Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge (Read 221038 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Drew Richardson
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 427
Joined: Sep 7th, 2001
Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Jan 28th, 2002 at 7:46pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Some time ago (11/27/01) as part of a post largely dealing with DoDPI-sanctioned criteria for determining the presence of respiratory-channel response(s), I reiterated a challenge to the polygraph community that I had first made in a public presentation (10/17/01) to the National Academy of Sciences panel investigating the validity of polygraph screening.  That challenge (which has not yet been accepted or even really responded to) was made as follows:

Quote:
I would suggest using  the roughly 15 members of the distinguished NAS panel looking at polygraph issues as an examinee pool, teach 2-3 to produce countermeasures, and then have the whole group participate in a simulated crime (one used by DoDPI or others).  A base rate (unknown to participating examiners) will be applied in the programming of guilty and innocent subjects.  Exams will be conducted, DI/NDI/Inc results recorded, as well as any determinations of the location and nature ( I will teach things other than the respiratory manipulations referred to for purposes of this particular posting/response) of any countermeasures suspected by examiners.  Although such an exercise would have clearly insufficient numbers and statistical power, I believe the anecdotal evidence of accuracy with and without countermeasures as well as the correct and wrongful (yet another source of false positives for the polygraph community) determinations of countermeasures would be quite revealing to those with an interest in this exercise.  I would suggest that the polygraph examiners participating come from the ranks of federal polygraph instructors or operators, leading civilian polygraphers or any other group whose credentials and experience would be deemed impeccable in polygraph circles. And finally, I would suggest that elements of the experimental design, simulated crimes, conduct of the examinations, results determinations, and post-test interviews of both examiners and examinees be recorded  by a major investigative television production that would be selected to cover this important and hopefully interesting subject.  


Although I am happy for this basic format to be modified to a design having sufficient power to reasonably allow for reaching levels of statistical significance for any results obtained, I believe it is very important that this process and outcome(s) be publicly available and, if possible, covered by any interested media outlet.  I believe this is an appropriate time to renew this challenge for the following reasons: (1) It has languished far too long without a meaningful reply, (2) As we begin a new year, it will be interesting to see how far in the year we progress with those who promote CQT polygraph testing continuing to cower from the truth about its weaknesses, and (3) the current thread dealing with the validity of polygraph screening should be viewed in the light of realizing that any (I believe substantial) lack of validity of CQT polygraph testing in the absence of countermeasures is only greatly exacerbated with the application of properly applied countermeasures.
« Last Edit: Jan 28th, 2002 at 10:06pm by Drew Richardson »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5723
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #1 - Jan 28th, 2002 at 10:38pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Drew,

Thank you for putting this challenge directly to the polygraph community. The first person who should accept your challenge is American Polygraph Association president Milton O. "Skip" Webb, Jr. Mr. Webb told Eric Zorn of the Chicago Tribune that purchasers of Doug Williams' manual, "How to Sting the Polygraph" have the same slim chance as anyone else of beating a polygraph "test." Clearly, Mr. Webb doesn't believe such countermeasures work. Now he has the chance to prove it. What do you say, Mr. Webb?

Or perhaps our friend and sometime interlocutor Gordon Barland will accept your challenge. Dr. Barland has attempted to scare visitors to AntiPolygraph.org into believing that the federal polygraph community has a reliable technique for identifying polygraph countermeasures that is more sophisticated than merely trying to bluff the subject into an admission. But when hard questions were put to him, he fell silent. What do you say, Gordon? Are you confident in your ability to detect countermeasures? Will you accept Drew's challenge?

David M. Renzelman, chief of the Department of Energy's polygraph program, told the National Academy of Sciences at its public meeting on 17 October 2001 that his polygraphers went through the countermeasures course at the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute, and that afterwards, when they practiced against each other, they had a 100% accuracy rate in detecting countermeasures attempts. But Mr. Renzelman curiously did not accept the challenge that Dr. Richardson put to him. What do you say, Mr. Renzelman? What are you afraid of?

Another luminary of the polygraph community who ought to take Drew's challenge is Mr. Harry Reed, president of the Illinois Polygraph Society, who last year claimed to reporter Brad Burke of the Peoria Journal Star that polygraph professionals can easily detect attempts to foil a polygraph "test." Mr. Reed did not respond when I challenged him to support his claim. Well, Mr. Reed, here's your opportunity to prove that you were not simply lying to a reporter who could not easily verify or refute the accuracy of your claim. You'll accept Dr. Richardson's challenge, won't you?

