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.

                                    Hart Nibbrigkade 22
                                    2597 XV Den Haag


                                    Monday, 18 June 2001


Dear Senator Graham:

I am a United States citizen working overseas. Together with Mr. 
Gino J. Scalabrini, I operate the website, 
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'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:

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 

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:

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 
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.:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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.


George W. Maschke

Enclosure: The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.

PS: A copy of this letter will be placed on-line at: