quickfix wrote on Jul 23^rd, 2015 at 7:38pm:


Lots of Ad Hominem attacks to my post, but no real comprehension or substantive refuting of anything I said.  Whether you enjoy "ruining" a person's career or not is irrelevant.  I might be mistaken, but haven't you joked about ruining people in the past on this forum Quickfix ?   I had the impression you enjoyed it.  Whether you enjoy it or not, I'm glad you tacitly admitted you are, in fact, ruining people.  Thank you.  I rest my case.   

Pailryder, regarding your Ad Hominem response,  I'm glad you think Orwellian torture is funny.   Do you think that someone losing their livelihood and having a nervous breakdown due to the polygraph is not Orwellian torture ?  Do you know what the term Orwellian torture means ?   I'll tell you where I came up with the Dachau statement.  It just popped into my head when you said polygraph examiners were "good" people.  I recall reading a speech that Heinrich Himmler once gave when he said, and I paraphrase after translation , something to the effect of, "it is impressive that we can do such terrible things and still remain such good people."   

I don't need to join my friend on the delivery truck and my 8 times on the polygraph over a 20 year period (obviously I must have passed) are behind me.  I have several friends, however, who are going through hell and I feel for them.  My motivation for continuing an interest in this topic involves following my oath of office and duty to my country.  I am also proud of my service and my agency and believe that the current polygraph abuse is a stain on the honor of our sacred law enforcement and military institutions.  I don't blame polygraph examiners as much as I blame our poor leadership for allowing the polygraph to be a panacea of truth.  I know a Vietnam Silver Star recipient who became a polygraph examiner and then quit when he realized that he was hurting innocent people.  He had honor.  He would have continued as a polygraph examiner if he was allowed to just use it as a tool.   

Lastly, to those of you in the polygraph community who are laughing at me, as Quickfix suggests, I would be happy to share notes about the difference between a complicated month/year long investigation conducted in accordance with due process and culminating in a trial versus a several hour interview followed by an "interpretation" of a biological reading with final innocence or guilt determined by a kangaroo court staffed by members of the same "private club".

Did December go and run away?  Wow, they are resorting to the ole hit and run tactic.  A tactic embraced by frauds, shysters, drunks, and carnies.

Typical of Holden and his crew, send in the clowns and then run when the going gets tough.  It's their go to.

It's one thing to claim to be a good person, it's another thing to BE a good person.   

Joe McCarthy wrote on Jul 24^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Joe -

         Let's lighten it up a bit.  Do you prefer Smithwicks or Guiness ?

Joe, why don't you just get this gal that is giving you hard time and give her some of that old Irish charm? Get her into the polygraph suite, turn on the activity sensors and do her to a tender turn..

Dan Mangan wrote on Jul 25^th, 2015 at 1:44am:



Personally, I think it is both possibilities.

Joe McCarthy wrote on Jul 24^th, 2015 at 7:11pm:


Joe -  I understand completely.  But back to the question -  Smithwicks or Guinness.  I'd like an Irishman's opinion.

Joe McCarthy wrote on Jul 25^th, 2015 at 9:20pm:


Thank you -  Sounds good to me.  I normally like single malt, but a good 18-year old blend distilled in cork sounds good.  I've already got the Guinness, next time I'm at the liquor store I'll get the Jameson.   

                 Shláinte