Drew, your challenge has indeed languished too long without a meaningful reply. The silence of those who profess to be "dedicated to truth" (American Polygraph Association motto) condemns them.
« Last Edit: Oct 23rd, 2004 at 9:21pm by George W. Maschke »  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: maschke@antipolygraph.org
Wire: @georgemaschke
Threema: S7TK4RXR
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Postal mail: Van Trigtstraat 53, 2597 VX The Hague, The Netherlands
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Mark Mallah
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 131
Joined: Mar 16th, 2001
Gender: Male
Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #2 - Jan 28th, 2002 at 11:04pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Drew/George,

Great idea Drew.  To take it out of its languor, have you (or George) forwarded it to any media people, and/or the people you mention in your post, George?

Maybe Shawn Efran of CBS News would be interested in this as a follow up to his "Final Exam" piece.  Maybe that Chicago reporter who was going to moderate that debate should know about this.  Of course the NAS people should know about it too.  Maybe Diane Sawyer, as a folllow up to her 60 Minutes piece from the 1980's.  Jeff Stein from Salon.com?  Kathleen Koch from CNN?  The FAS people?  John Stossel?  Perhaps Honts or some other academic would want to run a parallel study incorporating the same principles.

The basic idea is to get not only this web site, but a media outlet to challenge the polygraph people, so their refusal would be reported, with its obvious implications.

Let me know if you want to explore this further, or need any assistance.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5723
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #3 - Jan 28th, 2002 at 11:35pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Mark,

I agree that Drew's idea is a great one. And indeed, it is one of which the news media ought to take note when reporting on polygraph issues. I will pass word of it to Mssrs. Efran, Stein, Zorn, and Burke, as well as the FAS. I'm not sure how to get in touch with Diane Sawyer (who has gone from CBS to ABC), John Stossel, or Kathleen Koch. Could you e-mail me if you have contact information?

It's interesting that you suggested the idea of Charles Honts running a parallel study. When he spoke at the National Academy of Sciences polygraph meeting at Woods Hole, Massachusetts in July, he mentioned that he had secured funding for a polygraph countermeasures study using The Lie Behind the Lie Detector as the source of countermeasures information. I don't know anything more, though, about the protocol for his study or its status.

Indeed, if the polygraph community lacks the courage to accept Drew's challenge (as seems to be the case), this needs to be reported widely, and the polygraph "professionals" need to be held accountable.
  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: maschke@antipolygraph.org
Wire: @georgemaschke
Threema: S7TK4RXR
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Postal mail: Van Trigtstraat 53, 2597 VX The Hague, The Netherlands
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Twoblock (Guest)
Guest


Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #4 - Jan 29th, 2002 at 6:13am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Mark and George

I bugged all three major network news magazines but, only 60 minutes 11 took me up on the challenge. Scott Pelley was an investigative reporter for a Dallas TV station before he went network. NBC and ABC would not touch the subject. I told John Stossel that he would be a natural to moderate the debate. Evidently I didn't faze him.

I really pushed for a cross-the-table debate between you two, Geno and Dr. Richardson and the polygraph community. I suggested they study the antipolygraph website before engaging the debate. They should be familiar with the website by now.

I was disappointed that Scott Pelly didn't have discussions about the invalidity of the polygraph.

I guess it's time to start a new round of letters and emails to the TV magazines. It's way past time for the scam artist to be forced to find another  scam in which to be involved.

Keep us informed if the planted seed starts to sprout.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5723
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #5 - Feb 1st, 2002 at 10:41am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
As Drew mentioned, he first made this countermeasures challenge at a public meeting of the National Academy of Sciences' Study to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph on 17 October 2001. A transcript of Dr. Richardson's remarks is now available on AntiPolygraph.org. Here is the relevant excerpt:

