Note: AntiPolygraph.org has prepared a navigable index to the archive posted here. See:
https://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-055.shtml
--AntiPolygraph.org Administrator
Polygraph Place Bulletin Board Private Forum Archive
Ralph Hilliard, who runs the website PolygraphPlace.com, was compelled to take the site's bulletin board offline owing to "ongoing problems related to email spammers using vulnerabilities of the bulletin board to send spam through the server."
The bulletin board included a private forum for polygraph examiners that was opened on October 9, 2002. This is an archive of the private forum. Each message thread is saved in Mozilla Archive File Format (MAFF).
To read these files, you will need Mozilla Firefox and the Mozilla Archive File Format (MAFF) extension.
Get Firefox here:
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/fx/
Get the MAFF extension by selecting Tools->Add-ons and searching for MAFF or at:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/mozilla-archive-format/
The file "Polygraph Place Bulletin Board.html.maff" contains 33 tabs corresponding to the 33 pages of the bulletin board. Use this file to browse the available topics. However, the links won't work. Instead, there is a numbered folder corresponding to each page of the index and enclosing the relevant threads. Where threads extended for multiple pages, these are preserved in multiple tabs within the same file. Again, bulletin board navigation links will not work.
You will also find a folder numbered "0." It contains several discussions posted after the 33-tab index file was saved.
The discussions on the Polygraph Place examiners' forum offer a rare glimpse into a closed community and could serve as rich source material for a master's thesis or doctoral dissertation on in-group/out-group psychology.
Dramatis Personae
A number of prominent figures in the polygraph community participated in these discussions. Screen names are indicated in parentheses where they substantially differ from real names:
* Gordon H. Barland, a former researcher at the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute
* Patrick Coffey (thenolieguy4u), a private polygrapher from northern California
* Barry Cushman (Barry C), current (May 2013) president of the American Polygraph Association
* Keith Gaines (liedoctor), an instructor at the National Center for Credibility Assessment (who is not a doctor)
* Ed Gelb (egelb), a past president of the American Polygraph Association
* Mark Handler (Mad Dog), a prolific writer on polygraph topics
* Ralph Hilliard (detector), owner of PolygraphPlace.com
* Donald Krapohl (dkrapohl), second-in-charge at the National Center for Credibility Assessment and editor of the American Polygraph Association's journal
* Dan Mangan, a private polygrapher who is skeptical of the scientific basis for polygraph. In the end he was banned from the forum.
* J.B. McCloughan, a polygraph examiner with the Michigan State Police and currently a director of the American Polygraph Association
* Paul Menges (CHSBOY), a former instructor at the National Center for Credibility Assessment (deceased)
* Raymond Nelson (rnelson), a private polygraph examiner who now works for the Lafayette Instrument Company
* Jack L. Ogilvie, a senior examiner with the Phoenix Police Department and a forum moderator
* Lou Rovner, a forum moderator and one of the few polygraph examiners with a Ph.D. (though you would never guess from his writing)
* Jim Sackett (sackett), a polygraph examiner with the Las Vegas Metropolitan P.D.
* Dan Sosnowski (Dan S), owner of a private polygraph school and past president of the American Polygraph Association
* Ted Todd, a polygraph examiner for the Contra Costa County Prosecutor
* Milton O. Webb (skipwebb), Army CID polygrapher and past president of the American Polygraph Association
Suggested Readings (folder number indicated in parentheses)
* Got a call from Marisa Taylor of McClatchy Newspapers (1) Animated discussion of the investigative journalist's reporting on polygraph
* Comparison questions (20) Does this sound like the discourse of a scientific practice?
* We must have a mole (22) a long thread that begins with paranoia and moves on to the American Polygraph Association's investigation of the Marston Polygraph Academy
* Question on validated techniques (24) Scientific discussion?
* Countermeasures (28) A discussion of how to deal with polygraph countermeasures
* Honts (33) in which admission of Professor Charles R. Honts, a polygraph researcher, to the forum is discussed; forum members voted against allowing him to join the board.
Discussions about George Maschke and/or AntiPolygraph.org
(a frequent topic; these are just highlights):
* GM's Smoke & Mirrors 8)
* George Mashe (10)
* GM Translates for Al Qaeda? (12)
* Georges Wasteland (14)
* GEORGE MASCHKE; Ready, Aim, Fire !!!!!! (16)
* George Maschke arrested last night (16)
* Maschke's Website (19)
* George Maschke lives in a world of make-believe friends (21)
* George (22)
Discussions about Doug Williams:
* Doug Williams book (3)
* Doug Williams to be on TV (9)
Ex-Examiner,
You are to be congratulated!
This is a treasure trove of valuable material and is a gift likely to keep on giving.
A quick perusal suggests that this should be treated as a routine one-stop-shopping source, i.e., a logical beginning for anyone (cross-examining attorney, opposing expert witness (even another uninvolved polygraph examiner)) having a need to oppose many of the involved Dramatis Personae in a court of law, other public oral presentation, written review article, etc.
Any inappropriate character revealed, improper demeanor displayed, any lack of maturity put forward, etc. will go a long way towards impeaching the credibility of a potential expert witness. This would be true with almost any form of proffered expertise but is particularly so with polygraphy.
The potential outcome(s) of such negative traits would include examiner bias and improper "test" construction, administration, chart scoring, etc. This is clearly the case due to the largely subjective nature of such activities all subject to and reflective of any personal character shortcomings of the individual constructing and administering any given examination.
I don't think it is too far fetched to see some of this material as a basis for review/reevaluation/reopening of matters previously handled/adjudicated/closed and involving several of these individuals...
Well, I guess there's only one dog in the yard now!
Ex-Examiner,
Thank you for sharing this information! It's a huge archive and will take time to read, analyze, and comment on.
All,
Unfortunately, the amount of time I can devote to polygraph matters is limited and is likely to remain so for some time. (I'm often available in the chat room, but when not chatting, I'm usually attending to non-polygraph matters.)
Thus, I encourage crowd-sourcing the analysis of the archive that Ex-Examiner has shared. If you have the time and interest, please feel free to download the archive, peruse it, and post anything findings you think noteworthy.
