- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by sackett
- Mar 22, 2008, 12:41 AMQuote from: George_Maschke on Mar 21, 2008, 02:34 AMI think we should let TLG keep posting so we can examine the true, unmasked workings of the "polygrapher mind". Quite similar to that of an inquisitor of the "Middle Ages".
Did alchemists fret as much when debunked? Were their ravings as venomous and incoherent?
Mr Cullen,
comparing alchemist to polygraph examiners? How many were later identified as brilliant for their times and the father of their particular studies?
I'll take your comparison as a compliment, especially since alchemy was the earliest form of chemistry, metallurgy, physics, medicine, astrology, semiotics, mysticism, spiritualism (as quoted from Wikkipedia). Most, of course are sciences which I am sure you would find fault in under examination by your "trained and accomplished" eye...
Sackett
Posted by the_wolf
- Mar 21, 2008, 09:34 PMQuote from: the_wolf on Mar 21, 2008, 06:24 PM T.M.
It would seem you were unable to deal with MY posting altogether, other than recycling something altogether unrelated. I think this goes to my previous point about the same old Mantras being said over and over with no piercing effect.
Please answer this for me if you can. Math is the only perfect science. Polygraph (as well as other charts) are converted to mathamatics in rendering a decision. There are almost endless case examples in specific issue testing of confirmed charts PRIOR to other evidence validating them. Well trained Examiners with the most modern computer equipment, inclusive of motion sensors, have usually a low end 2% to high end 5% or less Inconclusive rate. In the remaining 95 to 98% of the time they are able to arrive at a clear point of rendering a clear finding, and one which is usually consistent in those charts. How do you account for the Examiner's hand score (subjective), as backed by the computer algorithm products (objective) arriving at the same conclusion in such high numbers. Neither the computer or the examiner place anything on the chart, and it ALL comes from the subject.
Please don't respond with your opinion about how you don't like it, as I have a child at the single digit age range who can do that about his food. Rather, You as an articulate adult please use logic to account for the above variables. Not a mantra, or blanket statements, but specifically --------- how are they able to do this ?
Huh?!!!! Are you responding to TM here or me? If you are asking me, you should answer my questions first.
You should answer anyway. Or are you to busy looking in whatever reading material you have gathered from some class you took from some crackpot with a fake PHD or an absent minded boob that can't even remember to renew a license. Take your choice, because I doubt that you went to a quality PCSOT school.
Posted by the_wolf
- Mar 21, 2008, 08:11 PMQuote from: the_wolf on Mar 21, 2008, 05:17 PMMr Cullen,QuoteI have to ask before I respond to this posting. Is your post regarding all examiners, or is it directed at the Grand Inquisitor and others of his ilk?
It applies to everyone it applies to.
I would also add ARROGANT and VINDICTIVE to the list of adjectives describing them.
That could cover both sides of the fence. But, that may very well be your point.
Posted by TheNoLieGuy4U
- Mar 21, 2008, 06:24 PM T.M.
It would seem you were unable to deal with MY posting altogether, other than recycling something altogether unrelated. I think this goes to my previous point about the same old Mantras being said over and over with no piercing effect.
Please answer this for me if you can. Math is the only perfect science. Polygraph (as well as other charts) are converted to mathamatics in rendering a decision. There are almost endless case examples in specific issue testing of confirmed charts PRIOR to other evidence validating them. Well trained Examiners with the most modern computer equipment, inclusive of motion sensors, have usually a low end 2% to high end 5% or less Inconclusive rate. In the remaining 95 to 98% of the time they are able to arrive at a clear point of rendering a clear finding, and one which is usually consistent in those charts. How do you account for the Examiner's hand score (subjective), as backed by the computer algorithm products (objective) arriving at the same conclusion in such high numbers. Neither the computer or the examiner place anything on the chart, and it ALL comes from the subject.
Please don't respond with your opinion about how you don't like it, as I have a child at the single digit age range who can do that about his food. Rather, You as an articulate adult please use logic to account for the above variables. Not a mantra, or blanket statements, but specifically --------- how are they able to do this ?
It would seem you were unable to deal with MY posting altogether, other than recycling something altogether unrelated. I think this goes to my previous point about the same old Mantras being said over and over with no piercing effect.
