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 11 post(s).
Posted by: Twoblock
Posted on: Feb 14th, 2006 at 11:02pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
retcopper

On another thread, Dr. Drew Richardson (a well known polygrapher) issued you an opportunity to debate. Evidently you figure that you don't have the educational background to debate him because you haven't answered it yet. That was just another flippant remark from you, huh?
Posted by: retcopper
Posted on: Feb 14th, 2006 at 8:27pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
I come here to get amused at some of the writings in here. It is particularly funny  to see how much bad advice is being given to some of the people who have done something wrong and are trying  to beat the test.

Why debate polygraph with you?  Are you an examiner? Most of the people in here have their minds made up anyway. Try to debate you and others and you come back with flippant remarks.
Posted by: Johnn
Posted on: Feb 14th, 2006 at 7:40am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Sergeant1107 wrote on Feb 14th, 2006 at 3:09am:

Retcopper,

If there was a website full of people I did not agree with I couldn't imagine spending my time there just to post the intellectual equivalent of "Oh yeah?" and "How do you know?"


Unless they are trolls
Posted by: Sergeant1107
Posted on: Feb 14th, 2006 at 3:09am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
retcopper wrote on Feb 13th, 2006 at 6:06pm:
George:

Why do you think the three newpapers you mentioned are more likley to publish selected stories?

Retcopper,

Why are you here?  Why do you come to this message board at all?

You obviously disagree with George and everyone else who is against the use of the polygraph.  However, all you bring with you is apparently a willingness to throw out a random, brief, unsupported comment here and there which contributes nothing to the ongoing discussion.

If there was a website full of people I did not agree with I couldn't imagine spending my time there just to post the intellectual equivalent of "Oh yeah?" and "How do you know?"
Posted by: retcopper
Posted on: Feb 13th, 2006 at 6:06pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
George:

Why do you think the three newpapers you mentioned are more likley to publish selected stories?
Posted by: Smokey - Ex Member
Posted on: Nov 15th, 2005 at 5:07am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
I know I am several years late on this topic, but I am planning on writing to my local representsative concerning he use of ploygraphs.  I am currently in the hiring process with 3 differeny agencies.  Is there much likelyhood that info of me writing a letter like this could get to the wrong people?

-Smokey
Posted by: Mark S. Zaid, Esq.
Posted on: Mar 25th, 2001 at 8:57pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
For those who submitted letters to congressional representatives, please let me know what, if any, responses you received, and particularly whether a staff contact name was provided. If you have not received a response within 30 days of sending the initial letter, please call your Congressman/Senator. You might also send an updated letter to the relevant members of the House and Sentate Intelligence and Judiciary Committtees. As always, do not hesitate to contact me with questions at ZaidMS@aol.com
Posted by: Gino J. Scalabrini (Guest)
Posted on: Feb 27th, 2001 at 9:47am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Distrustful,

The reason that most of our efforts are geared toward law enforcement/military/intelligence positions is because these employees/applicants comprise the majority of people who can still be "tested" under current US law.  Nearly everyone else (employees of private firms, criminal suspects, etc) already has the right to refuse to be polygraphed and suffer no adverse consequences on the basis of this refusal alone.

Nonetheless, feel free to e-mail me any specific ideas you might have for such a letter (or better yet, a complete model letter).  We will be happy to consider it for posting on the site.
Posted by: Distrustful (Guest)
Posted on: Feb 27th, 2001 at 7:04am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
I was wondering if a form letter would be made available here for persons who are not interested in law enforcement/military.  But, that are concerned about the issue of polygraphs and to what extent they are being used.  Or maybe for persons in law enforcement  that have never had to take a polygraph.  These were groups of people that I thought would also be interested in our effort.
Posted by: George Maschke (Guest)
Posted on: Feb 23rd, 2001 at 1:39am
  Mark & Quote
Mark is absolutely right: now is a critical time for the future of U.S. polygraph policy. We must take advantage of this time when polygraphy is in the national spotlight to help expose it for the fraud that it is.

In addition to writing your elected officials, write letters to the editors of your local and national newspapers. Most reporting on polygraphy in the wake of the Hanssen spy case has uncritically accepted the premise that "polygraphs = security."

It would be especially helpful to write to the editors of major national papers like the Washington Post, the Washington Times, and the New York Times. Letters that comment on their stories are more likely to be published. See the AntiPolygraph.org news page for links to recent articles about polygraph policy. And be sure to include your name, address, and daytime phone number for confirmation purposes so that your letter can be published (even if you request that your name be withheld).

You can send letters to the editors of most newspapers by e-mail. The e-mail addresses for letters to the editors of the above-cited newspapers are:

  • The Washington Post: letters@washpost.com 
  • The Washington Times: letters@washtimes.com 
  • The New York Times: letters@nytimes.com 


Last modification: George Maschke - 02/22/01 at 17:39:12
Posted by: Mark S. Zaid, Esq. (Guest)
Posted on: Feb 22nd, 2001 at 7:47pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
I am sure all of you have been reading with interest the recent arrest of a veteran FBI agent who was caught spying for the Russians. This episode has re-ignited the controversy of polygraph examinations. Uninformed people, particularly on the Hill, are calling for an increase use because Hanssen was never polygraphed during his tenure. Obviously, we cannot allow this to happen. 

We need everyone to draft letters to your Congressional representatives (Congressman and 2 Senators) about this issue. If you are willing to do so, please contact me at ZaidMS@aol.com for talking points. 

This is very important! Thanks.
 
  Top