Here is a direct link to the 94 MB archive:
https://antipolygraph.org/yabbfiles/Attachments/Polygraph_Place_Bulletin_Board_Private_Forum_Archive.zip
Thank you Ex-Examiner for providing the readers of this website with this treasure trove of information of which the polygraph community does not want the general public to know! I have always wondered what the polygraph community feels about the anti-polygraph community in general and GM in particular.
How did you obtain it?
Are you yourself a former polygraph examiner (judging from your moniker)?
How do you think Mr. Ralph Hilliard will respond?
(By the way, I had to install Firefox and install the MAFF add-on. After downloading the ZIP file, I changed the property of this file so that it opens using the Firefox application.)
Quote from: George_Maschke on Jun 06, 2013, 01:44 PMUnfortunately, the amount of time I can devote to polygraph matters is limited and is likely to remain so for some time.
George, you might want to take a couple days off and indulge yourself, it's a cornicopia. I found it amusing and alarming to read..the same people who have power over who gets hired in law enforcement or national security, talking like prankster school boys...musing over such silly things like using photoshop to alter your pictures....astonishing.
A review of message threads in the Polygraph Place archive with "countermeasure*" in the title provides no indication that the polygraph community has any coherent, let alone effective, method of detecting the kinds of countermeasures outlined in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (https://antipolygraph.org/lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf).
There are a lot of libelous statements against George, even liking him to a Sex Offender:
"I would liken Boy George to a Sex Offender in that he has an obsessive compulsive disorder that he is fixated on. He neither wants or seeks treatment for it, and would only fight any attempt to get him off of his fixation to the point of his own demise or imprisonment should that ever be decided for him. Further, Like a sex offender, I don't believe there is any cure for him. "
The internal exchanges regarding the countermeasure challenge are good reading. There are two juxtaposed themes--trying to convince themselves that they can indeed detect countermeasures, overlayed with an acute apprehension to step forward.
Countermeasures Challenge - Polygraph Place Bulletin Board.html.maff
Quote from: Arkhangelsk on Jun 09, 2013, 01:13 AMThe internal exchanges regarding the countermeasure challenge are good reading. There are two juxtaposed themes--trying to convince themselves that they can indeed detect countermeasures, overlayed with an acute apprehension to step forward.
Countermeasures Challenge - Polygraph Place Bulletin Board.html.maff
Polygraph operators are so paranoid about people using so-called "countermeasures" that they routinely accuse everyone of using them. It is a sad irony that most of the people they accuse don't even know what "countermeasures" are. As a matter of fact, the word "countermeasures" is a word that has been misappropriated by polygraph examiners - it is used to describe what they say is a means to thwart their ability to detect deception. But polygraph operators have always maintained that they can tell when a person is using these so-called "countermeasures". If that is true, how can anyone use them "beat" the test? But, for the sake of argument, let me ask a few more pertinent questions: If people can indeed be taught to use "countermeasures" to "beat the test", wouldn't that prove the polygraph is not a "lie detector"? Does the validity and reliability of the polygraph test demand that the subjects of the test must be ignorant about how it works? If anyone could be taught how to produce and/or prevent a reaction on the polygraph at will, wouldn't that make the whole idea of a "lie detector" a fraud? And wouldn't polygraph operators have to admit their little machine is actually just a sick joke - and that the polygraph instrument is simply a prop used by an interrogator to frighten people into making admissions and confessions? And would it not be prudent for the government to quit wasting money on something that is nothing but a fraud and a con job? The fact is the answer to all these questions is a resounding YES!
Polygraph operators do not want to debate the validity of the polygraph as a "lie detector" because they will lose - and they certainly don't want to answer any of these questions! They know they cannot prove the polygraph is valid and reliable as a "lie detector - so they just say that the people who educate themselves are only doing research on the polygraph in order to "beat the test". I say that is just BULLSHIT! I have spent almost forty years proving that the "lie detector" is just a myth, and it is common knowledge that just telling the truth only works half the time, so people are smart enough to know that they must LEARN HOW TO PASS or they will be falsely accused of lying.
Doug, I think you've got that right. Moreover, I think the very existence of Operation Lie Busters (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=5074.msg37396#msg37396), an apparent effort to criminalize the teaching or learning of polygraph countermeasures, is testimony to the polygraph community's inability to detect countermeasures and attendant insecurity.
Quote from: George_Maschke on Jun 09, 2013, 12:26 PMDoug, I think you've got that right. Moreover, I think the very existence of Operation Lie Busters (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=5074.msg37396#msg37396), an apparent effort to criminalize the teaching or learning of polygraph countermeasures, is testimony to the polygraph community's inability to detect countermeasures and attendant insecurity.
Good point - and it is also another example of the Government's all out attack on the 1st Amendment right to free speech!
By the way, on another subject - a few days ago I encouraged everyone to join me in giving a donation to help support you and your good work. But when I tried, I was unable to do it myself. When I click on the button at the bottom of the page, I got this response: "The link you have used to enter the PayPal system contains an incorrectly formatted item amount".
I suggest you look into fixing this so you can get some support from your loyal followers.
Thank you, Doug, for pointing out the bad donation link at the bottom of the message board. I have updated it. I pay the costs of running AntiPolygraph.org out of pocket and am grateful to those who have helped to keep the lights on at AntiPolygraph.org over the years.
Quote from: George_Maschke on Jun 09, 2013, 04:03 PMThank you, Doug, for pointing out the bad donation link at the bottom of the message board. I have updated it. I pay the costs of running AntiPolygraph.org out of pocket and am grateful to those who have helped to keep the lights on at AntiPolygraph.org over the years.
You're welcome - I just donated $50. Now, I again challenge everyone who is being helped or has been helped by this website and all the other ancillary activities George is involved in to stop polygraph abuse - DONATE!
In a 30 July 2009 post to the PolygraphPlace.com examiner's forum, Skip Webb, a polygraph examiner with the U.S. Army's Criminal Investigation Command and past president of the American Polygraph Association, makes an unusually candid admission about the nature of polygraphy in general and polygraph screening in particular that I think is worth quoting in its entirety:
QuoteI think we placate ourselves into believing that the polygraph works under any circumstances and when used on anyone for any reason. None of which is really true. It appears especially true in pre-employment and periodic screening.
