- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by 1st4th5thand6th
- Oct 13, 2014, 09:29 PMQuote Do I believe the government agencies who utilize the polygraph are this nefarious? YES! And it is tantamount to criminal negligence on the part of those charged with oversight of these government agencies to allow them to continue to use this so-called "lie detector testing"!
Yes, it seems quite hypocritical for the government to outlaw discrimination based on religion, race, sexual orientation etc... yet routinely discriminate in it's hiring processes against innocent, taxpaying, educated individuals who clearly and accurately understand that it's polygraph process is total bunk....
Posted by Doug Williams
- Oct 13, 2014, 03:59 PMQuote from: George_Maschke on Oct 13, 2014, 03:55 AMLast year, I filed a Freedom of Information Act request with U.S. Customs and Border Protection for the PowerPoint presentation that CBP polygraph chief John R. Schwartz gave at the American Association of Police Polygraphists' 2013 annual meeting in Charlotte, North Carolina.
CBP denied my request, apparently without even looking at the document, and also denied my appeal, though the reviewer evidently did make some actual investigation into the contents of the document. The correspondence associated with this request may be viewed here:
https://antipolygraph.org/foia.shtml#operation-lie-busters-powerpoint
It's noteworthy that according to the letter of denial, Operation Lie Busters remained an ongoing investigation as of 25 August 2014.
In addition, CBP seems to suggest that it is illegal to develop polygraph countermeasures where it states:QuoteReleasing the information in the presentation would provide a blueprint to CBP polygraph examiner strategies, reveal specific investigative techniques, and enable individuals to attempt to develop examination countermeasures thereby circumventing the law.
It should be noted, however, that there is no law prohibiting the development of polygraph countermeasures, or indeed the teaching or use of same.
Oh the irony! "Circumventing the law" indeed... After much thought, I have come to what I consider to be the only logical conclusion that can be drawn as to why government agencies, (federal, state, & local) continue to use the polygraph even though all the scientific evidence proves it is worthless as a "lie detector". I believe they are using the polygraph as a subterfuge to avoid complying with federal employment regulations! What else explains the 65% "failure" rate for applicants who have already passed a very thorough background investigation? These agencies can circumvent federal laws and discriminate against people, ask illegal questions, interrogate/terrorize them for hours, and use the polygraph as an excuse to deny employment to anyone they don't want to hire. They can be totally subjective in their hiring and firing practices when they use the polygraph, because all they have to do is to say the applicant "failed" a polygraph test. By simply saying the person has "failed" a polygraph test, government agencies can hire and fire people at will and then just blame it on the "failed" polygraph test. There is no way anyone can appeal a hiring or firing decision that is based on a "failed" polygraph - and those who are denied employment or terminated have no recourse - they can't bring a lawsuit for discrimination or wrongful termination! Do I believe the government agencies who utilize the polygraph are this nefarious? YES! And it is tantamount to criminal negligence on the part of those charged with oversight of these government agencies to allow them to continue to use this so-called "lie detector testing"!
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Oct 13, 2014, 03:55 AMLast year, I filed a Freedom of Information Act request with U.S. Customs and Border Protection for the PowerPoint presentation that CBP polygraph chief John R. Schwartz gave at the American Association of Police Polygraphists' 2013 annual meeting in Charlotte, North Carolina.
CBP denied my request, apparently without even looking at the document, and also denied my appeal, though the reviewer evidently did make some actual investigation into the contents of the document. The correspondence associated with this request may be viewed here:
https://antipolygraph.org/foia.shtml#operation-lie-busters-powerpoint
It's noteworthy that according to the letter of denial, Operation Lie Busters remained an ongoing investigation as of 25 August 2014.
In addition, CBP seems to suggest that it is illegal to develop polygraph countermeasures where it states:
It should be noted, however, that there is no law prohibiting the development of polygraph countermeasures, or indeed the teaching or use of same.
CBP denied my request, apparently without even looking at the document, and also denied my appeal, though the reviewer evidently did make some actual investigation into the contents of the document. The correspondence associated with this request may be viewed here:
https://antipolygraph.org/foia.shtml#operation-lie-busters-powerpoint
It's noteworthy that according to the letter of denial, Operation Lie Busters remained an ongoing investigation as of 25 August 2014.
In addition, CBP seems to suggest that it is illegal to develop polygraph countermeasures where it states:
QuoteReleasing the information in the presentation would provide a blueprint to CBP polygraph examiner strategies, reveal specific investigative techniques, and enable individuals to attempt to develop examination countermeasures thereby circumventing the law.