Please answer this for me if you can. Math is the only perfect science. Polygraph (as well as other charts) are converted to mathamatics in rendering a decision. There are almost endless case examples in specific issue testing of confirmed charts PRIOR to other evidence validating them. Well trained Examiners with the most modern computer equipment, inclusive of motion sensors, have usually a low end 2% to high end 5% or less Inconclusive rate. In the remaining 95 to 98% of the time they are able to arrive at a clear point of rendering a clear finding, and one which is usually consistent in those charts. How do you account for the Examiner's hand score (subjective), as backed by the computer algorithm products (objective) arriving at the same conclusion in such high numbers. Neither the computer or the examiner place anything on the chart, and it ALL comes from the subject.
Please don't respond with your opinion about how you don't like it, as I have a child at the single digit age range who can do that about his food. Rather, You as an articulate adult please use logic to account for the above variables. Not a mantra, or blanket statements, but specifically --------- how are they able to do this ?
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Mar 21, 2008, 05:17 PMMr Cullen,
It applies to everyone it applies to.
I would also add ARROGANT and VINDICTIVE to the list of adjectives describing them.
QuoteI have to ask before I respond to this posting. Is your post regarding all examiners, or is it directed at the Grand Inquisitor and others of his ilk?
It applies to everyone it applies to.
I would also add ARROGANT and VINDICTIVE to the list of adjectives describing them.
Posted by the_wolf
- Mar 21, 2008, 04:19 PMQuote from: George_Maschke on Mar 21, 2008, 11:05 AMHi T.M.
Did you not just see me participate in a civil explanation to G.M. about the conditions sex offenders live under as ordered by a Judge ?
What was your problem with that ? Are you so entrenched in your position that you reach to the fringes of having no argument that you have to reference the middle ages ? You may find if and when you are open to it that the Truth does not rest in the fringes, and in regard to the computer polygraph it's proponents have already stated it is not perfect but significant , while its detractors still try to use that less than pefect admission as if it had no value at all. I would rather believe that people of your side of the aisle might mature and also admit that technology, techniques, and their applications get better with time. Simply trying to tear down that which is, and has been proven valuable; and without any replacement for same, is a waste of time and energy. Reach down deep now, and in your cool sobering maturity, tell me what you would replace the polygraph with that is both more affordable and reliable. I still have been waiting for that answer from you folks, you see only passed over applicants here and those claiming the shadow of "I told the Truth" in their tests who spew out only negativity, and no reality.
It seems my ahem esteemed colleague :-/ has been happy to tell you that the process is accurate, but fails to "Reach down deep now, and in your cool sobering maturity" tell the posters, at least in part, why he believes the process is accurate. I can now understand why the credibility of the profession is questioned.
Using the "it does so work" argument just causes more questions and suspicion. Therefore I will apologize for my dear colleague from parts unknown and try to explain just a bit more using a post I have made in the past on another discussion. I think you'll find my post far more enlightening.the following is the cut and paste text from that posting.
Re: Polygrapher Violating Disclosure of Information to fellow Officers
Reply #11 - Yesterday at 7:44pm nopolycop wrote on Jan 10th, 2008, 7:03pm:
Please explain to me, Mr. Wolf, how one can "pass" or "fail" an opinion? It is well established that the results of a polygraph examination is simply the learned opinion of the polygrapher, correct? With the more experienced, better educated polygraphers likely to have a more accurate opinion, correct?
Assuming the above is accurate, how can one pass or fail an opinion?
An examiner reading your physiological data and scoring the data based on the degree of physiological arousal that is
1, timely
2, significant
3, and consistent among the 3 collected charts
Should be able at accurately assess which question you are most afraid of. Lets, remember people, this is not a lie detector, it's a fear detector. We are reading sympathetic vs parasympathetic nervous system reaction. No one can "detect a lie" unless of course that person truly is GOD. And if you do meet God, tell him to call me. I know a lot of people that are trying to find his son and I am sick of them asking me where he is.
While there are some scoring systems that give the examiner a degree of subjectivity, the decision to go to the green or the red SHOULD be an objective one. This is sadly not always the case. Thus bringing me to my next opinion.
I feel, in some cases, the new examiner is more apt to be objective than subjective. The new examiner is fresh out of school, wide eyed and truly eager to do it all "by the book". They will often sit at their desk with a ruler and a score sheet and take 5-10 minutes to score chart #1. ahhhh to be a young examiner. On the flip side of that, the new examiner can miss a few things that only experience teaches. I believe that you learn about polygraph in polygraph school. It's what gets pumped into that new examiners brain after school that makes him/her a chart roller or an examiner.
That brings me to the next issue.