Think of what we do as using a torque wrench to tighten a lug nut. If we set the torque too high, we tighten the lug until we wring the head off. Not a good result, especially if you're the nut being tightened or you are the one responsible for keeping the wheels turning safely. If we set the torque too low, we never break a bolt, we do get the warm and comforting sound of the click when we tighten the nut but in reality, one day the wheel is going to run off. Again, not a good result.
Our dilemma appears to be easily solved by just finding the right amount of torque to get the job done without breaking the bolt. In reality, though, every bolt has a different tolerance or breaking point and every job requires a different amount of torque. We don't have the luxury of knowing either of the unknowns going in.
Added to our problem is when the policy wonks come into play. Human Resources wonks say we're breaking too many lug nuts so we lower the torque a bit. Security wonks say we're letting too many wheels fall off so tighten the torque. It's kind of hard to blame our problem on either the torque wrench or the lug nut. More policy types then add another problem by bringing in weaker and weaker lug nuts and demanding they be used to hold the wheel on. We're told to use them anyway and don't break any off in the process. Then we start manipulating the torque settings to accomplish that, knowing when a wheel runs off, we're the ones who will get blamed
As the person using the tool, we have the responsibility to quit overselling our abilities and that of polygraph process. What polygraph can do, it can do pretty well. What it does poorly is what bites us in the ass when we use it anyway.
The same day, former DoDPI researcher Gordon H. Barland replied, "I am awestruck. That is a truly brilliant metaphor!"
I'm one of the "bolts" whose "head was wrung off," and I think Webb's metaphor shows that polygraph examiners at the highest levels of government know damned well that what they're doing is not science. It's also a tacit admission that pass/fail rates are dictated from above.
Webb's post appears in the message thread, "GM's Smoke & Mirrors" which is to be found in folder 8 of the archive.
My congrats to the person who gave up this treasure trove of information. It is providing many hours of entertaining reading. I am finding it hard to believe that none of our illustrious polygraph guru's haven't chimed in, or is this butt-whipping that this archive provides finally enough for them to say UNCLE.
Best Regards
Here's another illuminating post by Skip Webb, found in the message thread "George Mashe" (sic), located in folder 10. On 9 March 2009, responding a suggestion that I should be criminally prosecuted for making information about polygraph countermeasures available to convicted sex offenders, Webb wrote (emphasis added):
QuoteTrying to make the case that George is aiding and abetting an offender would be like saying that someone who went to the NASCAR driving school and then decided to drive the get away car in a bank robbery would cuase their driving instuctor to be a partner in the crime. If your logic held water, then all of the pilot instructors who trained the 911 pilots would be in jail right now.
George is not our problem. The fact that mental and physical countermeasures can negate the efficacy of our test is the problem. We either have to get really good at countering the CMs or we need to develop a test that circumvents CMS or makes them useless.
Most diagnostic tests can be defeated or countermeasured if one wants to skew or frustrate the procedure and the resulting diagnosis. Unfortunately some of our clients have a reason to do so.
I can assure you that when the draft was in effect, we had a number of people who faked or counter measured the hearing test and the eye test in an effort to get out of the draft. If there had been an internet back then, you can bet it would have been full of CM sites telling one how to do it. Even when I was drafted, people were told through the grape vine to put a bar of soap under their arm in an effort to elevate their blood pressure??????????
I know we like to vent our frustration on George but the reality is we are angry not so much with George as we are with the limitations of what we do and the ease with which it can be frustrated.
Frustration and anger, when properly directed can create innovation. We need to channel our frustration and anger into productive change.
In polygraph community jargon, I'd call that a "substantive admission."
On 29 September 2008, Ralph Hilliard, the proprietor of PolygraphPlace.com, opened a message thread titled "We need a 'comments' voice. Any Volunteers?" It's in folder 13 of the archive (https://antipolygraph.org/yabbfiles/Attachments/Polygraph_Place_Bulletin_Board_Private_Forum_Archive.zip) (94 mb ZIP file). His idea was to orchestrate a commenting campaign on on-line newspaper articles about polygraphy:
QuoteHey Everybody,
Since I have been regularly scanning all the polygraph articles that land each day, there is a common theme of misinformation either in the article itself or in the comments that follow.
In one form or another, quotes and stories have become the reality to most in the public rather than facts.
For example, every single moment maschke gets a chance, his mantra is 'Consensus amongst scientists is that there is no basis in science for the CQ polygraph.'
Most regular folks repeat the usual...
How good could they be since they aren't allowed in court?
or as Repairman Jack responded to a recent online article....
Polgraphs - isn't the jury still out on their reliability?
That article is here if you want to read it:
http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/3702525.Would_I_lie_to_you_/#commentsform
So what is my point? It is important to do the small things to advance a professional message with facts.
And at least one way would be to post positive and corrective information in the 'comments' areas at the end of all these articles.
It doesn't need to be an army. One person could help the collective profession by making it their mission to daily read the polygraph related articles and 1. Correct misinformation in the articles and 2. Post intelligent, fact based replies to naive commenters.
I have the motivation and energy to do this, but not the time. Its little things like this that could make a difference in public opinion in the long run, especially because authors tend to quote other authors and that is how the misinformation continues to spread.
I was going to put this in the newsletter, but why tip our hand to GM, who would probably be there like stink on shit to dig up a fight if he knew there was an actual plan. A Covert fighter would be a much better option...at least until he catches on and then we will at least be giving another opinion to the masses than just his.
Any Takers? Hmmm, not to put you on the spot Jim, but isn't this what you hoped to do at AP? I'd rather fight on neutral territory than on GM's ground.
------------------
Ralph Hilliard
PolygraphPlace Owner & Operator
Be sure to visit our new store for all things Polygraph Related
http://store.polygraphplace.com
The campaign evidently never got off the ground, but I did find this post by Don Krapohl of DoDPI/DACA/NCCA interesting:
QuoteFolks:
Let me first say that the following is just my personal opinion, and should not be misconstrued as being an APA position nor necessarily especially wise counsel. It is simply how I've come to see our exchanges with George.