It should be noted, however, that there is no law prohibiting the development of polygraph countermeasures, or indeed the teaching or use of same.
Posted by Ex Member
- Jul 07, 2014, 06:35 PMThis case is very interesting and opens up a real can of worms. First of all, I think Mr. Dixon was very foolish to allow himself to be a party to malfeasance, albeit a fake scenario. Had he taken a position of only teaching those who wish to avoid a false positive, he would have been on a firmer ethical footing. I wonder how far this precedent could go? If I were very adroit at bank robbery and chose to give instruction as to the best strategies and tactics, would I be committing a crime? Remember the martial arts teacher who gave instruction to the 9/11 terrorist?--he was not charged with a crime. But if he had known of his student's nefarious intentions, would it have been a crime then?--is the penal code based on what's in your head, like "hate crimes?" It's very convoluted and a difficult concept to untangle.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jul 06, 2014, 01:46 AMOn Wednesday, 2 July 2014, Chad Dixon was released from the United States Penitentiary at Marion, Illinois after completing his 8-month sentence. Dixon is the only person to have been criminally charged in the U.S. Customs and Border Protection's "Operation Lie Busters," an evidently still ongoing criminal investigation into people who teach others how to pass polygraph "tests."
I think that CBP and other federal agencies' targeting and entrapment of Dixon, as well as their raid on Doug Williams (who has not been charged with any crime), and possible entrapment attempt against me, has been a tremendous overreach and abuse of authority, as well as a waste of taxpayer dollars and investigative resources.
I think that CBP and other federal agencies' targeting and entrapment of Dixon, as well as their raid on Doug Williams (who has not been charged with any crime), and possible entrapment attempt against me, has been a tremendous overreach and abuse of authority, as well as a waste of taxpayer dollars and investigative resources.
Posted by Doug Williams
- Jun 27, 2014, 05:42 PMQuote from: Doug_Williams on Jun 10, 2014, 10:40 AMQuote from: George_Maschke on Jun 10, 2014, 03:52 AMJames F. Tomsheck, who headed the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Internal Affairs section, of which the polygraph unit behind Operation Lie Busters is a part, was removed from that position yesterday:
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-border-patrol-internal-affairs-20140609-story.html
AntiPolygraph.org has learned that Tomsheck himself was once a polygraph operator and gave the commencement address at a July 2013 NCCA graduation ceremony:
https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2014/06/10/sacked-u-s-customs-and-border-protection-internal-affairs-chief-james-f-tomsheck-was-keynote-speaker-at-2013-ncca-graduation-ceremony/
James F. Tomsheck and the whole Internal Affairs Unit of the CBP should not only be investigated, they should be prosecuted! This investigation should also include a very thorough investigation into the actions of Special Agent Douglas Robbins of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Office of Internal Affairs, CBP Senior Special Agent Fred C. Ball, Jr. and CBP polygraph unit chief John R. Schwartz. They all neglected their duty, choosing instead to mount a vicious and unlawful attack on me.
Instead of "investigating individual cases of alleged wrongdoing" they put their emphasis "toward assisting other agencies, including the Government Accountability Office and the Department of Homeland Security inspector general" - i.e. "OPERATION LIE BUSTERS".
During "OPERATION LIE BUSTERS", they spent thousands of man hours and untold amounts of money trying to persecute and intimidate me, (and others) for telling the truth about the waste, fraud and abuse in their polygraph unit. Rather than do the job they were assigned to do (internal affairs investigations), they conducted an unscrupulous, unconstitutional attack on me! Robbins himself told me that they had been investigating me for over three years!
Schwartz, one of the men behind "OPERATION LIE BUSTERS", said he thought that those who "protest the loudest and the longest" against polygraph testing "are the ones that I believe we need to focus our attention on." And so it was that James F. Tomsheck and his crew hatched a plan to "focus attention" on the one man who best fit this description, the man all polygraph operators have hated for almost forty years - one who helped put tens of thousands of them out of business in 1988 with the passage of the EPPA - yours truly, Douglas G Williams.
The "Schwartz" quoted there is John Schwartz, a Customs and Border Patrol official who is involved in the investigations. So, yeah, that's a federal government agent specifically claiming that he wants to focus his criminal investigatory power on those who speak out against polygraph testing (rather than do the job he was assigned to do - investigating allegations of wrong doing in his own agency).
