George W. Maschke wrote on Oct 15
th, 2008 at 5:01pm:
Yes, slander. In the sense of "a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report."
Malicious.? I for one would have never known that you were busted by S A Trimarco and Mr. Youngblood if you hadn't decided to disclose it to the world. I don't really understand how you could support a claim that anyone who repeats information that you disclosed to the world is acting maliciously.
False?? Well, you just admitted that you couldn't prove that it was false. I just choose to believe an FBI Special Agent and a Police Employee before I believe you. Neither of these men to my knowledge have ever failed a Polygraph, been accused of cheating on a polygraph, or co-written a book and published a web site which encourages lying and cheating and attempts to instruct people on techniques to allow them to pass a polygraph while lying. Both of these men had long term careers working for agencies where their credibility was subject to constant attack. You barely got started before you were determined to be unsuitable by the people tasked with making those decisions.
Defamatory ?? Dr. Maschke the foundation for whatever fame or infamy you might enjoy stems from the opinions of S.A. Trimarco and Mr. Youngblood. You should write them a thank you note and praise anyone who furthers your legend by repeating their opinions. You disclosed this information for the purpose of adding credence to your claims of poor treatment and to increase your name association with your cause. You can't really call the information
you use to make yourself famous as defamatory. Well,
you could, but most people would think it was a silly contention.
The final element of a slander in the legal sense is damage. Perfecting a damage claim regarding something you disclosed about yourself and occurring on a bulletin board where you control access would be somewhat problematic.
You accused the FBI of somehow revealing the results of your Polygraph to Mr. Youngblood which led him and his supervisor to accuse you of countermeasures. Like I said, if you had been slandered, you should have pursued it there.
You have repeatedly called me a liar yet you have absolutely no supporting information from anyone that I have ever lied to you. All I did was refuse to answer your question about where you could find a research paper.
You repeatedly side step the truth of the statement that there have been no scientific studies published or otherwise that both state that the countermeasures you endorse are undetectable AND use your book TLBTLD as a cited source for the procedures or techniques for producing undetectable countermeasures. You return to a quote from your book that does not answer the question. You try to use careful semantics to try to pretend that you don't encourage people to lie to relevant issues on polygraph examinations even though you know that all the questions on the test are relevant to the testing process. Even the ones that are not labeled "Relevant Questions" are
by definition, relevant.
RELEVANT Main Entry: rel·e·vant
Pronunciation: \ˈre-lə-vənt\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Medieval Latin relevant-, relevans, from Latin, present participle of relevare to raise up — more at relieve
Date: 1560
1 a:
having significant and demonstrable bearing on the matter at hand b: affording evidence tending to prove or disprove the matter at issue or under discussion <relevant testimony> c: having social relevance
2: proportional , relative
relevant. (2008). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.
Retrieved October 15, 2008, from
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/relevant Sancho Panza