I have long held the view that we should not post on the AP site. I came to this conclusions from what I know about the facts on the ground. First, the site is a refuge for zealots, and as zealots they are immune to information that challenge their beliefs. They are impervious to facts, logic, data, or evidence. So we must first acknowledge that our contribution in that regard will not be useful. We have yet to convince any of them of the sins of their ways. Second, it seems apparent that the site owner thrives on the attention he receives when we post there. Far from being taken aback by our brilliantly crafted counterpoints, he derives gratification when people, anyone, acknowledge him. The more you post, the happier he gets. Third, when we hold a moritorium on posting, as you all did recently, the zealots end up feeding on each other. If they don't receive gratification from others, they do it to themselves (insert favorite joke here). This causes their postings be become more frenzied, more extreme, and ultimately to reveal to all the world how out of the mainstream their thinking is. And finally, the AP posters seem to have all the time in the world. Who here can post a response 24 hours a day? It is clear that we can't exhaust them because we have other work, truly important work, to get done.
It seems a more adaptive response to set up a separate site with pro and balanced information on polygraphy. It need not be like the AP site, where everyone with a keyboard can send whatever he wants. Rather, it could simply be an informational site that remains static except for updates by the administrator. I would argue that this should not be undertaken by the APA, since there is an assumption of bias. Also, many of the folks here are not APA members, and they should be able to assist in this effort.
Here are some of the potential benefits of this new site. One: it gets our message out. Two: it doesn't tie us down answering postings from radicals. Three: it might tie up the radicals on their site trying to respond to all of the good information on our site.
Regardless of whether this new site idea gets off the ground, let me repeat that our time spent posting on the AP site has come to naught and that we are better served by focusing on solutions instead of detractors. Let me just end with an open question: where are our energies best spent?
Don
(Very) long-time readers of AntiPolygraph.org may recall that after AntiPolygraph.org first went on-line on 18 September 2000, Krapohl registered the domain name antipolygraph
.com (https://www.antipolygraph.org/news/polygraph-news-003.shtml#21-04-01), though he never set up a website at that address. The pro-polygraph website separate from the American Polygraph Association that he suggests in the above post also seems not to have been created.
Don, you opine that I and others are "impervious to facts, logic, data, or evidence." Why don't you try me? For starters, could you point out any factual errors that you believe exist in
The Lie Behind the Lie Detector? I am, in fact, keenly interested in correcting anything that we may have gotten wrong.
Quote from: George_Maschke on Jun 17, 2013, 02:39 AMFar from being taken aback by our brilliantly crafted counterpoints,
Really now....can someone give me some examples of this brilliance?...Quickfix, care to chime in?
George,
You have clearly won the intelligence war hands down. These clowns don't know which way is up, what to say to whom, or when they will likely see it on this board.
Your source is likewise masterful and appears to not to have compromised himself/herself and is likely posed to continue collecting and reporting the polygraph community's abysmal behavior and thought process...
Keep up the good work!
getrealalready,
Thank you for your kind words. We indeed owe a debt of gratitude to conscientious members of the polygraph community who, like Ex-Examiner, have made documents and information available to us over the years.
I invite any readers with information concerning polygraph policy or procedure that they believe should be made available to the public to do so. Ways to do this include attaching documents to a message board post (as Ex-Examiner did), e-mailing me, or sending me a letter by postal mail. Contributors who wish to remain anonymous can do so by accessing the site through a proxy network like Tor (https://www.torproject.org/) or by simply dropping a letter in the mail without a return address.
The polygraph advocates have been conspicuously absent ... hmmmm ;)
Quote from: getrealalready on Jun 17, 2013, 06:36 PMGeorge,
You have clearly won the intelligence war hands down. These clowns don't know which way is up, what to say to whom, or when they will likely see it on this board.
Your source is likewise masterful and appears to not to have compromised himself/herself and is likely posed to continue collecting and reporting the polygraph community's abysmal behavior and thought process...
Keep up the good work!
Sometimes, there just are no words. LMAO
Karma, she can be a bitch.
Grabbing my "popcorn and soda" and watching the show. I been waiting four long years for this.
I don't know who these clowns hate the most - George or me. I was the only one they had to hate from '79 to 2000 - and then George came along. And then they had another one to hate. I think we should have a contest. The "GOOD GUY" prize goes to the one the polygraph con men hate the most!
I have always been proud of the fact that these jerks hate me so much - that's proof I am hurting them. They have recently demonstrated just how much I am hurting them and how much they hate me.
Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 19, 2013, 11:11 AMSometimes, there just are no words. LMAO
Karma, she can be a bitch.
Grabbing my "popcorn and soda" and watching the show. I been waiting four long years for this.
Just like there is a guy in a white hat, there has to be a guy in a black hat. But with all due respect, there are a lot of people who have come into my room for whom you should be refunding some money.
Anyway, save the loving the hate for the others. I am not here to love or hate you. I am simply here to watch the show I know to be coming.
The show is already here, and you clowns are leading the parade. The stench of fear and paranoia is stifling (but amusing) - it exudes from the screen when I read all the pirated posts from POLYGRAPHPLACE. All you guys in the black hats really prove my contention that the "lie detector" is a myth when you think you are talking only to fellow charlatans! And what's worse, you all know it is a joke and you still claim it is a valid scientific method to detect deception. Your hats are all very black indeed - as are your hearts!
Now, if someone else would grow a conscience like "EX POLYGRAPHER" and make all the posts from the APA public, we could really get an insight into the hearts and minds of the black hat gang of thugs and conmen called polygraphers.
And as for refunds - no one has asked for any.
I leave you to ponder the words of the man who invented your so-called "lie detector".
"The lie detector, in many places, is nothing more than a psychological third-degree aimed at extorting a confession as the old physical beatings were. At times I'm sorry I ever had any part in its development."
polygraph pioneer
John A. Larson
Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 19, 2013, 02:48 PMJust like there is a guy in a white hat, there has to be a guy in a black hat. But with all due respect, there are a lot of people who have come into my room for whom you should be refunding some money.
Anyway, save the loving the hate for the others. I am not here to love or hate you. I am simply here to watch the show I know to be coming.
Doug, I have not attacked you personally and grouping me in with these ass clowns is just silliness, as I was attacked on those posts too.