One blogger, commenting on the investigation of me, put it this way: "That sounds a hell of a lot like a police state, where federal agents publicly declare that they're going to use their criminal investigation powers to target people who oppose a program they support. Talk about chilling effects and a massive First Amendment violation. To have a federal official, with investigatory power, who's already involved in existing investigations flat out say that he wants to target those who speak out, is incredible. That's not the way our government is supposed to work."
This story goes much deeper than the "lack of diligence" in doing their job, and I hope there is an in-depth investigation. These men all used (misused, and abused) the power of their office and violated my constitutional rights under color of law. This is a story of how a group of pro-polygraph men, most of whom are polygraph operators, used their authority as federal agents in pursuit of a personal vendetta against me. They should not only be investigated, they should be prosecuted!
This article states: "Under Tomsheck, a former veteran Secret Service agent, the internal affairs division also became known for pursuing controversial criminal cases. At least one of them is now being scrutinized.
In that criminal inquiry, dubbed Operation Lie Busters, federal agents investigated instructors who claimed they can teach job applicants how to pass lie detector tests.
In the days after Tomsheck's ouster, the inspector general began interviewing officials who handled the criminal investigation as part of what is being described as an "inspection."
The criminal inquiry, which was reported by McClatchy last year, was aimed at discouraging criminals and spies from infiltrating the U.S. government by using the polygraph-beating techniques.
By attempting to prosecute the instructors, however, federal officials adopted a controversial legal stance that sharing such information should be treated as a crime.
The case sparked a debate over whether the federal government should be pursuing such instructors given questions about the reliability of lie detectors, which are not accepted by most courts as evidence against criminal defendants."
I would like to offer a few suggestions that would perhaps make this article more accurate. My editorial suggestions are in parenthesis: "Under Tomsheck, a former veteran Secret Service agent, (AND POLYGRAPH OPERATOR). the internal affairs division also became known for pursuing (A PERSONAL VENDETTA AGAINST DOUG WILLIAMS, A WELL KNOWN POLYGRAPH OPPONENT, AND ATTEMPTING TO IMPRISON HIM FOR HAVING THE AUDACITY TO EXERCISE HIS FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND SPEAK OUT AGAINST THE ABUSE CAUSED BY THE POLYGRAPH, AND PROVING THE POLYGRAPH WAS NOT ACCURATE AS A "LIE DETECTOR", BUT WAS RATHER A PSYCHOLOGICAL BILLY CLUB USED TO FRIGHTEN AND INTIMIATE PEOPLE).
"The criminal inquiry, which was reported by McClatchy last year, was aimed" (AT SILENCING DOUG WILLIAMS BECAUSE HE IS THE ONE WHO PROTESTS THE LOUDEST AND LONGEST AGAINST POLYGRAPH TESTING).
"The case sparked a debate over whether the federal government should be pursuing" (CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST DOUG WILLIAMS AND VIOLATING HIS FIRST AND FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS. IN FACT, THERE WAS NO "DEBATE" - RATHER THERE WAS OVERWHELMING AGREEMENT THAT THIS WAS A CLEAR CASE OF ABUSE OF POWER AND GOVERNMENTAL OVERREACH AS EVIDENCED BY THE FACT THAT ALL THOSE INVOLVED IN OPERATION LIE BUSTERS ARE NOW THEMSELVES UNDER INVESTIGATION AND MANY, INCLUDING JAMES F. THOMSHEK HIMSELF, HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM THEIR POSITIONS).
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jun 21, 2014, 01:33 AMMarisa Taylor and Franco Ordonez report for McClatchy that U.S. Customs and Border Protection Internal Affairs (CBP-IA), the unit to which CBP's polygraph unit, which conceived "Operation Lie Busters," belongs, is under investigation "for falsifying documents, intentionally misplacing employee complaints and bungling misconduct reports as part of a coverup to mask its failure to curb employee wrongdoing."
McClatchy's reporting suggests endemic corruption at CBP-IA. Last October, Dennis Lindsay, who was the special agent in charge of the CBP-IA office in Houston, Texas, where the polygraph unit is headquartered, committed suicide for reasons that have not been determined.
McClatchy also notes that after former CBP-IA head James Thomsheck's ouster earlier this month, "the inspector general began interviewing officials who handled [Operation Lie Busters] as part of what is being described as an 'inspection.'"
Read the entire article here:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/06/20/231045/border-agencys-watchdog-under.html
McClatchy's reporting suggests endemic corruption at CBP-IA. Last October, Dennis Lindsay, who was the special agent in charge of the CBP-IA office in Houston, Texas, where the polygraph unit is headquartered, committed suicide for reasons that have not been determined.
