Quote:


Doug, I have seen your site and find it a reasonably set up commercial venture. As such, you are maximally motivated to keep current with the thinking and practice in the polygraph community. Thus, were I facing a polygraph I would buy and download your product to get a broader view than that presented here. A principal reason is to decide whether I would lie and use countermeasures or simply tell the truth about what I have learned about the deceptive practices of polygraphers and state "gentlemen, I am neither willing to deceive or be deceived"

Still, I very much respect George for putting the incredible effort into maintaining a classy, and accurate* site.  True "positives" tend to slink away. George didn't.

Also, Georges' site has the highest level of discourse I have found. I really wish I could find intelligent conversation on a pro-polygraph site. It clearly is difficult to maintain the fiction AND have a decent conversation about the true value of the polygraph in a public arena.

*accurate: As best as I can tell having read Kleiner (2002) and various interrogation books that also highlight the polygraph.

-Marty

Quote:


Do I?  In fact, I believe this is the first time I've mentioned Mr. Williams or his work -- which is fairly easy to verify by searching the message boards.

For the record, I have no problem with Doug Williams or his book, and have never said otherwise.  In fact, I'm glad his work is out there; it's one more nail in the coffin of polygraphy.

Unfortunately, we have no way of knowing whether the above person is truly "Doug Williams", since he posted anonymously as a "guest".  Anyone may post under the same name with impunity.

By contrast, my posts may always be identified by the fact that I am a registered user posting under the name, "Skeptic".

Regardless, I'm sure Doug Williams understands the desire for some anonymity when it comes to this topic, as he has indicated on his web site.

Skeptic

Quote:

 
Webster's 9th New Collegiate Dictionary defines "plagiarize" thus: "to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (a created production) without crediting the source ~ vi to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source."

Gino Scalabrini and I did not plagiarize Mr. Williams's manual, "How to Sting the Polygraph," which is one of many sources we relied on in researching The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. Our book is well-referenced throughout, and we cite Mr. Williams's manual where we have relied on it.

Skeptic:  You seem to have something to say about or to me on a fairly regular basis - but unlike you when I post anything on the board I use my own name.

As to what George and Gino have said about my technique in their book, it is pretty close - not plagarism, but close. However, it does not have many of the important points that are in my revised edition.

Doug Williams

Quote:


Doug, such bald advertising is ill-befitting

Seriously, those who have reviewed both documents have noted the methodology taught is essentially the same.  Readers can judge for themselves how comprehensive and well-researched is The Lie Behind the Lie Detector; it is available for free downloading here:

The Lie Behind the Lie Detector

Evidently, this book is good enough to be used by the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute in discussing countermeasures, as is Doug Williams' work.

Skeptic

Marty wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2002 at 1:21am:

 
Marty,
 
No, I have no such estimate. The great majority of people who visit AntiPolygraph.org do not post on the message board or e-mail us. What I have noticed is that the number of visits to AntiPolygraph.org roughly doubled between our first year on-line and the second, and that upward trend seems to be continuing.

Seeker wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2002 at 4:56am:


I'm with you, Seeker: it's time to ignore this low-functioning fool.  There's nothing in his posts that really requires refuting, anyway -- the average reader can see his small-minded bigotry for what it is.

He's had more than enough chances to contribute something meaningful.  Time to move on.

Skeptic

Once again biggotry abounds.  The overwhelming view of the USA held overseas had been one of great respect.  USA has been, and still is, considered by many countries to be fair, just, and equitable.   
A wrong is a wrong.  It does not see race, sex, national origin, religion, or any other factors.  Every human being has basic rights.  Those rights were the foundation of the great USA.   
Translate on in every language around the globe where this nonsense has a hold!
Than, is a duty to the human race.

George and Seeker believe it is important to publish this booklet in Arabic to help Al Queda.  Fortunately the countermeasure booklet by Doug Williams has not been translated for the terrorists yet, and those who use his method, WHICH IS DIFFERENT AND WORTH PAYING FOR, are not caught as frequently as the morons who download this booklet.  The people who wrote this thing are only bitter losers who failed the poly, and Doug is a former polygrapher.

polylawman-
Kussomak

Hi George. 
I read your post an translating your book. I can translate into Arabic for you and post it.
After I post it maybe we can email it to our terrorist friends in Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia.  Don't you think thats a good idea George. Or didn't you think about that. Or maybe you did think about it.

Quote:


When you copied George's post and slightly altered it you forget to proofread.  Thanks for the laugh.