I do not fear you Doug, you may have an overinflated sense of ego here. Out of all I have been through in the past four years, you think YOU are the person I should fear? LMAO...... Ok, if you think you can make me miserable, take your best shot; go for it.
Like I said, I am not here to love you or hate you. I am not even here to like you or tolerate your existence. As a matter of fact I don't even hear your name but about once or maybe twice a year. I am simply here to watch liars and hypocrites get exposed for what they are.
Save your hate for someone who cares that you hate them. That energy is wasted on me. You hating me is not even a blip on my radar screen.
Now why don't you get your Lincoln Logs and some matches and go play insurance fraud. Either that or go find a storm where a house can fall on you, because you are boring the hell out of me.
You seem the type to like ruby slippers
Am I to assume then that the "liars and hypocrites" you refer to are the polygraph operators? It would seem so since you said, "I was attacked on those posts too". I guess I'll go back through them and see if I can identify you.
Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 19, 2013, 04:13 PM
I am simply here to watch liars and hypocrites get exposed for what they are.
You go ahead and do that. But I am done with you. You are of no or little use to me.
Oh and no need to look through anything, it is common knowledge I am Joe McCarthy and my gripe with PP is no secret. I don't hide behind screen names; I let others play that game.
No go play in a funnel cloud somewhere. Until I can find a use for you, I'm done.
Yo George, where is the ignore button?
Oh, so you are THAT Joe McCarthy. I really enjoy it when you guys start fighting each other like a couple of whores fighting over who works the johns on a street corner. It was very entertaining to watch you argue about who gets to poly the next sex offender! And then to get the court involved in your little territorial dispute - hilarious! There was also something about defamation wasn't there? That would be the classic example of the pot calling the kettle black! Here's a button for you - ::)
Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 19, 2013, 04:47 PMYou go ahead and do that. But I am done with you. You are of no or little use to me.
Oh and no need to look through anything, it is common knowledge I am Joe McCarthy and my gripe with PP is no secret. I don't hide behind screen names; I let others play that game.
No go play in a funnel cloud somewhere. Until I can find a use for you, I'm done.
Not anywhere near as hilarious as insulting GN one day and then riding his coat tails today. Wow you are predictable as the countermeasures you teach. To think people actually pay you for what they can get here for free. Think you maybe the biggest charlatan in polygraph today.
By the what happened to your polygraph examiners license Doug?
Yes, George and I have set aside our differences, and have united in one final push to finally stop the madness called "lie detection". That is the only thing I ever had on my "bucket list".
But I do offer a few things that are unique to me and for which I charge a modest fee - practice tests, personal training, email and phone consultation - 12 hours a day, seven days a week.
And you are right - I was once the "biggest charlatan in polygraph". But I, unlike you, have changed my ways and, like the Superman that I have now become, I am fighting for TRUTH, JUSTICE, AND THE AMERICAN WAY! :D
Well maybe not Superman, but I am fighting for the same things - which are the antithesis of what you represent - and I have had some super victories in my battle against the evil Orwellian instrument of torture called the "lie detector". I was instrumental in putting about 10,000 polygraph conmen out of business with the passage of the EPPA, and it won't be long before the rest of you will have to find other work too - your days are numbered. >:(
Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 19, 2013, 05:43 PMNot anywhere near as hilarious as insulting GN one day and then riding his coat tails today. Wow you are predictable as the countermeasures you teach. To think people actually pay you for what they can get here for free. Think you maybe the biggest charlatan in polygraph today.
Yet here we are and you are now relegated to helping sex offender try to get away with the things they do. How proud your mommy must be.
Oh and answer the question. What happened to your polygraph license?
It's a simple question
I have accomplished my goal, I baited you into outing yourself - now people can make their own judgments about who you are and what you say. So I'm done with you after this post.
As to my license, the last time I saw it, it was circling the bowl getting flushed down with all the rest of the shit - and yours is soon to follow. :P
Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 19, 2013, 06:21 PMYet here we are and you are now relegated to helping sex offender try to get away with the things they do. How proud your mommy must be.
Oh and answer the question. What happened to your polygraph license?
Oh dougie, you have a nice day. off you go now.
Oh and lets not make the mistake of thinking that you baited me out. I never hide behind a screen name and always speak plainly and honestly; which is more than I can say for other people.
And your statement is, from what I heard partly right. Your license did go into the toilet. Too bad you can't be honest about what happened.
But that is what liars do, they deflect and avoid answering direct questions directly or honestly.
Have a good day dougie, thanks for the entertainment.
I don't think a "polygraph license" is of any significance; it would be no different than having an "astrologers license." In fact, why not have a "polygraph countermeasures license?"; one could show it to the polygraph operator and say "there ya go, now hook me up!"
For those who may not be familiar with the background, in 2008, Joseph McCarthy (the fighting irish) filed a lawsuit in Tarrant County, Texas airing the local polygraph community's dirty laundry. See the message thread, Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=3887.msg28973#msg28973).
This earned McCarthy the polygraph community's enmity, as you'll see in the above message thread and also, in the Polygraph Place archive. See the message threads "Is Joe McCarthy a Moron" in folder 15 and "Joe McCarthy's Texas Lawsuit" in folder 13.
What was the ultimate decision of the court? Did Joe prevail?
Sadly, I had a lawyer that was not ready for a fight like this and some major procedural errors on her part left me defenseless to a summery judgment. I was never allowed my day in court which is the way the polygraph examiners wanted it.
I did not prevail in court, but I did prevail in business when I learned to become as cut throat as the cut throats.
The one valuable lesson I did learned is that NO ONE ever wins a lawsuit. Even if you win, you lose. A lot happened afterward; with forged documents surfacing that I knew nothing of, settlements that I was not privy to, it was a plain mess. Just a mess.
The harassment by the defendants continued and the dirty tricks. TAPE being the worst of the dirty tricksters. But thats ok, the truth always gets revealed d in the end. This leak shows the type of people I had to deal with. Underhanded, backstabbing, and gleeful at the pain of others (with a few acceptions).
They cannot run from their own words. Now they have to deal with what they say and the things they do. I have no sympathy or empathy for them.
