I'm not worried about it, as quickly as December showed up, she left once it came time for her to back up her crap.

Typical behavioral measures, all flash and talk and no substance.

It doesn't matter, if December is who I think it is, I came upon some information that will explain why this person who insists she has no vested interest has a lot of interest in reality.Also spending a lot of time looking in collage stations and the corroding arias to confirm other information.

We all know what happens when I start diving, I have this ability to find very interesting things.  Next week I will be back in Conroe/Huntsville to pick up more info uncovered.

Stay tuned boys and girls.

Quote:


I have to be careful down here as approaches that are....... average.... in my old stomping ground, are not approaches that will work down here.  People down here don't listen to reason down here when utilizing such methods.  It just makes them dig in more like ticks.   

You are also assuming I am dealing with men who are brave enough to look me in the eye; one on one, and on the level.  Fact is, they wouldn't stand a chance sitting at a table with me and having a fair debate if they HAD to answer questions honestly.  Not a one of my, how did people on pp put it, "Texas Tormentors," would ever have the guts to do it.  Why? 

That answer is simple.  They rely on mob mentality and bullying to win a debate.  They also will not engage in an environment where the system is not rigged to their benefit.  Even when I say Rios and St. John in October of last year, they avoided certain direct questions like the black plague.  Well never mind listen to how Rios lies and avoids questions in this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddYN2jbH0Ds&index=6&list=PLfdmQbJ2BVYROwsBSdkO9e...

First he says he knows nothing about any of it

LIE

he was on the board of directors

Then he says he follows the bylaws to the letter

LIE

the bylaws were violated on multiple occasions by all involved including the Board of Directors, Executive Committee, and the Ethics Committee.

he said he would look into it 

LIE

he already knew everything

he said that the only person who is afraid of taking a polygraph is someone who will lie to it

THIS WAS THE TRUTH

Funny how TAPE's president says that, but not a one of them is willing to step up to the test under fair conditions.  Interestingly, I was willing to step up to my own test to exonerate myself from TAPE and TAPE's sycophant's accusations against me.  I guess if we go by Rios' mentality of only a liar would avoid a test, one can easily presume, that they are lying and I am telling the truth.  hmmmmmmm

They can act like they are above taking a polygraph.  Fact is they are afraid of failing their own tests and ending their career.   

They only way I can fight them, is to expose their lies and unethical behaviors.   

oh another lie he tells, is that only TAPE MEMBERS and invitees can attend CEU classes.

This also was a LIE 


MEETINGS

1.      The seminars of this Association shall be held semi-annually at a place selected at each semi-annual seminar.

2.      The place of the seminar shall be determined by a majority vote of all members present and voting.  If more than two places are nominated, the place receiving the smallest number of voted on the first ballot shall be dropped from consideration and the balloting continued until one place, of two remaining, has received a majority of all votes cast and the place of the next seminar be determined thereby.

3.      In order to attend a semi-annual or any meeting of the Association a member of any class membership shall be in good standing.

4.      Elected officials of other polygraph organizations may be invited to attend the business meeting of the Association at the discretion and invitation of the President.  Non-Examiners or other Polygraph Examiners may attend a seminar for all activities excluding the business meeting of the Association.

that is from their own bylaws.  So that day, the President of TAPE broke his own bylaws, ON VIDEO.  either that or he is incompetent and didn't know his own bylaws.  There really is no third option here.

Moreover, TAPE broke their bylaws with me and my wife Karen's membership applications.  The procedures were not followed according to the bylaws at all.  Even though both Rios and their lawyers assured me the bylaws would be followed.   

Fact is, these people wouldn't know what the truth was down here in Texas if it pitched a tent in their asses.  Nothing any of them say can be trusted, and if I were a lawyer out there, I would demand every chart of theirs and question their very decision or action.  With as many times as Mr. Rios has been taught lying in his official capacity as an organization president, who is to say he doesn't lie in his official capacity as a New Branfules police detective?  It's a fair question.

Same with the rest of the liars I have exposed over the past year.  If they will lie and cover this crap up, who is to say they won't lie about test results, or confessions, or scores?   