Quote:
[font=Palatino,Times]Polygraph Countermeasures Challenge

...I indicated something about willingness -- I'm happy to -- if the polygraph people here want to take exception with anything that I've said [unclear] I'm more than happy to address that. But what I would suggest to you all, if anybody wants to do this is -- I know we have 13, 14, 15 people here -- what I'd be willing to do is [unclear] in the absence of polygraph people at some point -- is to take two or three of you to show you countermeasures, to demonstrate them to you, to let you demonstrate to yourselves that you can do it, and then we will actually have you all -- all of you -- participate in a simulated crime [unclear]. I know you've all taken stim tests [unclear] what you saw was absolutely meaningless. It has absolutely nothing to do with a polygraph exam, and I'll tell you why. But what I think -- it would be very useful for you to see a simulated crime using the control question test because that's basically what you're being asked to evaluate in terms of polygraph screening. So what I would suggest that we do is I teach two or three of you to do polygraph countermeasures, to do a simulated crime, a standard one that -- perhaps one done at DoDPI. And then the professional polygraph examiners, whether it be DoDPI instructors, the federal agency polygraph examiners, [whether] it be well-known civilian examiners -- anybody -- we go down there, and we see -- we do a polygraph exam. Some of you are going to be programmed guilty. Some of you will be programmed innocent. The issue will be, can they determine where the countermeasures are? Which of you used countermeasures and where did you do it?

What I predict will happen is that they will fail absolutely miserably, and that they will falsely accuse some of you of using polygraph countermeasures. I can almost guarantee it. But the proof is in the pudding.
[/font]


None of the senior federal polygraphers in the room accepted Dr. Richardson's challenge.
  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: maschke@antipolygraph.org
Wire: @georgemaschke
Threema: S7TK4RXR
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Postal mail: Van Trigtstraat 53, 2597 VX The Hague, The Netherlands
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box dominique ngoo
Guest


Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #6 - Feb 10th, 2002 at 12:13pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
it's cost nothing to claim that it's easy to beat the polygraph when you are not the person sitting in the chair.  Countless  suspects have been caught over the years.  Teaching countermeasures is similar as teaching criminals to cover their tracks or destroy evidence.   People should just stop doing it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5723
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #7 - Feb 10th, 2002 at 12:56pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Dear Mr. Ngoo,

I believe you are an Assistant Superintendent of the Singapore Police Force. Do you mean to say that it is not easy to beat a polygraph "test?" If so, perhaps you or someone else on the Singapore Police Force would care to accept Dr. Richardson's challenge?

Certainly, the polygraph has been useful over the years as an aid to interrogation, and has helped to convince guilty (and gullible) suspects to confess their crimes. But the polygraph technique has no scientific basis, and peer-reviewed research indicates that it is vulnerable to countermeasures that polygraphers cannot detect.

In the United States, large numbers of truthful persons (especially those applying for public jobs in law enforcement, emergency services, and intelligence) are wrongly accused of deception every year, and it is to help such persons protect themselves against the danger of a false positive outcome that AntiPolygraph.org makes information about polygraphy, including polygraph countermeasures, freely available. (See The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.)

An unintended but unavoidable consequence is that the same information is also available to liars seeking to beat the polygraph. Law enforcement agencies like yours that rely on the polygraph need to understand that CQT polygraphy has no scientific basis, has zero diagnostic value, and is easily defeated through the use of simple countermeasures, information about which is readily available via the Internet.

« Last Edit: Feb 10th, 2002 at 3:50pm by George W. Maschke »  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: maschke@antipolygraph.org
Wire: @georgemaschke
Threema: S7TK4RXR
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Postal mail: Van Trigtstraat 53, 2597 VX The Hague, The Netherlands
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box beech trees
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 593
Joined: Jun 22nd, 2001
Gender: Male
Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #8 - Feb 10th, 2002 at 3:23pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Quote:
it's cost nothing to claim that it's easy to beat the polygraph when you are not the person sitting in the chair.  Countless  suspects have been caught over the years.  Teaching countermeasures is similar as teaching criminals to cover their tracks or destroy evidence.   People should just stop doing it.


I guess I don't understand. On the one hand you assert that the polygraph is a devastating interrogation tool, but on the other you write that teaching countermeasures results in a ruined polygraph test, with criminals 'covering their tracks'.

Which is it?
  

