This letter was sent by certified mail to Senator Bob Graham, Chairman of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on 18 June 2001 and received on 28 June 2001.
AntiPolygraph.org
Hart Nibbrigkade 22
2597 XV Den Haag
Netherlands
maschke@antipolygraph.org
Monday, 18 June 2001
HONORABLE BOB GRAHAM
524 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON DC 20510
USA
Dear Senator Graham:
I am a United States citizen working overseas. Together with Mr.
Gino J. Scalabrini, I operate the website AntiPolygraph.org,
which is dedicated to exposing polygraph waste, fraud, and abuse
and to the passage of a Comprehensive Polygraph Protection Act
eliminating the governmental and other exemptions of the 1988
Employee Polygraph Protection Act.
I am writing this open letter to you in your new capacity as
Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI)
to bring to your attention evidence of waste, fraud, and abuse
in federal polygraph policy and to request that you promptly
schedule hearings on this matter.
Polygraphy -- the very cornerstone of America's
counterintelligence policy -- is a fraud. It is fundamentally
dependent on the polygrapher lying to and deceiving the person
being "tested" about the nature of the procedure (and upon the
latter's ignorance and fear). While polygraphy has a built-in
bias against truthful persons, it can be -- and has been --
easily defeated by deceptive persons through the use of simple
countermeasures. To find out how anyone -- truthful or otherwise
-- can pass a polygraph "test," see Chapters 3 & 4 of
AntiPolygraph.org's free book, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.
I have enclosed a printed copy for your review. This book may
also be downloaded in Adobe Acrobat format at:
http://antipolygraph.org/pubs.shtml
You and the members of the SSCI need to be aware of the
information about polygraphy that is provided in The Lie Behind
the Lie Detector, and to know that this information is in the
public domain (and presumably no secret to foreign intelligence
services).
With regard to hearings on polygraph policy, I recommend that
the [sic] you invite (or subpoena, if necessary), the testimony of the
following individuals:
1. FBI Supervisory Special Agent Dr. Drew C. Richardson of the
Laboratory Division, to expound upon his 1997 testimony
before the Committee on the Judiciary's Subcommittee on
Administrative Oversight and the Courts that polygraph
screening is completely without any theoretical foundation,
has absolutely no validity, and that anyone can be taught
to beat this kind of test in a few minutes. You'll find Dr.
Richardson's opening statement before that subcommittee
along with follow-up correspondence at:
http://antipolygraph.org/read.shtml#senate-judiciary-1997
2. FBI Laboratory Director Dr. Donald M. Kerr, to explain why
he failed to answer Dr. Richardson's charges on grounds of
science when asked in writing to do so by Senator Chuck
Grassley:
http://antipolygraph.org/hearings/senate-judiciary-
1997/kerr-letter.shtml
3. FBI Director Louis J. Freeh, to answer under oath whether
it is true that "when the FBI implemented its polygraph
program in 1994, the then current special agent class had
already begun its training. Nevertheless, members of the
1994 class were administered polygraph examinations and
approximately half the class failed. However, the FBI
simply overlooked this problem and waived the requirements
of the polygraph for the 1994 class." 1st Amended Complaint
in Croddy, et al. v. FBI, et al.:
http://antipolygraph.org/litigation/zaid/first-amended-
complaint.shtml
4. Former FBI Special Agent Mark Mallah, to discuss with the
committee his polygraph experience and the intensive but
ultimately abortive espionage investigation that was
launched against him based solely on a false positive
polygraph outcome. See his public statement at:
http://antipolygraph.org/statements/statement-002.shtml
5. Dr. Sheila D. Reed, who developed the Test for Espionage
and Sabotage (TES) polygraph screening format used by DoD
and DOE, but who also concluded that polygraph screening
should be stopped and was stripped of her security
clearance after saying so. For more on the TES, see:
http://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-002.shtml
http://antipolygraph.org/read.shtml#TES
6. Defense Security Service (DSS) director Gen. Charles J.
Cunningham, Jr. (ret.), to explain under oath what happened
to the data collected in Dr. Reed's 3rd Test for Espionage
and Sabotage validation study (which indicated that
polygrapher bias plays a significant role in determining
test outcomes). DSS has refused to release any information
about this study under the Freedom of Information Act, but
claims the amount of information withheld consists of only
two 14-page reports, suggesting that Dr. Reed's voluminous
research data (which filled boxes) and draft report have
been destroyed;
7. Former Department of Defense Polygraph Institute director
Michael H. Capps, to explain why he dismissed the
Institute's entire scientific advisory board in 1995;
8. Aldrich Hazen Ames, to explain how he beat the polygraph
while spying for the Soviet Union/Russia. Twice.
Since polygraph advocates claim that Ames' charts actually
did show deception, and that he merely succeeded in sweet-
talking his way out of it, a panel of federal polygraph
examiners chosen at random should be convened before the
Committee to demonstrate their amazing powers by picking
out the spy after Ames' unmarked charts are mixed with the
unmarked charts of the 100 preceding and the 100 following
CIA employees polygraphed.
9. Former CIA lawyer Adam J. Ciralsky, to speak about his
polygraph experience at CIA. See his pending legal
complaint at:
http://antipolygraph.org/litigation/ciralsky/ciralsky-
complaint.shtml
10. Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet, to answer
under oath whether it is true, as alleged at para. 55 of
Mr. Ciralsky's above-cited complaint, that "some of the
CIA's most senior officials, including Chiefs and Deputy
Chiefs of Station, have repeatedly 'failed' their own
polygraphs, some as often as six times, without
repercussions. These officials have remained in their posts
and have not been subjected to CIC/CEG investigations."
Mr. Tenet should also state under oath whether it is true,
as alleged by attorney Mark S. Zaid in a statement recently
submitted to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, that
"in 1997-98, CIA polygraphers reported to the Department of
Justice's Public Integrity Section that they were
instructed by CIA management to 'fail' certain employees.
Additionally, they revealed that they were taught how to
sensitize examinees during pre-testing interviews so as to
create the likelihood of false positives. Notwithstanding
these sensational allegations, there is no evidence that
either the CIA or the Department of Justice ever conducted
an investigation." Mr. Zaid's submitted statement may be
read on-line at:
http://antipolygraph.org/hearings/senate-judiciary-
2001/zaid-statement.shtml
Senator Graham, polygraph screening -- the foundation of our
nation's counterintelligence policy -- is a massive fraud, and
should be halted. I urge you to schedule in-depth hearings into
polygraph policy without delay. I will be happy to answer any
questions you or your staff may have of me in this regard.
Sincerely,
George W. Maschke
AntiPolygraph.org
Enclosure: The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.
PS: A copy of this letter will be placed on-line at:
http://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-014.shtml