI scandal, the October Surprise, the House page sex and drug
    scandal, Debategate, Koreagate, and Iran-Contra. In October 1988,
    three days after the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI)
    was indicted by a federal grand jury for conspiring with the Medellin
    Cartel to launder $32,000,000 in illicit drug profits, the bank hired
    H&K to manage the scandal. Robert Gray also served on the board of
    directors of First American Bank, the Washington D.C. bank run by
    Clark Clifford (now facing federal charges) and owned by BCCI. Gray
    was close to, and helped in various ways, top Reagan officials. When
    Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger's son needed a job, Gray hired
    him for $2,000 a month. "And when Gray's clients needed something from
    the Pentagon, Gray and Co. went right to the top." Gray also helped
    Attorney General Ed Meese's wife, Ursula, get a lucrative job with a
    foundation which was created by a wealthy Texas client, solely to
    employ her.

  22. ROBERT KEITH GRAY- PRIVATE SPOOK? Robert Keith Gray, who set up Hill
    and Knowlton's important Washington, D.C. office and ran it for most
    of the time between 1961 and 1992, has had numerous contacts in the
    national and international intelligence community. The list of his
    personal and professional associates includes Edwin Wilson, William
    Casey, Tongsun Park (Korean CIA), Rev. Sun Myung Moon, Anna Chennault
    (Gray was a board member of World Airways aka Flying Tigers), Neil
    Livingstone, Ro- bert Owen, and Oliver North.

  23. THE GRAY AREA BEHIND HILL & KNOWLTON Gray's connection to Iran-Contra
    has never been fully examined. Notably, the Tower Commission, Reagan's
    official 1986 investigation, all but ignored it. In 1983, Texas
    Senator John Tower had declined to seek reelection thinking he had a
    deal with Reagan to become Secretary of Defense. After Weinberger
    decided to stay on in the second Reagan term, Tower found himself
    without a job. In 1986, his friend Robert Gray offered him a position
    on the board of directors of Gray and Co. Shortly thereafter, Tower
    was asked to head the presidential inquiry. Not suprisingly, the Tower
    Commission kept Gray and Co. out of the investigation, in spite of the
    facts that several key players in the scandal had worked for Gray and
    Co., and Gray's Madrid office was suspected of involvement in the
    secret arms shipments to Iran.

  24. Despite large gaps in the official inquiry, it has been established
    that Robert Owen, Oliver North's messenger and bagman, worked for Gray
    and Co. after leaving then-Senator Dan Quayle's staff in 1983. Owen
    worked primarily with Neil Livingstone, a mysterious figure who claims
    to be a mover and shaker in the intelligence world but who is
    described as a "groupie." Livingstone worked with Ed Wilson, Air
    Panama, and as a front man for business activities sponsored by the
    CIA and Israeli intelligence. Owen and Livingstone traveled frequently
    to Central America to meet with the Contras in 1984. An interesting
    footnote to Iran-Contra is that in 1986, Saudi Arabian arms broker
    Adnan Khashoggi hired Hill and Knowlton and Gray and Co. to milk
    maximum publicity out of his major donation to a $20.5 million sports
    center, named after him, at American University.

  25. THE FOURTH BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT The pattern of influence peddling and
    insider abuse is clear. The potential for real reform is less obvious.
    Despite his stated intention to restrict the influence of lobbyists
    and PR manipulation, Clinton's reforms are viewed with cynical
    amusement by those in the know. Although newly restricted from
    directly lobbying their former agencies, retiring government officials
    can simply take jobs with PR firms, sit at their desks, and instruct
    others to say "Ron, or Howard, sent me." Nor does the updated Foreign
    Agents Registration Act have real teeth. The act-legislated in 1938
    when U.S. PR firms were discovered working as propagandists and
    lobbyists for Nazi Germany-is rarely enforced. While it requires
    agents of governments to register, it omits requirements for agents of
    foreign corporations, who often serve the same interests.