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government." ~ Thomas Paine
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Dominique Ngoo
Guest


Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #9 - Apr 17th, 2002 at 4:36pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Beech Trees,
apologies for not replying you earlier cos I don't visit this site
too often. I thought there should'nt be any confusion since my posting was in simple English.  Nevertheless, let me simplify it further.   I did not say that the polygraph is a devastating interrogation tool.  Neither did I say that countermeasure results in a ruined polygraph test.  My posting is still up there.  It is downright dishonest of you to try put words into my mouth and then accuse me of saying something you don't understand.  Although we are in cyberspace, I hope you show the world that your society still have some self respect.   The problem is not with what I posted.  Itz with the way you interpret it.   Itz probably so bizarre that you confused even yourself.   

p/s - George, if your intention is to help the truthful and innocent, God Bless America.  At least someone out there is concerned about the rights of the innocent.  It seems to me so far that criminals in your country have more rights than law abiding citizens.  However, the way your site teaches countermeasure WILL NOT protect anyone against the danger of a false positive.  On the contrary, it may even put them into a load of trouble.  Countermeasure techniques such as distorting breathing at CQ are so primitive and easy to detect.  Stop challenging people to accept Richardson's challenge.  Nobody out there is answerable to Richardson.  Not Mr Webb. Certainly not Dr Barland, Mr David M Renzelman, Mr Harry Reed or anyone else.      
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box AMM
User
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Aug 24th, 2001
Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #10 - Apr 17th, 2002 at 10:14pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  

Quote:
However, the way your site teaches countermeasure WILL NOT protect anyone against the danger of a false positive.  On the contrary, it may even put them into a load of trouble.  Countermeasure techniques such as distorting breathing at CQ are so primitive and easy to detect.  Stop challenging people to accept Richardson's challenge.  Nobody out there is answerable to Richardson.  Not Mr Webb. Certainly not Dr Barland, Mr David M Renzelman, Mr Harry Reed or anyone else.        


First, if you are indeed from Singapore (aka the City of Fine), I'd like to say that you have a beautiful country-I've traveled through many times and done quite a bit of touring there: Sentosa Island, over to Johor Bharu, etc.

With that said, I respectfully disagree with your position that the countermeasures taught here will not protect someone from a false positive.  I am living proof that when employed correctly, they will.  I endured two LAPD polygraphs: one resulted in a false positive and an investigation that revealed nothing, the other I passed with flying colors by employing countermeasures.

I utilized the very techniques that you described as primitive and easy to detect to ensure the correct outcome was reached (non-deception indicated).  My examiner never accused me of using countermeasures, and according to him, he's very experienced. (LAPD Detective/Polygrapher for many years and now works for the LASD as a polygrapher.)  How is it that I could fool him so easily?

While you are correct that no one is answerable to Dr. Richardson, it certainly would be nice to see one of the polygraph advocates you listed accept his challenge.  They are the ones who have stated that countermeasures are easy to detect.  Dr. Richardson is merely asking them to back up their claims.  If countermeasures are in fact easy to dectect, I can't imagine why they wouldn't jump at the chance to disprove his claim.  It begs the question: "What are they afraid of?"
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Dominique Ngoo
Guest


Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #11 - Apr 18th, 2002 at 3:44am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
AMM,

I really have no idea how and why you failed the 1st test and passed the 2nd one.  Problem with this type of discussion is that people hide their identity resulting in what they said being unverifiable.   If I were you and a polygrapher gave me a false positive, I'll sue his pants off.  I urge you to do just that if what you said is true.  Sites like this one is not ideal for you to view your "grievance" cos lots of folks don't visit this kind of site.  I'll also name him instead of just saying he's a LAPD detective/polygrapher and now works for LASD.  How are we to know who you are talking about?  Without naming him, you also did not give him a chance to respond and whatever story you tell is one-sided.      
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5723
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #12 - Apr 18th, 2002 at 7:45am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Dominique,

You wrote:

Quote:
p/s - George, if your intention is to help the truthful and innocent, God Bless America.  At least someone out there is concerned about the rights of the innocent.  It seems to me so far that criminals in your country have more rights than law abiding citizens.  However, the way your site teaches countermeasure WILL NOT protect anyone against the danger of a false positive.  On the contrary, it may even put them into a load of trouble.  Countermeasure techniques such as distorting breathing at CQ are so primitive and easy to detect.  Stop challenging people to accept Richardson's challenge.  Nobody out there is answerable to Richardson.  Not Mr Webb. Certainly not Dr Barland, Mr David M Renzelman, Mr Harry Reed or anyone else.