If they will cover up racist, sexist and terroristic threats made by their members and leadership, who is to say they don't practice racism, and sexism still.  Funny how Andy Sheppard said TAPE would apologize if they knew all that crap cam from their organization; 7 years later and I am still awaiting that apology.  Funny how I didn't get it from Rios the two times I saw him last year.  He knew, come on; and all I wanted was simple words.

Lastly, with two instances of having my safety and well being threatened by Officers of TAPE, who is to say TAPE will not use violence or threat of violence again to silence me?   

Just saying, and it is well known that I have had my safety threatened by two TAPE Officers.  One threatened me in 2008, and Maria Hubbard did so in public earlier this year in an unprovoked incident.  In the legal world, I believe this would be called a pattern of behavior.

Anyway, you get the idea.  Though these people should be questioned, they never have been until I showed up and was provoked into taking action.  So they only thing they have left is threats of violence, or punishing me through a rigged system where the right thing takes a back seat to the politically expedient and lies are more revered than the truth.   

While I still strongly believe in polygraph and the good I try to do everyday in it's use, I have little faith in our system

Joe McCarthy wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2015 at 2:57pm:


Joe, when I read those words of yours it reminded me of the American Polygraph Association Board of Directors' decision to move the goalposts with regard to my quest for the office of president-elect.

For the past fifty (50) years, a full member of the APA could run for the office of president-elect without having previously served as a director.

But now, after seeing my support spike from 15% of the vote in the 2014 election to 28% of the vote this year -- and perhaps fearing that my support would continue to grow in similarly large measure -- the APA Board of Directors has crafted a rule requiring that candidates for president-elect first serve as a director.

That rule is embedded into a much larger package of new bylaws and constitutional changes for the APA, which will be up for a vote at the general membership meeting on September 1st. Passage is all but assured.

I wonder what part of my three-point election platform the APA establishment fears most?

Could it be my bill of rights concept for polygraph test subjects? (Clearly, bringing informed consent to a much higher levels kills business.)

Maybe it's my idea a countermeasure challenge series that pits randomly chosen polygraph operators against a crew of CM-schooled ringers. (I predict polygraph accuracy would be shown to hover around 50% in that scenario.) 

Of course, it could be my call for total equality among APA members.  (Seems fair to me -- and many of my peers, evidently.)

In any case, the APA's decision to move the goalposts, election-wise, is a most telling development.

It appears that vocal critical thinkers, iconoclasts, and non-believers must be kept at bay.

But for an organization that claims to be dedicated to truth, the question is obvious: Why?

Ya know dan, lieguytoo and I were talking yesterday on the phone.  Every time him and I talk reminds me that we all can get along as long as we are honest with each other and ourselves.  

I also find it amusing that people like december say I can't let stuff go, but fail to mention that I talk to lieguytoo all the time.  

I feel I should also make it clear to everyone, I hold no ill will against lieguytoo, and haven't for some time.  I do hold ill will against the people he worked for and represented who share responsibility for his actions.  After all, he was a managing employee at behavioral measures and a Board Member of TAPE. 

Funny how they accuse him of all sorts of unethical acts, when I see a history that he was the ONLY person in that whole group that acted with honor and maned up.  Lieguytoo was the only one of that whole group to do the right thing.  He made it right.

Says a lot about BM and TAPE doesn't it?  BW measures and TAPE still deny that lie guy too was even attached to them.  They also deny that what he did was wrong and fail to condemn the actions and apologize on behalf of their organizations.  

The only man amongst them turned out being lieguytoo.  Shame on them

As December goes, it is clear she ran for cover after I started asking real questions.  Clearly when it comes to actually debating, they find themselves lacking in facts, answers, and substance.

My advice for December is this.  Before you start attacking me again like a coward

1, use your name, otherwise you lack credibility.  Nothing new there in regard to lack of credibility huh?

2, don't throw stone at a man that has a machine gun (figuratively speaking of course)

3, you don't need to change the questions when you have all the answers