George, do you have any estimate of the reasons visitors come to this site? I'm curious if you have seen a change in the ratio of pre-poly and post-poly visitors.  Of course there are also the poly people themselves. Some are active FUD spreaders. Then there are the terminally curious that get fascinated in the way such a thing is used and abused by society.

-Marty

Quote:


Through your gratuitous ad hominem attacks against Rat Patrol, you have merely succeeded in exposing you as a small-minded, malicious bigot. Your regrettable conduct here reflects poorly upon yourself and the polygraph community.

By the way, did you pass the poly, Skeptic?

Quote:


So basically, you know nothing of the polygraph or the subject matter we're discussing.  You're just here to play games and spew racist crap.

Are you telling us that we can't even get dumb polygraphers to visit us now?  We're reduced to incursions from the KKK?

I'm almost hurt.
Skeptic

I am not a polygrapher, and have no idea what one would do in that situation.  Seems in the testimony on this board, people have LIED and said they did not research polygraph.

Ratpatrol,

Another consideration is that anyone hoping to discover who's been researching polygraphy by monitoring websites would have to check the logs of the National Academy of Sciences, the Federation of American Scientists, and numerous others: a hopeless task.

But you raise an interesting question. Let's say you, the polygrapher ask a subject, "Have you researched polygraph?" and the subject, heeding your wise counsel posted here, thinks very carefully and replies, "Yes, I have. I've been to AntiPolygraph.org and have read The Lie Behind the Lie Detector as well as the NAS report. I understand that polygraphy is junk science, and I am well familiar with polygraph procedure and countermeasures."

How do you, the polygrapher, procede?

Quote:


A nice attempt at scaremongering, Ratpatrol. However, the routine monitoring of this website and identification of visitors by government would require a massive investment of investigative resources and taxpayer dollars, as well as multiple warrants from multiple jurisdictions. Bottom line: it ain't likely.

But any who are concerned about their visits to AntiPolygraph.org being monitored are welcome to access this site through an anonymous proxy. (Several are linked at the top of this page.)

Remember, as Seeker stated, you can be traced, and undoubtedly are being traced, so when your polygrapher asks you, "have you researched polygraph" think very carefully about your answer.  

Whatever you say in here is being monitored from all sides.  Concerned?  Stay away from antipolygraph.org.

http://stopcarnivore.org/

I continue to be amused by those who tread in here without concern for the basic knowledge that they CAN be traced back.  It takes only someone with some capabilities in IT to be able to do it.  Then again, we do not need to get into the discussion about mirror imaging, the wealth of information contained in source codes, or any of the other tell-tale signs that one leaves every single time they even visit a site online.

I am really hoping we get back to some intelligent discussions this weekend.  The antics of george, joker, the skeptic wannabes, and others, while we amuse ourselves by intellectually spanking them, really becomes a waste of time after a while.
Perhaps a web site vote?
We ignore the ignorant?
What do you all say??

Quote:


Don't forget "disgusted" and "akkkmed".

Skeptic

Let's have a website vote.

Who do you think "joker" is?

Little "george", Polyman2002, Polydonotlie, or "eastwood"

I know it is difficult since the thoughts they present all seem the same.

Thats a good idea just plead guilty and get it other with.

Thanks alot. What you said may just save me about $4000 for tester fees and the time my lawyer is there. I'm going tobring this up to my attorney asap. Thanks again!!!

Quote:


Good. If the polygraph is useless save as a coercive tool used by The State to elicit confessions, then the CVSA is that coercive tool's bastard stepchild. You were correct to fire your worthless defense attorney.

Quote:


These are a series of bad ideas. If the DA truly believes that enough credible evidence has been collected to charge and convict you, then you would be better off preparing your defense to create reasonable doubt and/or plea bargaining. If the DA is still weighing whether or not such evidence exists, a failed polygraph certainly won't help your case, and a passed polygraph won't necessarily convince the DA as he plays both sides of the polygraph argument to his benefit.

Not knowing the facts of the case, generally speaking asserting your rights and making The State prove its case is best. I think it would be foolish to presume a DA would believe the results of a polygraph over the assertions of his law enforcement investigators, people with whom he most likely has great trust and rapore.

The only possible way I could see a polygraph helping is if you get the DA to somehow stipulate that you won't be prosecuted of you pass a poly. If it were me I would then become expert at countermeasures and pass the sham of a test, Goodnight Irene.

My lawyer told me to take a cvs I did then results came back inconclusive. I have since fired that attorney and have a new one. We are planning on hiring a private party to give me a poly. So my attorney can show the da how his investigators messed up. The da told my attorney that if he can prove this then charges will be lessend or dropped. Is this a bad idea? Again this is a private poly tester. Pleasehelp..