I will say there is a lot more underhandedness than what is seen here. But that I will deal with when the time is right and in the appropriate forum
Interesting comments from the polygraph place forum. I'd like to hear Pailryder and Sarge's comments:
"Pailryder is an obsequious twit who claims to be a polygraph examiner, but says only what is useful to GM. He occassionaly tries, inauthentically, to promote some form of polygraph, just to preserve impressions. He's really a disgusting fake. I'm also suspicious of his origin - with a registration date during 2006, pre-dating Palerider, though not a single post until recently. It would be quite easy for an Administrator to create a user, and then manually alter the registration date in the MySQL database upon which YABB runs. Pailryder's written voice has the same emasculated need for testosterone replacement as the GM and Lethe character. You'll notice this voice emerge whenever GM's characters are attempting to be sincere, thoughtful and intelligent."
"and the respected Sergeant1107 - is a dimensionless character. he's a one-note-song, who's carefully crafted mantra is remarkably similar to that of GM himself. He claims to work at the Pentagon (BS), and claims to have failed three polygraphs while telling the truth."
Arkhangelsk
Yes, it's true. I have been called a fake and a fraud by both sides of this board, but my doctor did provide the testosterone replacement therapy!
Arkhangelsk
I have to disagree with you. Sarg. 1107 has always identified his work as a sergeant with a Connecticut, I believe, LE department. I have never read where he said that he worked at the Pentagon.
Twoblock, just to clarify, see the quotation marks. These were statements made by polygraph operators on the Polygraph Place Forum, they are not my words.
Quote from: Arkhangelsk on Jul 19, 2013, 10:14 PMInteresting comments from the polygraph place forum. I'd like to hear Pailryder and Sarge's comments:
"Pailryder is an obsequious twit who claims to be a polygraph examiner, but says only what is useful to GM. He occassionaly tries, inauthentically, to promote some form of polygraph, just to preserve impressions. He's really a disgusting fake. I'm also suspicious of his origin - with a registration date during 2006, pre-dating Palerider, though not a single post until recently. It would be quite easy for an Administrator to create a user, and then manually alter the registration date in the MySQL database upon which YABB runs. Pailryder's written voice has the same emasculated need for testosterone replacement as the GM and Lethe character. You'll notice this voice emerge whenever GM's characters are attempting to be sincere, thoughtful and intelligent."
"and the respected Sergeant1107 - is a dimensionless character. he's a one-note-song, who's carefully crafted mantra is remarkably similar to that of GM himself. He claims to work at the Pentagon (BS), and claims to have failed three polygraphs while telling the truth."
Interesting indeed - an insight into the minds of these idiots! Their preoccupation with this site and their amateurish, in-depth, pseudo psychoanalysis of a person who they say has an "emasculated need for testosterone replacement as the GM and Lethe character", combined with their childish attempts at playing detective, looking for clues to someone's identity by what they refer to as "written voice", (whatever the hell that is supposed to be), is hilarious.
It shows the extent of their stupidity and paranoia. It also lets you know they have way too much time on their hands. Probably more government employees wasting time, (and tax payer's money), with all this nonsense.
Arkhangelsk
Most polygraph operators are like Obama. Obama uses things like (primarily) race baiting to draw attention away from his inequities i.e., his murders in Benghazi. Polygraphers uses lies against people i.e., the Sargent trying to bolster their industry which, as Doug says, is going to crumble.
Quote from: Doug_Williams on Jun 19, 2013, 06:08 PMYes, George and I have set aside our differences, and have united in one final push to finally stop the madness called "lie detection
So, does this mean Dr Maschke had finally decided to allow you to promote your for profit business ventures on his not for profit site?
No, Pailface, we are going to stop your insidious Orwellian for profit business! I mean just what I said, "George and I have set aside our differences, and have united in one final push to finally stop the madness called "lie detection."
Words mean things. But since you don't seem to comprehend them too well, I'll give you some more of those emoticons so you will understand. Polygraph con men go bye bye! ;D No more bullshit tests! :P
I am a private polygraph examiner who survived EPPA, so your bluster does not scare me. I have already taken your best shot and I am still here. You will never put me out of my chosen profession.
Quote from: pailryder on Jul 21, 2013, 08:35 PMI am a private polygraph examiner who survived EPPA, so your bluster does not scare me. I have already taken your best shot and I am still here. You will never put me out of my chosen profession.
Never say never...... ::)
Quote from: pailryder on Jul 21, 2013, 08:35 PMI have already taken your best shot and I am still here.
I guess that testosterone replacement worked.
I don't recall ever claiming to have worked at the Pentagon. All of my posts are still here, as far as I know. If anyone can find where I claimed to work (or to have worked) at the Pentagon, I'd love to see it.
Ever since the appearance of the Polygraph Place forum on this site, it seems that most of the polygraph operators went into hiding (save those with recent testosterone replacement).
I have been reading this forum for a few weeks now...I am not in law enforcement, but I do know someone whose life a polygrapher broke...the story of which I will not go into...however, these polygraphers ruin lives...and after reading the comments of one in here, and seeing his attitude, and how he articulates himself, my only emotional response is shaking my head in disbelief and shock, thinking, (and my life/career, future and the future of my family solely lies in this person's hands?) My God, this country is so corrupt...(call me naieve, but I used to believe in a world that was basically honest and forth right) that words like integrity and loyalty meant something....there are men and women out there who spent their lives dreaming of a career in law enforcement, simply b/c they wanted to make a difference, who have molded themselves into human beings that any parent would be proud to have their children look up to them as role models...people whose love for their job have been loyal and honest to their work for many years, with a clean portfolio, whose whole career lies within the hands of these examiners...whose lives they've ruined...just because? Unbelievable...and even more sickening, is the fact that they don't bat an eyelash at that fact....a perfect yet sad example of the power they have...I feel nothing but disgust, and do believe in Karma....
Lets face it, no one wants to loose their jobs, no one, however, if GM suceeds along with all the rest on his site, and for the record, I pray they do, these cocky examiners who call themselves human beings, would be out of a job, now wouldn't they?
GM, thank you for the time, you've put into this...for this website, and the compassion you feel for so many victims who have been truthful, loyal and devoted to their jobs.