McClatchy also notes that after former CBP-IA head James Thomsheck's ouster earlier this month, "the inspector general began interviewing officials who handled [Operation Lie Busters] as part of what is being described as an 'inspection.'"
Read the entire article here:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/06/20/231045/border-agencys-watchdog-under.html
Posted by Doug Williams
- Jun 10, 2014, 10:40 AMQuote from: George_Maschke on Jun 10, 2014, 03:52 AMJames F. Tomsheck, who headed the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Internal Affairs section, of which the polygraph unit behind Operation Lie Busters is a part, was removed from that position yesterday:
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-border-patrol-internal-affairs-20140609-story.html
AntiPolygraph.org has learned that Tomsheck himself was once a polygraph operator and gave the commencement address at a July 2013 NCCA graduation ceremony:
https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2014/06/10/sacked-u-s-customs-and-border-protection-internal-affairs-chief-james-f-tomsheck-was-keynote-speaker-at-2013-ncca-graduation-ceremony/
James F. Tomsheck and the whole Internal Affairs Unit of the CBP should not only be investigated, they should be prosecuted! This investigation should also include a very thorough investigation into the actions of Special Agent Douglas Robbins of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Office of Internal Affairs, CBP Senior Special Agent Fred C. Ball, Jr. and CBP polygraph unit chief John R. Schwartz. They all neglected their duty, choosing instead to mount a vicious and unlawful attack on me.
Instead of "investigating individual cases of alleged wrongdoing" they put their emphasis "toward assisting other agencies, including the Government Accountability Office and the Department of Homeland Security inspector general" - i.e. "OPERATION LIE BUSTERS".
During "OPERATION LIE BUSTERS", they spent thousands of man hours and untold amounts of money trying to persecute and intimidate me, (and others) for telling the truth about the waste, fraud and abuse in their polygraph unit. Rather than do the job they were assigned to do (internal affairs investigations), they conducted an unscrupulous, unconstitutional attack on me! Robbins himself told me that they had been investigating me for over three years!
Schwartz, one of the men behind "OPERATION LIE BUSTERS", said he thought that those who "protest the loudest and the longest" against polygraph testing "are the ones that I believe we need to focus our attention on." And so it was that James F. Tomsheck and his crew hatched a plan to "focus attention" on the one man who best fit this description, the man all polygraph operators have hated for almost forty years - one who helped put tens of thousands of them out of business in 1988 with the passage of the EPPA - yours truly, Douglas G Williams.
The "Schwartz" quoted there is John Schwartz, a Customs and Border Patrol official who is involved in the investigations. So, yeah, that's a federal government agent specifically claiming that he wants to focus his criminal investigatory power on those who speak out against polygraph testing (rather than do the job he was assigned to do - investigating allegations of wrong doing in his own agency).
One blogger, commenting on the investigation of me, put it this way: "That sounds a hell of a lot like a police state, where federal agents publicly declare that they're going to use their criminal investigation powers to target people who oppose a program they support. Talk about chilling effects and a massive First Amendment violation. To have a federal official, with investigatory power, who's already involved in existing investigations flat out say that he wants to target those who speak out, is incredible. That's not the way our government is supposed to work."
This story goes much deeper than the "lack of diligence" in doing their job, and I hope there is an in-depth investigation. These men all used (misused, and abused) the power of their office and violated my constitutional rights under color of law. This is a story of how a group of pro-polygraph men, most of whom are polygraph operators, used their authority as federal agents in pursuit of a personal vendetta against me. They should not only be investigated, they should be prosecuted!
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jun 10, 2014, 03:52 AMJames F. Tomsheck, who headed the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Internal Affairs section, of which the polygraph unit behind Operation Lie Busters is a part, was removed from that position yesterday:
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-border-patrol-internal-affairs-20140609-story.html
AntiPolygraph.org has learned that Tomsheck himself was once a polygraph operator and gave the commencement address at a July 2013 NCCA graduation ceremony:
https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2014/06/10/sacked-u-s-customs-and-border-protection-internal-affairs-chief-james-f-tomsheck-was-keynote-speaker-at-2013-ncca-graduation-ceremony/
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-border-patrol-internal-affairs-20140609-story.html
AntiPolygraph.org has learned that Tomsheck himself was once a polygraph operator and gave the commencement address at a July 2013 NCCA graduation ceremony:
https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2014/06/10/sacked-u-s-customs-and-border-protection-internal-affairs-chief-james-f-tomsheck-was-keynote-speaker-at-2013-ncca-graduation-ceremony/
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Feb 23, 2014, 04:59 PMQuote from: quickfix on Feb 23, 2014, 01:20 PMI was speaking hypothetically;in reality, you couldn't teach a cow to fart, much less teach someone to produce "truthful tracings".