The more experienced examiner, can be someone who truly loves his/her job. They can't wait to get and sometimes comes home late because time got away from him/her. This is an examiner that trains interns well, quality controls the lesser experienced charts for errors, and corrects the bad habits or unprofessional behavior of the examiners under his or her supervision. Sadly this examiner is not in the majority.
Some more experienced examiners may have "hit the wall". Maybe he/she has become a bit jaded or has become someone who goes to work, does the job, and goes home like many people that some of us know. They forgot how important it was to be objective and fair. This examiner, in my opinion has many years under his or her belt and can't wait to for the day that they can leave it all behind them and spend their last days in God's waiting room, Florida.
On the flip side of this is the arrogant pinhead that feels that he/she maybe is "God's gift to the polygraph community". This is someone who runs his/her office like a chart factory, feels that they are somehow above the law, and disregards the principals of polygraph because after all, they seem to think they know it all.
Because they know it all, they try to hire or train as many people as they can in an effort to infect the community with their brand of "truth", making it more difficult for the examiner that does give a crap to make a solid difference that is positive and helpful to the world. This is next to impossible because of the chart roller larva that is infecting this industry with a smothering virus of ignorance, self indulgence, and egotism.
In closing over 51% of the time I would trust the non politically motivated "new guy" to give a fair test over most of the examiners that have been around 25+ years.
Let me know if I have missed anything in my answer.
I do hope that I have given you more understandable information than "it does so work".
Posted by the_wolf
- Mar 21, 2008, 04:03 PMQuote from: George_Maschke on Mar 21, 2008, 02:34 AMI think we should let TLG keep posting so we can examine the true, unmasked workings of the "polygrapher mind". Quite similar to that of an inquisitor of the "Middle Ages".
Did alchemists fret as much when debunked? Were their ravings as venomous and incoherent?
Mr Cullen,
I have to ask before I respond to this posting. Is your post regarding all examiners, or is it directed at the Grand Inquisitor and others of his ilk? :-?
Posted by the_wolf
- Mar 21, 2008, 03:58 PMQuote from: George_Maschke on Mar 21, 2008, 12:55 AM Okay,
A sex offender in a treatment program on probation / parole may have that status up and including for life. While in the program either the treatment provider or the probation officer may violate them and have them revoked which means jail / prison. The program is a priviledge, and not right. In fact, while on probation they do NOT have their full civil rights. Further, they may not communicate outside of group treatment with other felons. They, and the language is usually broad as interpreted by a Judge, Treatment provider, or probation officer; may not perform any action which leads them forward in the cycle of deviance. They may not discuss out of group their polygraph experiences, questions, methods, results, etc. To any reasonable person then, their communicating with you as a part of Anti-Polygraph.com is in fact an Anti-Program measure for them. They are not making a commitment to the polygraph community per se, but rather to the macro treatment program as not to undermine its function for themselves or others. Your efforts are a contaminent in that legal process for them, and they know it. In fairness to you, NOW you know it.
I didn't say I was disagreeing with you, I was just saying that you were very hostile and defensive, kind of like now. I never said they had full civil rights, but the basic ones still stand. The one that is most encumbered by this probation is the 4th and 2dn amendments. The 1st and 5th amendment rights still stand with some restrictions.
By the way, I get my information from a lawyer that I pay for this kind of advice before I go shooting my mouth off. So, unless you have a Bar Card, what you have to say in regards to the interpretation of law means nothing to me. I would also thank you to not give legal advice or interpret law without a license to do so. That kind of thing can get you into trouble. I have an idea, let's let the judges and lawyers decide what a violation of conditions is, after all they are the ones who wrote the law. Do your job and let them do theirs.
If someone wants to risk getting into trouble, then let them hang them selves. Though I am willing to bet if they are exposing the likes of you, the Judge may be easy on them to get to you.
Moreover you are in no place to inform me of anything. You sound like one of those chart rollers that loves the word inconclusive, just so you can charge for another test, and don't say that examiners aren't looser with inconclusive in PCSOT than with any other test. Lying just insults me and degrades you.
Tell me to you mark your test with the term "utility test"? Oh my, did I use the term "utility test" in my outside voice? Silly me. I wonder if anyone else knows what a "utility test" is.
Or do you run a true polygraph? Are all your examinations audio and video recorded?
Do you run only approved formats?
Do you hand score all charts or do you give then a quick "global review"?
Do all your PCSOT tests run a minimum of 90 minutes?
