If anyone is interested, an excellent interview given by Larry Pratt (Executive Director of Gun Owners of America) of Tom Fitten concerning the government's continuing failure to combat terrorism may be heard here:

http://www.soundwaves2000.com/rammaker.asp?id=116&d=02-15-03

That link should open up Real Player... if not go to 

http://www.soundwaves2000.com/livefire/

and click the link for the 2.15.03 show. While the polygraph (as far as I can tell) does not come up in the interview, there are many tangential points discussed in the interview that have also been raised here.

Dave

Seeker,

Spank me, PLEASE spank me!!!  Batman loves pain, why else would I keep coming back to this site.

So my responses were simply a "venomous misinterpretation" of your recent posts?  Interesting, but how about putting up or shutting up.  You laid out some pretty heavy accusations.  It's easy to sit back now and say how I misinterpreted what you wrote, but my dear sweet lady, you wrote it.  Just what were you meaning when you wrote, 

"It is those agencies who have failed us with their support and belief of witchcraft.  I do not see 9/11 as being luck on the part of the terrorists, but rather a horrible show of how unreliable our intelligence agencies are.....The only thing that is pressing and of concern is how many American lives have we forfeited as a result of our continued support of such voodoo practices.....We as American citizens cannot rely on the FBI to do the required investigative work to chase down leads that come in to them.  They have opted to institute the polygraph as their charlatan.  We can expect nothing less than chance when this method is used." 

How about giving a clear interpretation of the above statements, that way I can correct my thinking.  Tell you what, rather than spanking me, why not just slap me upside the head with a few facts to support what you have written.   

Steinjc,

I apologize for being so subtle in my last post to you.  The last paragraph of that post was intended to be one of my better sarcastic replys.  I obviously missed the mark by a mile if you thought it was meant to imply that I gave a rat's ass about how you live your life.  I'll let Seeker give you a spanking for your "venomous misinterpretation" of my post.

Seeker, spank him with a 2x4, he likes the pain even more than I do!

Batman

Batman wrote on Feb 19^th, 2003 at 9:08pm:


Batman,

You wouldn't know sarcasm if it hit you over the head with a 2x4.  I sometimes wonder if I waste some of my best humor replying to your pathetic posts.   

And sometimes I wonder if I waste my intellect on your posts.

Basically, Batman, you are a waste.  You provide little to the intellectual discussion of the anti pre-employment polygraph debate.

If you would like to redeem yourself, find a polygrapher buddy who has at least half a brain, or skipped the lobotomy day at DoDPI, and get him to post on this site.  Then you can sit back and cheer like your little pet Torpedo does.

I miss the days of the intellectual debate on this site, provided by The_Breeze.  He knew his job, wasn't a moron, threw in the occasional personal dig, and NEVER needed a crew of lap dogs like you have.

And he knew sarcasm.

Chris

Quote:


Chris,
Your humor and intellect aren't wasted; Batman isn't the only one who reads what you post

As for the Breeze, yeah, I was probably a little too hard on him myself, considering what's left.  Of course, we used to have Dr. Barland, J.B. and others stop by for solid debate.  It seems that sort of opposition evaporated after the NAS' report.

Skeptic

Hey!  350 posts!  Isn't there a pin or something?

Chris,

You can't waste what you don't have.

How's your life going anyway, post-polygraph?  Really, I want to know, I care.   


Septic,

Do I want your "honest analysis"?  I love that qualifier.  It reminds me of some of the poor, innocent criminals who, when asked a question start with, "Honestly?"; or "Do you want an honest answer?"   

No Septic, lie to me!   

If you can be honest Septic, please give me your "honest analysis".


Do you guys really have to wonder why folks like Dr. Barland don't post on this site anymore?  Do you think "idiots" like me drove him away?  How about the possibility he either found your constant harping to be rather dull, boring, and not at all stimulating; or maybe he simply realized that there is no debating zealots.  The only thing you can do with zealots is either ignore them, or let the "idiots" deal with them. 

Well..........HERE'S BATMAN!!!

The fact that you goofballs keep responding to folks like myself and Torpedo does not speak well for your individual or combined intellects.  Maybe, just maybe your the anti-polygraph idiots.  George simply puts you out there on the front line to take all the shots.  The difference between you idiots and this idiot is that I know and understand my role in this little game; however you guys really think you're out there accomplishing something.  You are George's version of cannon fodder.   

Ain't that right George?  Maybe you can get these idiots out there on your poster campaign?

Batman   

Batman wrote on Feb 25^th, 2003 at 9:49pm:


Ladies and Gentlemen, I proudly present to you, SARCASM!!!

Well done, Batman, you finally got that sarcasm thing done right.  Now am I going to have to wait another 50 posts before you do it again?

I'd just like to throw out there for the group the hypocrisy of the caped cruasder.  I wrote this to him:
Quote:


to which he replied:

Quote:


So Batman, thank you for reassuring to me that you are nothing but "cannon fodder" for the pro-polygraph side.  You and Torpedo and your other lap dogs can sit behind your "fence" and poke the stick at us all you want.   

When you point it my way, though, you'd better get a bigger stick, because your current antics will no longer gain my attention.

Chris

Torpedo wrote on Feb 26^th, 2003 at 4:51am:


Yes, Torpedo, you moron, you tripped the right trigger.  Your inability to properly master the English language has sparked another GRAMMAR posting from me.

PLEASE NOTE:  These are my views and mine alone.  They do not represent anyone else on this site!!!!

Quote:


Although I know you would get a "rise" out of seeing me in a tight fitting outfit, I am certainly NOT interested in seeing your "torpedo."   

Though my views drift more toward center than other anti-polygraph types on this site, I assure you, I an not going to ask permission to join your "treehouse club" anytime soon.

Quote:


Thank you for the proof that you have no "reasonable knowledge."  What dogs and many other animals lack are "opposable thumbs," not opposing thumbs.  Opposing thumbs is best described in how you challenge your co-workers to a match of wits (others call it thumb wrestling). 

Quote:


Since English, a language you have no concept of, was derived from Latin, I probably shouldn't be beating you up for your improper use of a Latin phrase (and when I say Latin, I don't mean Mexico/Central America).   
Anyway, the phrase is:
quod erat demonstrandum, meaning, literally,  "which was to be proved"
I decided I would beat you up for butchering it, because our beautiful English language gave us the wonderful QED to use in its place, so that simple minded folk like you don't have to worry about the actual Latin words.  But, Torpedo, why should I expect you to take the easy way out, when you can attempt the hard way, and look stupid at the same time?

Chris