    And if loopholes for lobbying are comfortably large, public relations
    activities remain totally unregulated and unscrutinized by any
    government agency. Given the power and scope of PR firms, their track
    records of manipulation, their collusion with intelligence agencies,
    and their disregard for the human rights records and corporate
    misdeeds of many of their clients, this lack of oversight endangers
    democracy. Careful regulation, stringent reporting requirements, and
    government and citizen oversight are essential first steps in
    preventing these giant transnationals from functioning as a virtual
    fourth branch of government.

  26. @28 John, out of your last 10 comments wherein you have copied material from an unidentified source, you have mentioned Neil Livingstone only in @26. Here is what I take from this:

    Robrt Owen worked for Ollie North. Owen also worked with Livingstone. Livingstone worked with Ed Wilson, of Air Panama, who was a front man for the CIA and Israeli Intelligence. Owen and Livingstone traveled frequently to Central America to meet with the Contras in 1984.

    Where's the crime?

    You have shown Livingstone has good connections and good experience, vastly more than any other governor candidate. The conclusion must be that we have only two candidates who have the experience and talent to govern Montana: Hill and Livingstone. So let's cut to the chase and focus on who we are going to vote for between Livingstone and Hill.

  27. Dr. Ed,

    Lucky Lucciano also had good connections and lots of experience but that would not qualify him for the Governorship of Montana any more than it does Livingstone.

    Robert Owen did not work "with" Livingstone at Gray & Co., he worked under Livingstone's direction.

    Robert Owen also worked under the direction of Livingstone at the Institute on Terrorism and Subnational Conflict.

    Robert Owen was or is also Executive VP Global Options.

    Ed, I realise now that none of this means anything to you. Only one conclusion can be drawn from your admiration for Livingstone, his associates and the human rights vioations they have committed around the world, and that is that you too feel that all is fair in love and war. That in order to protect the huddled masses you must first take away their rights in order to protect them.

    I think that Michael Aquino and MG Paul Vallely had their collective finger acurately on the exact purpose for which PR firms the likes of Gray & Co., and Hill & Knowlton exist when they collaberated on their paper "Psyop to Mindwar: the Psychology of Victory".

    Unfortunately for Us here at home in America the "Mindwar" has been instituted, perfected, and has been capitalized on by guys like Livingstone. They use it in order to drag us into the most dirty actions around the world.

    But hey, he's your guy!

    Good Luck with that Ed, I'm sure you, Neil and the whole "kitchen cabinet" will be but a very faint blip in the rear view of historical memories of the 2012 Montana elections.

  28. @30 John, I hope you feel I have allowed you freedom to express your opinion on PolyMontana. As I said above, I never intended or expected to change your vote but I think your comments have been of interest to many readers.

    Thank you for noting Neil Livingstone's connection with the Institute on Terrorism and Subnational Conflict. A quick search led me to Neil's March 1984 article in the Air University Review: Fighting Terrorism and "Dirty Little Wars" which is excellent even by today's standards 28 years later. You have helped me demonstrate that Neil Livingstone is by far the most qualified candidate for governor. No one else is even in his league.

    No wonder Morrie Shechtman, whose profession is understanding and evaluating people, wrote:

    Montana’s never before seen as qualified a candidate for any office, as they have in Neil Livingstone.

  29. Dr. Ed, As Morrie says, in the "evolution of species" Livingstone has certainly evolved into the "most qualified" candidate Montana has ever seen.

    As for me, I guess evolution has not occured inside of me. I still belive that the "limiting" documents to our form of government are the U.S. Constitution and the State Constitutions.

    State sanctioned terrorism and those who think they are above the law because they are the law will never get my vote.

    As for freedom of speech? I think that when one seeks to characterize another as a "worm", because they fail to see the need to examine history face to face in order to understand it, that they themselves have become guilty of using antimidation as a tool to quell freedom of speech.

  30. truthpounder62

    Great resume, but I don't think Montanans are looking for a D.C. lobbyist that can hob-nob around with the MSM boys.
    C orruption
    I n
    A ction

    No thanks Neil

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.