You claim that countermeasure techniques such as distorting breathing are "primitive and easy to detect." However, the breathing manipulations explained in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector are based directly on U.S. Department of Defense Polygraph Institute (DoDPI) doctrine. DoDPI recognizes 12 scorable breathing reactions, which we've described in the 2nd edition, along with illustrations.

How can a polygrapher determine whether a reaction on the pneumo channels of the polygraph instrument was voluntary or involuntary? Could you direct me and other skeptical readers to any published articles or books that support your claim that such countermeasures are easy to detect?

With regard to your demand that I stop challenging people to accept Dr. Richardson's challenge, I'll stop when the polygraph community proves its claimed ability to detect the kinds of countermeasures described in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.

While it is true that neither Mr. Webb, Dr. Barland, Mr. Renzelman, Mr. Reed, nor anyone else is answerable to Dr. Richardson (or to me), they have all publicly suggested, claimed, and/or implied that polygraph countermeasures don't work and/or that the polygraph community has developed better-than-chance techniques for their detection. So long as those in the polygraph community make such claims, AntiPolygraph.org will continue to publicly challenge them to support them.

Until the polygraph community proves its claimed ability to detect countermeasures, Dr. Richardson's unanswered challenge will remain a daily embarrassment to those who profess to be "dedicated to truth" (American Polygraph Association motto) whilst peddling a fraud, and the number of days this challenge has gone without takers will be prominently displayed on the AntiPolygraph.org home page.

« Last Edit: Apr 18th, 2002 at 8:48am by George W. Maschke »  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: maschke@antipolygraph.org
Wire: @georgemaschke
Threema: S7TK4RXR
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Postal mail: Van Trigtstraat 53, 2597 VX The Hague, The Netherlands
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Dominique Ngoo
Guest


Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #13 - Apr 18th, 2002 at 10:27am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
George, I've no idea what's the DoDPI doctrine is about.  From the way things are happening over your side, it seems your community is quite messy.  Although AMM wrote sarcastically that my country is a Fine country, I'm glad it is not like yours.  With regard to the CM challenge, I think most propoly folks won't take it up because being in Goverment service, they can't do that and not because they cannot substantiate their claim.  If you (or Mr Drew) take that as a "victory" then what I can say is I sympathize with your lot.   For those innocent persons out there, my advice is to co-operate, follow instructions so that the examiner can prove your innocence.  Always remember, lots of folks wrongly accused of some crime were proven innocent and the plaintiffs who lied against them were taken to task.  If indeed anyone was framed (like some folks claimed), they should name that person who framed them and then sue him till his pants drop.            
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box beech trees
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 593
Joined: Jun 22nd, 2001
Gender: Male
Re: Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge
Reply #14 - Apr 18th, 2002 at 4:29pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Quote:
George, I've no idea what's the DoDPI doctrine is about.


This after you previously posted:

Quote:
Countermeasure techniques such as distorting breathing at CQ are so primitive and easy to detect.


It takes a brave man to admit he knows absolutely nothing about the topic on which he is commenting.


Quote:
From the way things are happening over your side, it seems your community is quite messy.


Yes, we don't cane our citizens for drawing on walls.

Quote:
With regard to the CM challenge, I think most propoly folks won't take it up because being in Goverment service, they can't do that and not because they cannot substantiate their claim.


An interesting theory. On what evidence to you base such a statement? Presuming for a moment your assertion is true, it would appear our Federal government is prohibiting an acceptance to the challenge because they know the sham would be exposed.

Quote:
If you (or Mr Drew) take that as a "victory" then what I can say is I sympathize with your lot.   For those innocent persons out there, my advice is to co-operate, follow instructions so that the examiner can prove your innocence.


Mr. Ngoo, I am aware you are not a citizen of the United States and thus might not be too conversant with our system of laws. In our country, a citizen is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

That means that the person sitting in the polygraph chair is innocent already, there is no NEED to submit to a polygraph interrogation.

My advice is to hold fast, assert your inalienable rights, educate yourself, and fight back whenever possible.

Quote:
Always remember, lots of folks wrongly accused of some crime were proven innocent and the plaintiffs who lied against them were taken to task.  If indeed anyone was framed (like some folks claimed), they should name that person who framed them and then sue him till his pants drop.


Unfortunately not all citizens here can afford to hire a civil attorney, especially when faced with the monolithic federal government as the defendant.
  

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government." ~ Thomas Paine
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo
Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge

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
                       
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 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