The fact that John Schwartz and Fred Ball launched an ongoing effort to put Doug Williams in a cage is strong evidence that the federal polygraph community does not share this view.
Posted by quickfix
- Feb 23, 2014, 01:20 PMQuote from: Doug_Williams on Feb 22, 2014, 05:29 PMYou are absolutely right AA!And I might also note that Quickfix is the first polygraph operator to go on record and freely admit that a person could be "trained" to pass a polygraph test.That makes my case and proves the polygraph is not a "lie detector".If a person can be trained to control every tracing on the polygraph chart and produce a "truthful" chart at will, that is prima facie evidence that the polygraph is absolutely worthless as a "lie detector".Congratulations Quickfix for finally admitting something that polygraphers have always denied.I was speaking hypothetically; in reality, you couldn't teach a cow to fart, much less teach someone to produce "truthful tracings".
Posted by Twoblock
- Feb 22, 2014, 10:37 PMDoug,
Study the 1st., 4th. and 14th. Amendments (those seem to cover your situation) and file it pro se. It costs $450.00 to file a lawsuit in federal court. I am in the process of doing a fed. suit for my grandson. His 1st., 4th., 8th. and 14th. Amendment rights were violated many times. This is a first for me in this realm so I have to burn midnight oil studying these statutes. I don't have to study any more for ADA and Sec. 504 Rehab. Act lawsuits. I know those by heart. Lawyers will tell you that it's almost an impossibility to win a 14th. Amendment Sec. 1983 lawsuit because of immunities. That's bunk when a 1983 is brought correctly. The only problem with a pro se lawsuit is that you don't get to argue your case in front of the fed. judge or a panel of three appellate judges. Only bar lawyers can do that. I would love to argue cases before a fed. judge.
Study the 1st., 4th. and 14th. Amendments (those seem to cover your situation) and file it pro se. It costs $450.00 to file a lawsuit in federal court. I am in the process of doing a fed. suit for my grandson. His 1st., 4th., 8th. and 14th. Amendment rights were violated many times. This is a first for me in this realm so I have to burn midnight oil studying these statutes. I don't have to study any more for ADA and Sec. 504 Rehab. Act lawsuits. I know those by heart. Lawyers will tell you that it's almost an impossibility to win a 14th. Amendment Sec. 1983 lawsuit because of immunities. That's bunk when a 1983 is brought correctly. The only problem with a pro se lawsuit is that you don't get to argue your case in front of the fed. judge or a panel of three appellate judges. Only bar lawyers can do that. I would love to argue cases before a fed. judge.
Posted by Doug Williams
- Feb 22, 2014, 05:29 PMQuote from: AuntyAgony on Feb 22, 2014, 05:14 PMQuote from: quickfix on Feb 21, 2014, 05:31 PM...if your wife or daughter were raped or murdered, and the perpetrator passed a polygraph exam after "training" with Doug Williams, you might think differently...I would certainly be furious beyond mere words at the criminally incompetent LEOs who tried to rely on the polygraph instead of doing their jobs properly.
-Aunty Agony.
You are absolutely right AA!
And I might also note that Quickfix is the first polygraph operator to go on record and freely admit that a person could be "trained" to pass a polygraph test.
That makes my case and proves the polygraph is not a "lie detector". If a person can be trained to control every tracing on the polygraph chart and produce a "truthful" chart at will, that is prima facie evidence that the polygraph is absolutely worthless as a "lie detector". Congratulations Quickfix for finally admitting something that polygraphers have always denied.
Posted by Aunty Agony
- Feb 22, 2014, 05:14 PMQuote from: quickfix on Feb 21, 2014, 05:31 PM...if your wife or daughter were raped or murdered, and the perpetrator passed a polygraph exam after "training" with Doug Williams, you might think differently...I would certainly be furious beyond mere words at the criminally incompetent LEOs who tried to rely on the polygraph instead of doing their jobs properly.
-Aunty Agony.
Posted by Doug Williams
- Feb 22, 2014, 03:31 PMQuote from: Twoblock on Feb 22, 2014, 02:06 PMDoug,
I think you have an excellent civil rights case. There's plenty of case law to back up your lawsuit. Go for it.
Unfortunately justice is a commodity - you only get what you can pay for. The DOJ has unlimited resources - I don't.