If you have to think about any of these questions or you get defensive, than my concern is that you are outside of APA standards. Don't say there aren't examiners out there that don't do it, we all know they do and who thay there are.
By the way, I wonder if you can tell me how the GSR works and what is the difference between analog and sensor box GSR? I await this answer with great anticipation. If you know the answer maybe you can tell me, just so I know.
Next time read the post. Interesting how hostile you have been and you don't deny it.
Posted by TheNoLieGuy4U
- Mar 21, 2008, 11:05 AM Hi T.M.
Did you not just see me participate in a civil explanation to G.M. about the conditions sex offenders live under as ordered by a Judge ?
What was your problem with that ? Are you so entrenched in your position that you reach to the fringes of having no argument that you have to reference the middle ages ? You may find if and when you are open to it that the Truth does not rest in the fringes, and in regard to the computer polygraph it's proponents have already stated it is not perfect but significant , while its detractors still try to use that less than pefect admission as if it had no value at all. I would rather believe that people of your side of the aisle might mature and also admit that technology, techniques, and their applications get better with time. Simply trying to tear down that which is, and has been proven valuable; and without any replacement for same, is a waste of time and energy. Reach down deep now, and in your cool sobering maturity, tell me what you would replace the polygraph with that is both more affordable and reliable. I still have been waiting for that answer from you folks, you see only passed over applicants here and those claiming the shadow of "I told the Truth" in their tests who spew out only negativity, and no reality.
Did you not just see me participate in a civil explanation to G.M. about the conditions sex offenders live under as ordered by a Judge ?
What was your problem with that ? Are you so entrenched in your position that you reach to the fringes of having no argument that you have to reference the middle ages ? You may find if and when you are open to it that the Truth does not rest in the fringes, and in regard to the computer polygraph it's proponents have already stated it is not perfect but significant , while its detractors still try to use that less than pefect admission as if it had no value at all. I would rather believe that people of your side of the aisle might mature and also admit that technology, techniques, and their applications get better with time. Simply trying to tear down that which is, and has been proven valuable; and without any replacement for same, is a waste of time and energy. Reach down deep now, and in your cool sobering maturity, tell me what you would replace the polygraph with that is both more affordable and reliable. I still have been waiting for that answer from you folks, you see only passed over applicants here and those claiming the shadow of "I told the Truth" in their tests who spew out only negativity, and no reality.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Mar 21, 2008, 02:34 AMI think we should let TLG keep posting so we can examine the true, unmasked workings of the "polygrapher mind". Quite similar to that of an inquisitor of the "Middle Ages".
Did alchemists fret as much when debunked? Were their ravings as venomous and incoherent?
Did alchemists fret as much when debunked? Were their ravings as venomous and incoherent?
Posted by TheNoLieGuy4U
- Mar 21, 2008, 12:55 AM Okay,
A sex offender in a treatment program on probation / parole may have that status up and including for life. While in the program either the treatment provider or the probation officer may violate them and have them revoked which means jail / prison. The program is a priviledge, and not right. In fact, while on probation they do NOT have their full civil rights. Further, they may not communicate outside of group treatment with other felons. They, and the language is usually broad as interpreted by a Judge, Treatment provider, or probation officer; may not perform any action which leads them forward in the cycle of deviance. They may not discuss out of group their polygraph experiences, questions, methods, results, etc. To any reasonable person then, their communicating with you as a part of Anti-Polygraph.com is in fact an Anti-Program measure for them. They are not making a commitment to the polygraph community per se, but rather to the macro treatment program as not to undermine its function for themselves or others. Your efforts are a contaminent in that legal process for them, and they know it. In fairness to you, NOW you know it.
A sex offender in a treatment program on probation / parole may have that status up and including for life. While in the program either the treatment provider or the probation officer may violate them and have them revoked which means jail / prison. The program is a priviledge, and not right. In fact, while on probation they do NOT have their full civil rights. Further, they may not communicate outside of group treatment with other felons. They, and the language is usually broad as interpreted by a Judge, Treatment provider, or probation officer; may not perform any action which leads them forward in the cycle of deviance. They may not discuss out of group their polygraph experiences, questions, methods, results, etc. To any reasonable person then, their communicating with you as a part of Anti-Polygraph.com is in fact an Anti-Program measure for them. They are not making a commitment to the polygraph community per se, but rather to the macro treatment program as not to undermine its function for themselves or others. Your efforts are a contaminent in that legal process for them, and they know it. In fairness to you, NOW you know it.