Quote from: 05233A3A2F560 on Aug 01, 2013, 08:00 AMI have been reading this forum for a few weeks now...I am not in law enforcement, but I do know someone whose life a polygrapher broke...the story of which I will not go into...however, these polygraphers ruin lives...and after reading the comments of one in here, and seeing his attitude, and how he articulates himself, my only emotional response is shaking my head in disbelief and shock, thinking, (and my life/career, future and the future of my family solely lies in this person's hands?) My God, this country is so corrupt...(call me naieve, but I used to believe in a world that was basically honest and forth right) that words like integrity and loyalty meant something....there are men and women out there who spent their lives dreaming of a career in law enforcement, simply b/c they wanted to make a difference, who have molded themselves into human beings that any parent would be proud to have their children look up to them as role models...people whose love for their job have been loyal and honest to their work for many years, with a clean portfolio, whose whole career lies within the hands of these examiners...whose lives they've ruined...just because? Unbelievable...and even more sickening, is the fact that they don't bat an eyelash at that fact....a perfect yet sad example of the power they have...I feel nothing but disgust, and do believe in Karma....
Lets face it, no one wants to loose their jobs, no one, however, if GM suceeds along with all the rest on his site, and for the record, I pray they do, these cocky examiners who call themselves human beings, would be out of a job, now wouldn't they?
GM, thank you for the time, you've put into this...for this website, and the compassion you feel for so many victims who have been truthful, loyal and devoted to their jobs.
You are right, the polygraph is not a "lie detector" - nor is it a "test"! In fact, it is nothing but a sick joke! It is an interrogation, an intimidation, an inquisition, a trial by ordeal - and the polygraph operator is the judge, jury, and executioner! If you are found guilty of lying, there is no appeal from his decision! And to make matters worse, even if you tell the complete truth you will probably still fail!
The polygraph test is the most important test anyone will ever take. Until you take one, you have no idea how traumatic and grueling it can be - it is that way for a reason. The polygraphers want you to be so frightened that you "spill your guts". Some federal agencies give bonuses to polygraph operators that get the most damaging admissions! In fact, many people are so intimidated that they make statements that the polygrapher will use to disqualify or incriminate them - some people are so frightened that they confess to things they haven't even done!
And you are also right that the thugs who run these "tests" don't give a damn about all the people whose lives they have ruined.
Quote from: Arkhangelsk on Aug 01, 2013, 01:07 AMEver since the appearance of the Polygraph Place forum on this site, it seems that most of the polygraph operators went into hiding (save those with recent testosterone replacement).
I noticed that... I guess they decided to heed the advice given by Abraham Lincoln when he said, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."
And even Mr. T Replacement ran away and hid like a scared little rabbit when he was challenged to defend the absurdity of his "chosen profession"! ;D
Well, they should hide!
Before I understood, what a polygraph can actually do, or not do, I was exceptionally biased!
If I heard a person failed, without any question, I thought that person was a lier, until it happened to my closest confident and friend.
He is a fine upstanding man, and will tell the truth, no matter who it hurts or how much it hurts him to do so. He has years of experience on the job, had taken polygraphs before and passed.
He is loyal to his family, associates and friends, and hasn't got one negative reference in his file! He doesn't go out drinking with his buddies after work, goes straight home to his family, every single night.
Is he perfect, no, he isn't, no one is, but, he is a fine upstanding man, who is a fabulous role model, is one of the best on the job!
He decided to apply for a better paying job, in another state. The examiner was extremely smug...I only wish I could relay my whole story to you, but cannot, just to show you how corrupt some of these systems are.
We were all devastated at the outcome of his polygraph. He failed and failed again, and again, to the point that it caused us all great anguish and loss of hope for the honest person.
What these cocky examiners neglect to understand is...
When you call someone a liar that is an honest person, it not only effects them in a very negative way, (i.e. loss of confidence, despair, frustration, depression, fear of the polygraph machine from that point on, anger, and great loss of pay increase, and a better career) you examiners affect his/her immediate family (wife, husband, children) but also they're extended family and friends...and there is no question in my mind what-so-ever, that he is and was telling the truth...He prides himself on walking the straight and narrow the best he can, due to his job and the implementations of negative behavior.
I believe the most difficult part for an honest person is, to be told they are being deceptive, losing they're chances at a better paying job. I have no question in my mind, what-so-ever, that he would be an asset to any department...and he had plenty of solid references, from people he had worked for and with.
He also told me that, he was biased at one time, when someone told him, they failed the polygraph, until it recently happened to him, and yet, never before failed one? Now, he has constant problems with them, and even though he knows he is telling the truth, the great embarrassment he now feels, b/c there are people out there who are biased and believe in the machine.
Let me tell you, that while there are probably some good examiners out there, there are also extremely cruel, biased, power hungry examiners out there who do not give one iota about the people whose lives they are destroying. And what is really wrong with this system is, if they are going to be giving polygraphs, then, if a candidate applies with another department in that same area/state, it should never be allowed & totally against the law, for a polygraph examiner to ask that candidate, "did you ever take a polygraph before?" "Did you pass or fail?" "What was the question you failed?" It should also be against the law for the examiners to phone each other, and discuss the candidate's failure (s). Tell me, that isn't biased. Any candidate that goes in for a polygraph examination, should walk into it, with a clean slate!
I am certain, in my friend's case, the examiners were working together on this, and no one will ever convince me otherwise.
To me, this is a corrupt way to utilize power that shouldn't be given to these examiners...and to rely on a machine...is subjective, primitive and an extremely imperfect way to decide one's fate. Shame on all of you out there who have been instrumental in ruining someone's career! The despair and hopelessness you've caused each and every one of his family members. That is why I say, someday, this is going to come back and bite you right in the butt, but good as I do believe in karma, and what goes around comes around. I cannot believe these examiners can actually go home and continue with their lives, knowing full well, that they've destroyed someone's life/career! How can you sleep at night?
Yanno, back in the day, before the courts outlawed them, I cannot begin to imagine, how many so called criminals were institutionalized that should not have been! How many lives, were and still are ruined, whole families ruined (mothers, fathers, sisters, sons, daughters and wives, not to mention the so called criminal, due to the polygraph!
