Add Poll
 
Options: Text Color Split Pie
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
days and minutes. Leave it blank if you don't want to set it now.

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
                       
Change Text Color
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align
resize_wb
resize_hb







Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx ics psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
X
Topic Summary - Displaying 13 post(s).
Posted by: Mark Mallah
Posted on: Jun 24th, 2002 at 10:32pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Quote:

What criminal repurcussions-- if any-- can result from a  government agency failing to address your request within the 20 day limit?


In all likelihood, none.  FOIA's timetables are routinely violated, and it's just accepted the the govt. doesn't have the resources to meet the deadlines.
Posted by: beech trees
Posted on: Jun 24th, 2002 at 7:41pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
George,

What criminal repurcussions-- if any-- can result from a  government agency failing to address your request within the 20 day limit?

Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Jun 24th, 2002 at 3:51pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Tanya Lane of the DSS Freedom of Information and Privacy Act office e-mailed me confirming receipt of the appeal and giving notice of an anticipated delay in processing it:

Quote:
Your request is currently being processed in accordance with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552).  We must inform you however, that due to a significant number of pending requests, a final determination within the statutory time period (20 days), may not be possible.

This request will be processed in a multitrack processing system based
and processed on a first-in, first-out concept.


Posted by: Mark Mallah
Posted on: Jun 21st, 2002 at 7:36pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Polycop,

You are nothing but a coward, making childish taunts from behind the safety of your "polycop" pseudonym.  Everyone can see that it's all just a big act.

By the way, I respect the privacy needs of people on this site who post under a pseudonym.  But they are not demanding that others reveal themselves as polycop has demanded, and they are not using their anonymity as a shield, behind which to hurl insults.  
Posted by: beech trees
Posted on: Jun 21st, 2002 at 3:38pm
  Mark & Quote
Quote:
Aw c'mon Capt. Jones, after making a number of very reasonable arguments in your FOIA request, the attitude you choose to display in this last paragraph is not going to win you any friends in the DSS FOIA office.  Didn't anyone ever teach you that you will get more with sugar than with vinegar?

Now say, "Pretty Please."

Polycop


After reading Polycop's acerbic, hubristic 'helpful' taunts, I was reminded of something Honoré de Balzac once wrote:

Bureaucracy is a giant mechanism operated by pygmies.

Petty, small-minded bureaucrats like Polycop were no doubt part of the original impetus for the passing of the Freedom of Information Act. The light we shed on the pseudo-scientific fraud of polygraphy causes the power-hungry, desperate polygrahers to shriek and howl in pain, much like like those subterranean albino eyeless newts dragged squirming to the Earth's surface. These irrational, boorish posts we're seeing are those final outbursts from the shrinking population of Polygrapher infernaleis, var. habenae quisquiliarum*.

There is no doubt here that DoDPI is witholding the requested information because of the source of the request. None of the information is classified, and the argument that dissemintion of the testing procedures and scoring method might somehow allow examinees to circumvent agency rules, policies, or statutes is specious at best and at worst clearly illustrates the fallibility of the polygraph as a diagnostic tool-- the polygraph is fundamentally based in trickery and deceit.

Sorry polycop, no jackboot-lickers here.

Dave


*Infernal Interpreter of Many Writings, variety 'Government Trash'
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Jun 21st, 2002 at 10:59am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
I note that in the two months since I began this message thread, none of our "forensic psychophysiologist" friends have been able to cite any science-based forensic test whose standardized techniques and procedures are kept secret from the public.

If the standardized techniques and procedures of other forensic tests are available for public scrutiny, why should those of "forensic psychophysiology" (polygraphy) be shrouded in official secrecy?
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Jun 20th, 2002 at 5:34pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Dave,

Under the Freedom of Information Act, an agency is granted 20 work days to make a determination on an appeal.
Posted by: beech trees
Posted on: Jun 20th, 2002 at 5:25pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Good show George, nicely done. Is there a set time limit in which they must respond?

Dave
Posted by: Polycop
Posted on: Jun 20th, 2002 at 5:21pm
  Mark & Quote
Mr. Maschke,

In the FOIA request to DSS that you document on this website, your last paragraph reads as follows,

"...Please release the withheld portions of the Federal PDD Handbook...If, however, you determine that DoDPI's unclassified standardized techniques and procedures for conducting polygraph examinations are somehow too dangerous for the American people to know, then I suggest that you order the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute to promptly cease and desist from representing polygraphy to be a "forensic" technique, for by withholding those standardized techniques and procedures, you will have tacitly acknowledged that "psychophysiological detection of deception" is not a forensic science, but a pseudoscientific fraud."

Aw c'mon Capt. Jones, after making a number of very reasonable arguments in your FOIA request, the attitude you choose to display in this last paragraph is not going to win you any friends in the DSS FOIA office.  Didn't anyone ever teach you that you will get more with sugar than with vinegar?

Now say, "Pretty Please."

Polycop


Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Jun 20th, 2002 at 4:31pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
AntiPolygraph.org's administrative appeal of DSS's decision to withhold portions of the Handbook was sent today (20 June 2002) and may be read on-line here:
 
http://antipolygraph.org/foia/foia-010-3.shtml 
Posted by: Fred F.
Posted on: Apr 26th, 2002 at 2:53am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
George,

After a brief examination of the document they sent you I would like to see the explanation of why they consider polygraph a "forensic science".

Also, I would be proud to have a "hand blocked" document. At least you know someone had to take the time  to take the magic marker to the handbook.

I can't fathom the DoDPi calling polygraphy a "science-based forensic test".  But until our voices get heard, those who believe that will and those of us who know the truth must spread the word farther.

Fred F.  Wink
Posted by: beech trees
Posted on: Apr 25th, 2002 at 5:05pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Hi George,

It looks like they need a nice lawsuit. A good attorney would demand to see the standards of practice so that he might better prepare a civil suit against them.
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Apr 25th, 2002 at 3:11pm
  Mark & Quote
Can a science-based forensic test depend on its standardized techniques and procedures being kept a secret from the public?

The Department of Defense Polygraph Institute's (DoDPI's) parent agency, the Defense Security Service (DSS), seems to think so. DoDPI presents polygraphy (which it terms "psychophysiological detection of deception") as a forensic discipline. But in response to AntiPolygraph.org's Freedom of Information Act request for the federal polygraph examiner handbook, DSS has invoked exemptions to withhold those portions of the handbook that set forth the standardized techniques and procedures for conducting polygraph examinations. DSS explains, in part:

Quote:
The information contained in the PDD Examiner Handbook, which is not generally known to the public, is designed solely to instruct law enforcement and national security investigators and does not "regulate the public." The material identifies specific applications of techniques and procedures used in polygraph matters and disclosure could enable circumvention of polygraph test [sic] by others. Accordingly, DSS is not going to release any information that could possibly benefit those attempting to reduce the effectiveness of the polygraph or violate the law and avoid detection.


DSS's response, along with those portions of the handbook that DSS did release, may be downloaded as a 1 MB PDF file at:

http://antipolygraph.org/documents/federal-polygraph-handbook.pdf 

Is anyone aware of any science-based forensic test whose standardized techniques and procedures are similarly kept secret from the public?
 
  Top