Posted by the_wolf
- Mar 20, 2008, 05:10 PMQuote from: George_Maschke on Mar 20, 2008, 04:43 PM George,
What possible purpose legitimate purpose could you have for wanting to be in contact with these sex offenders in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area. If we take your website materials as evidence, it could only lead to the conclusion that you want to interfere with, undermind, or sabotage; the court ordered programs they need to be a part of. Did you realize that in contacting you they know well that it would be a violation of their program ? The restrictions of their program is trumped by your desire to communicate with them, and could cause them to be revoked. You can not hide behind your desire for research with this group as a defense. Courts have punished "Enablers" in the past, and with this writing and others you are now fully informed and on notice ! Let the chips fall where they may.
Wow, you know, the more you type the more hostile you seem to sound. Now, I know some people like throwing a large number of stones into a glass house all at the same time, but I have found that someone does this to make enough noise to distract everyone else from the truth itself.
Normally I'd be on a fellow examiners side, but I am seeing you getting out of hand and throwing a lot of stones.
Makes me ask why?
In the probation conditions I see, there is nothing in them (when they are allowed to have internet access) that says it's a violation for looking at a website that does not have pornography on it. Nor does it state that they can't look at anti polygraph.org. They may be convicted of a crime, but this doesn't mean that they all rights striped from them.
As a polygraph examiner do I want my examinee to look at this website just to try to beat a test because they're lying? No.
As a polygraph examiner do I want to restrict an examinee, who intends to be truthful, from obtaining information about a test that their freedom rests on? No
I don't agree with everything that is said on this web site, this web site does contain some very accurate information on what polygraph measures and how it measures it. I would rather them read it hear for nothing so they can pay for their polygraph then give the rectal cavity in Oklahoma money for information that is laughable at best.
Back to you though. Why does it seem to me that you are "protesting too much"? What do you have to lose here? Why do you seem to be trying to scare someone from exercising a God given right to free speech, George or anyone else's?
By the tone of your email I would say that your psychological set is pined on this. Once again why?
:-?
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Mar 20, 2008, 04:57 PMQuote from: George_Maschke on Mar 20, 2008, 04:43 PM George,
What possible purpose legitimate purpose could you have for wanting to be in contact with these sex offenders in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area. If we take your website materials as evidence, it could only lead to the conclusion that you want to interfere with, undermind, or sabotage; the court ordered programs they need to be a part of.
Actually, I only have a few questions to ask of them regarding their post-conviction polygraph screening. To the best of my knowledge, convicted sex offenders are not required to swear omerta to keep the secrets of the polygraph community.
QuoteDid you realize that in contacting you they know well that it would be a violation of their program ? The restrictions of their program is trumped by your desire to communicate with them, and could cause them to be revoked.
No, I did not realize that which you claim. Please document this assertion.
Posted by TheNoLieGuy4U
- Mar 20, 2008, 04:43 PM George,
What possible purpose legitimate purpose could you have for wanting to be in contact with these sex offenders in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area. If we take your website materials as evidence, it could only lead to the conclusion that you want to interfere with, undermind, or sabotage; the court ordered programs they need to be a part of. Did you realize that in contacting you they know well that it would be a violation of their program ? The restrictions of their program is trumped by your desire to communicate with them, and could cause them to be revoked. You can not hide behind your desire for research with this group as a defense. Courts have punished "Enablers" in the past, and with this writing and others you are now fully informed and on notice ! Let the chips fall where they may.
What possible purpose legitimate purpose could you have for wanting to be in contact with these sex offenders in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area. If we take your website materials as evidence, it could only lead to the conclusion that you want to interfere with, undermind, or sabotage; the court ordered programs they need to be a part of. Did you realize that in contacting you they know well that it would be a violation of their program ? The restrictions of their program is trumped by your desire to communicate with them, and could cause them to be revoked. You can not hide behind your desire for research with this group as a defense. Courts have punished "Enablers" in the past, and with this writing and others you are now fully informed and on notice ! Let the chips fall where they may.
Posted by TheNoLieGuy4U
- Mar 20, 2008, 04:34 PM Hi Guard Dog,
You must be a mutt !!! I have no such rage as you have mentioned. I sit and write from my computer in a calm and considered manner. It is you who use psycho-babble terms here which would lead me to believe that YOU either are in treatment, or have been. In regard to absorbing actual "Information", there wasn't much other than opinion vs. information for consideration.
