Batman wrote on Jan 20^th, 2003 at 9:54pm:


I had no idea you were such a moral hardliner, Batman.  In my experience most people believe consensual affairs between adults, while certainly wrong, don't rise to the level of outright fraud.

BTW -- I'm glad you finally registered on the site.  You'd likely be a "very senior user" by now, if all your posts were counted

Now if we can just get "Anonymous" to register...

Skeptic

Anonymous,

I know this site is not really one for political debate, however it does, in a somewhat perverse way, center around discussions pertaining to truth and deceit; so I guess the topic of Bill Clinton does, in a way, fit right in.

I guess I can only ask that if a person is willing to accept the supposed good that occurred under Clinton's watch (economic growth, which in reality was a result of initiatives implemented years before) along with his utter contempt for the truth, then why would that same person be so against polygraph?  Even though it has its weaknesses, some good is derived from its use.  The "take the good with the bad" principle applies in both cases.   

Clinton lived his lies on a daily basis; they were and are in fact a matter of public record.  He betrayed the trust of the American Public, humiliated those closest to him, and displayed an utter disrespect for the very office he strove so hard to hold.

On the other hand, Ed Gelb's academic credentials are still open to debate.  I don't believe anyone has actually said, definitively, that his academic degrees are phony.

I guess, even if Mr. Gelb's degrees were phony, and if he has other failings, what does it matter, as long as it doesn't impact his job performance.  I suppose we can refer to this as "The Clinton Standard".  One can be a first class liar, cheat, and thief, but as long as the job gets done, well so be it.  Maybe it's OK to be these things, and still receive acceptance, if it's done on a more grand scale or larger stage.   

Let's kick the Ed Gelbs' around, but give a pass to the Bill Clintons'.   

Batman

Batman wrote on Jan 21^st, 2003 at 11:55pm:


It probably is a very good thing that this isn't a political discussion forum, Batman.  If you think I'm ruthless with polygraphers, you should see how I am with dittoheads and freepers

Regardless of what one thinks about Clinton (or Dubya, for that matter), for whatever real or imagined reason, the fact that someone worse than Gelb can be found is certainly beyond dispute.  It is also irrelevant to whether a man who has forged academic credentials should be touted as "beyond expert" in polygraph administration, or whether such a snake-oil salesman, as someone who was elected to serve as APA president, reflects poorly on the APA and the polygraph profession (or worse, is typical of both).

Skeptic

Doctor Ed Gelb is a self-made man of tremendous integrity that has worked hard all his life to gain top position in such an honorable profession.   Dr. Gelb is someone whose word is never doubted, if you know him personally.  He is a man we all look up to and admire for his expertise and his interrogation skills.  In a profession that searches for the truth, Dr. Gelb is an inspiration to us all.

Quote:


Sue,

It is to be hoped that Dr. Gelb will confirm your vote of confidence in him by substantively addressing the questions I've e-mailed to him.

That sounds like a ringing endorsement Sue.  Can you direct me to the grape koolaid?

FWIW,

The 'real' LaSalle University (based in Philadelphia) has no record whatsoever of an Edward Gelb attending, much less graduating from, either their Masters or PhD programs.