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 Netherlands firstname.lastname@example.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