Well it is the same thing in the career field. When you fail someone who isn't lying, you not only ruin that candidate's career, you also destroy his entire family! And I'm not just talking about his wife & children, but his mother/father, friends, all who care about that human being are devastated...especially when they know that he has done his very best all his life, to be loyal to his job and doesn't house a negative letter or report in his portfolio. Who was it that said, "Good guys finish last?"
I cannot believe how corrupt this system is...and that the people who give these polygraphs are just as corrupt, "How can they fall asleep at night?" Knowing full well, that they have set someone up, due to their own personal beliefs?
How would they feel if someone ruined them like that?
I have a work related friend, whose daughter gives polygraphs. They hooked her up, and on a question that she lied about, the machine said she was telling the truth, and on another question she told the truth about, it said she was lying? How can any law abiding reputable department in this country put an ounce of faith in this primitive way of deciding someone's character, and to boot, without doing any background checks?
This to me, is an extremely primitive way to avoid doing background checks and your actually paying people to give these bogus polygraphs, not to mention ruining lives, filling them with hopelessness and rejection, when all they're years of experience and loyalty to their careers and fellow officers mean nothing? SERIOUSLY, A MACHINE, that is so totally inaccurate?
I just cannot fathom the lack of intelligence here, it's a no brainer! This is 2013, not 1948!
Quote from: pailryder on Jul 21, 2013, 06:46 AMQuote from: Doug_Williams on Jun 19, 2013, 06:08 PMYes, George and I have set aside our differences, and have united in one final push to finally stop the madness called "lie detection
So, does this mean Dr Maschke had finally decided to allow you to promote your for profit business ventures on his not for profit site?
Seems the proper answer is "yes".
Pailryder,
Can you specifically site an example of something that Mr. Williams has said recently that you believe he could not have said on this site anytime since the creation of this website? If so, can you site an example of where he was prevented or warned about posting such a thing?
getrealalready
I find irony in the fact that Doug and George settled their differences at this particular time when Doug's for profit business is receiving such scrutiny. I am sure you have followed this board long enough to recall that Doug once posted a glowing review of his own book, under a different name, of course, and once offered a fist fight, with a promise to whip George's ass, as a way to resolve their issues.
Pailryder,
That which you say is true; in times past Mr. Williams has made inappropriate comments on this board and may well have slandered and/or threatened Dr. Maschke.
That, however, is irrelevant to the point that I was making...which is...I see no evidence whatsoever, that at any time since the inception of AntiPolygraph.org that Dr. Maschke, even while being attacked, would have taken any steps to prevent the posting of anything that Mr. Williams now says on this board.
I believe that is the case because, although that which Mr. Williams says may well be promotional and/or self serving, it is largely true and accurate with regards to his efforts to debunk polygraphy and to warn and assist those who may be victims of this rather crude quackery.
getrealalready
I take your point. Dr Maschke has never, to my knowledge, prevented anyone on the anti side from posting whatever they wished and I did not intend to imply otherwise. But Dr Maschke has always, it seems to me, taken pride in maintaining the site as source of free information for all, and thus avoided the charge, often made against other sites, that they are all about self promotion and money.
I challenge you to review my postings and cite specific examples where you feel I have engaged in quackery.
Pailryder,
My reference to quackery has nothing to do with your posts but with the practice of polygraphy (lie detection) which is nothing but quackery in your hands or any other...
getrealalready
So, I've practiced crude quackery for more than thirty years, but my posts don't quack? How could that be?
Pailryder,
Your words on this board may be true or false, relevant or irrelevant, meaningful or not, etc., but in the end they are just words. Your (or anybody else's) practice of lie detection and the representation of same as a valid diagnostic test is unadulterated quackery.
getrealalready
Are you arguing that all polygraph techniques are quackery? Do you evaluate David Lykken's GKT as quackery as well?
Pailryder,
With respect to Getrealalready's last post, note that Lykken's Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT) is not a lie detection test.
Dr Maschke
With respect to my last post, I did not refer to Lykken's GKT as a lie detection technique, but simply as a polygraph technique. So, Dr Maschke perhaps you would be so kind as to my answer, is Lykken's GKT a valid scientific test or is it too quackery?
Although it's not without weaknesses and vulnerabilities, I don't think the GKT is quackery.
I think "Peak of Tension" is a more apt name. "Guilty Knowledge" is an implication; POT more correctly describes some shift in psychological stress, the root cause of which cannot be precisely determined.
A Peak of Tension (POT) test is a poorly designed concealed information test (CIT). Unlike David Lykken's Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT) format, the POT involves QUESTION presentation in KNOWN (to the examinee) SEQUENCES, which renders the individual test items NOT independent of one another and therefore having the test results not being amenable to the normal statistical analysis of a properly designed CIT.
A GKT can be poorly constructed and confounded as well by asking questions as opposed to presenting subject areas and alternative answers which are repeated by the examinee. If a GKT is constructed to involve questions answered with alternative answers repeated by the examinee, in effect, one has created and confounded a CIT with a lie detection test (something which has no validity in its own right and is not made better by confusing/confounding with a CIT).
The Mozilla Archive File Format (MAFF) used by Ex-Examiner to archive the Polygraph Place private forum has been deprecated, that is, it is no longer supported in Mozilla Firefox. Therefore, AntiPolygraph.org is undertaking a project to make this archive readable with any browser. The process is labor intensive and will take time. For now, you can review the most recent 80 message threads here:
https://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-055.shtml
At this time, a little more than half of the Polygraph Place Bulletin Board Private Forum has been made available for direct browsing. 18 of the 33 index pages, comprising 720 message threads from 13 February 2008 to 20 May 2013 are now available for review:
https://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-055.shtml
All 33 index pages (comprising 1,306 message threads) of the Polygraph Place Bulletin Board private forum archive are now browsable:
https://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-055.shtml
If a Examiner tells you that you did not pass the polygraph, and you say I told the truth I have no idea I could failed the polygraph. Then the examiner say's. I did not say you failed the polygraph, I said you did not pass the polygraph. What is the difference. Thank you!
Apart from passing or failing, an "inconclusive" outcome is also possible. See Chapter 3 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (https://antipolygraph.org/pubs.shtml) for more on polygraph procedure.