In regard to what you feel is an attack on the moderator, I have only pointed out what is in fact the legal status of these sex offenders in their being wards of the court / convicts; and that the solicitation of them is in and of itself for THEM not in compliance with their program, and that nothing good can come from it. George's obsession, and perhaps yours too, with the use of the polygraph has lead to his crawling into the gutter with these sex offenders for that passsion, as well as his apparent relations with radical Islamic types verbally about this subject, and that both groups are intent on harm to this nation in both the micro and macro.
Now really Guard Dog, you do seem on guard a bit too much, and not much more intelligent than my pure breed of dog. One can find your lot at any dog pound if they choose to save same from lethal injection / disposal, but I choose to invest my time and efforts in a better breed which has proven itself over time.
Perhaps the problem I see here with You and George is that you begin with a false premise; That All Sides Are of Equal Value in This.
I say B.S. to that !!!! The ruling and opinions of the Judges in these cases are NOT equal to those sex offenders opinions. George's desire to "Seek Information" is NOT equal to the sentence in place by such a Judge for these people to remain in compliance. Your attempt to say I am somehow un-American is NOT equal to what and who I am and what I have done FOR America. George's and perhaps your opinion about the use of the polygraph is NOT superior or even equal to the importance of this nation's desire for national security. He / You offer no solutions for that, and fail to see that good men and women of equal or superior dedication to this country are working with the BEST tools they have, despite your tearing away at that.
When you line yourself up with convicted child molesters (domestically) and radical middle eastern Islamics (while abroad), and encourage them both toward activity which is NOT in the best interest of public safety and national security then you are no less than an enemy of the nation I know; and both in the foreign and domestic sense of that word.
In parting Mutt, my blood pressure is 120/80, and you don't possess what it takes to move my blood pressure where you thought it might be. You appear to be a common denominator in a world seeking to reward better people. Maybe you'll someday rise to the occassion.
For now you have alligned yourself with he who would demonize some of the best and brightest in the intel community, and who seeks to baptize the child molesters, and turn over part of his former family's treasure to the enemies of this nation. Your rewards are NOT in heaven.
You must be a mutt !!! I have no such rage as you have mentioned. I sit and write from my computer in a calm and considered manner. It is you who use psycho-babble terms here which would lead me to believe that YOU either are in treatment, or have been. In regard to absorbing actual "Information", there wasn't much other than opinion vs. information for consideration.
In regard to what you feel is an attack on the moderator, I have only pointed out what is in fact the legal status of these sex offenders in their being wards of the court / convicts; and that the solicitation of them is in and of itself for THEM not in compliance with their program, and that nothing good can come from it. George's obsession, and perhaps yours too, with the use of the polygraph has lead to his crawling into the gutter with these sex offenders for that passsion, as well as his apparent relations with radical Islamic types verbally about this subject, and that both groups are intent on harm to this nation in both the micro and macro.
Now really Guard Dog, you do seem on guard a bit too much, and not much more intelligent than my pure breed of dog. One can find your lot at any dog pound if they choose to save same from lethal injection / disposal, but I choose to invest my time and efforts in a better breed which has proven itself over time.
Perhaps the problem I see here with You and George is that you begin with a false premise; That All Sides Are of Equal Value in This.
I say B.S. to that !!!! The ruling and opinions of the Judges in these cases are NOT equal to those sex offenders opinions. George's desire to "Seek Information" is NOT equal to the sentence in place by such a Judge for these people to remain in compliance. Your attempt to say I am somehow un-American is NOT equal to what and who I am and what I have done FOR America. George's and perhaps your opinion about the use of the polygraph is NOT superior or even equal to the importance of this nation's desire for national security. He / You offer no solutions for that, and fail to see that good men and women of equal or superior dedication to this country are working with the BEST tools they have, despite your tearing away at that.
When you line yourself up with convicted child molesters (domestically) and radical middle eastern Islamics (while abroad), and encourage them both toward activity which is NOT in the best interest of public safety and national security then you are no less than an enemy of the nation I know; and both in the foreign and domestic sense of that word.
In parting Mutt, my blood pressure is 120/80, and you don't possess what it takes to move my blood pressure where you thought it might be. You appear to be a common denominator in a world seeking to reward better people. Maybe you'll someday rise to the occassion.
For now you have alligned yourself with he who would demonize some of the best and brightest in the intel community, and who seeks to baptize the child molesters, and turn over part of his former family's treasure to the enemies of this nation. Your rewards are NOT in heaven.