Quote:


An "American",
In your haste to tar George with the label "traitor", you apparently haven't noticed a couple of things.

First, as Beech Trees noted, any al Qaeda sympathizer would most likely read arabic and prefer/have easy access to the original arabic.  The Encyclopedia of Jihad is available (and has been for about 9 months) online for easy download in its entirety.

Second, of what possible assistance could this information be to terrorists?  If they read and prefer english, more information regarding the polygraph can be found at the local library.

Third, if you're looking for anti-American activities and traitors (even unintended), you might start with the polygraph and its proponents.  The use of the polygraph in screening continues to be a major hole in our security apparatus through which terrorists could easily slip and cause major damage.  This is known fact, which means those who continue to use the polygraph are knowingly aiding and comforting the enemy.

I don't buy it, "American".

Skeptic

Quote:


Retired Vet:

I missed the connection between military service and polygraphy.  I also missed the connection between polygraphy and patriotism.

Do you think that because someone served in the military, and may have done so honorably and to the great benefit of this nation, that somehow their post-military actions carry the aura of their military service, and are not to be questioned?

Your claim of many years of real world experience is hollow.  There are many in law enforcement, particularly in polygraphy, who spout this nonsense.  Of course it's universal--many elders say they are right because they have lived longer and experienced more.  But many have one year of experience twenty times, and living through and witnessing events does not mean that one has learned anything from them.  

Your trying to portray us as unpatriotic whiners is pathetic, and shows your unwillingness or inability to deal with the very serious problems with the polygraph.

You think your polygraph serves American interests just because you and your fellow practitioners say so? 

As long as we're talking about accountability, perhaps you can account for the national disasters of Aldrich Ames, Larry Wu Tai Chin, Ana Belen Montes, Karl Koecher, and the CIA's Cuban sources in the 1980's (long before this web site) who "passed"  polygraphs, but were traitors and double agents, respectively.

And since you are federal law enforcement (FBI is my guess) perhaps you'd like to account for the waste of time, money, and resources the FBI spent on a wild goose chase of me, because of reliance on the polygraph, while Robert Hanssen and Earl Pitts were committing espionage.  Hostile intelligence services must have been laughing their heads off.

Please don't tell us that you can account for these polygraph induced disasters by saying that the person who brought them up is a whiner.

Quote:


I fully support any and all efforts to eradicate the use of the polygraph in security screening, as it amounts to nothing more than a gaping security hole.

Make no mistake: I hold the security and safety of this nation as my highest priority.  And I would absolutely never do anything that I felt would endanger Americans or national security.

What you have to realize is the information in TLBTLD is easily available from a multitude of  sources.  If you truly imagine al Qaeda and others don't have easy access to that information already, you are part of the problem.  You are also blind: the translation of al Qaeda's information on the polygraph makes it abundantly clear the cat is out of the bag.

Ask yourself this question, if you would: why is it that the polygraph, throughout its long and illustrious history, has never caught a spy, and has specifically missed the most damaging spies our nation has seen?  The polygraph was in use long before George's book came along.

If security personnel would wake up to this problem tomorrow and eradicate the use of the polygraph, translation of TLBTLD would be a non-issue.  As it is, if that's what it takes to make people realize the polygraph, a lynchpin in our nation's security apparatus, is already compromised and worse than useless...

Skeptic

Changing the description from a "hasty" translation to a "rough" translation does not in any legal sense protect you from the act you have done.  Again,I am only assuming you provided it. Mr. Mallah, please advise your client. Do you now choose to answer the original question? Did you George Maschke provide on this web site the "hasty" translation; and now it must be added - did you George Maschke provide the "rough" translation which is the topic of this thread.

Cute BT.  Now you are in to altering posters names. I wonder if other posters know how things on this site can be manipulated?  George, BT is more of a problem to you than you might think.  I assure you and any other readers, my posted name is NOT "AnAmerican dufus". How incredibly childish!

Beech Trees, Skeptic,

"An American" has specifically accused Mr. Maschke of the capital crime of treason. See "An American's" first post here, where he wrote, "I  hope to God that you are brought to be held accountable for this that can only be viewed as treason."

The applicable law is 18 USC 2381. It provides:

"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and
comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five
years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

Anonymous,

If that in fact is An_American's assertion, he should be identified and sued into oblivion.

Quote:


You know, I'm not a lawyer, but I would love to hear the defense's argument.  I imagine it would go something like this:

"Your honor, my client is a patriotic American and an activist dedicated to exposing and fixing a documented critical flaw in our nation's security.  Unfortunately, this runs afoul of the economic interests of a number of people.  In an attempt to silence my client, the polygraph profession has tried many tactics, and is now resorting to the outrage of calling him a traitor.

"The prosecution would have you believe that Mr. Maschke is intentionally assisting our enemies with circumventing security procedures.  For this to be true, it would first be necessary that the polygraph could accurately be described as a "security procedure".  As recent findings by the National Academy of Sciences indicate, the polygraph is worse than useless for security screening; it is a detriment to security, one that has never caught a spy, one that has allowed our nation's worst espionage disasters to go on undetected.

"As for these charges, the prosecution's case boils down to claiming the translating of public-domain information from arabic to english constitutes treason.  We submit that this is prima facie absurd, and ask that these charges be dismissed with prejudice.  Further, in light of the fact that the prosecution is aware of the frivolous nature of the charges it has brought, we ask for recovery of all attorney's and legal fees."

I would pay to see the public flogging the prosecution would get on that one, not to mention the resulting damage to the polygraph profession.

Tell you what: I think it’s a lot more likely “An American” will be successfully sued for libel, should he continue with this crap.

Skeptic