AntiPolygraph.org Message Board

Hello
Can any member here help me or tell me if either one of these people are competent?  Not members of FL Polygraph Assoc for either or them as they said that is a dues racket?

Mike Alawait Tampa FL: www.lie-detector-tests.com
He seems to be everywhere in FL?  He said he would do it for $400 but I had to show up the same day!

Denny Connors Orlando FL:  www.connorsinv.com/polygraphs.htm
His phone always goes to voicemail but did tell me he would do it for $375.00 as he left me a message back.

These two remind me of the secret squirrels as they talked to me like they have some kind of magic truth box.

I called www.polytest.org.- he said he could have one of his contractors to help me. he said these two men were not even qualified to be in his polygraph network.  problem is these two seem to be the only two advertising in tampa Orlando? He said it would be $600.00.

This is for a test for my 10 year old son - accused of stealing.  After finding and reading on this site my mind is spinning!!

thank you for whatever you can tell me :-/

Mary,

Don't subject your son to a lie detector "test." Polygraphy is a pseudoscientific fraud. (https://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-018.shtml) Polygraph chart readings are evidence of nothing, and it is quite common for truthful people to "fail."

Polygraph operators are bottom feeders running a scam. Steer clear of them all. It doesn't matter whether or not they are members of a polygraph association. These associations exist to protect their members, not the public.

See our book, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, for more on why you shouldn't trust any polygraph operator:

https://antipolygraph.org/lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf

10 year old child, and you want to polygraph him?  WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU THINKING?  Follow up question.  If these examiner knew that the subject was going to be 10 yoa, WHAT THE FUCK ARE THEY THINKING?

(again, if they knew)

I would never........ ever............ EVER!!!!!!!!!! subject a 10 year old child to a polygraph test.  EVER. 

SHAME ON YOU!

WTF are people thinking?  You don't put a 10 year old child in the polygraph room, I don't care if he is accused of stealing the US Constitution, or the Crown Jewels. 

Do I know people will be pissed at me for saying all this?  YES. And if you are pissed, ask yourself why.  start with this

Is putting a 10 year old child, though a very adult interview and interrogation process a good idea?

Come on people, even Dr. Phil wouldn't even think of such a thing. 

Why is this even a conversation? 

SHAME ON YOU MISS

QuoteThis is for a test for my 10 year old son - accused of stealing.

Mary, were you a perfect child at 10? All kids lie and steal at some point in their lives. It's calling growing up. Stop making issues out of normalcy otherwise the universe will give you something legitimate to worry about.

I was looking for help, not sarcasm or profanity.  I had no plan to do this. Prinicipal was pressuring me. These two characters are the main ones in this area and the only ones that would do a young person.  Denny Connors (Orlando FL) and Mike Alawait (Tampa FL) I think the last one is an Arab.The others I called either did not answer the phone or did not return call.  This is a strange business you people are in.  I was hopin that some person in FL would see posts I made and be able to give me ammo on these characters that I could throw back in the face of the principal.  I am disabled and on a disability pension and my next move is legal aid as I want to protect my son. 

Mary,
Forgive me, but the absurdity of this makes it hard to give a measured response. Now that you provided slightly more facts, I see that the Principal is the one who should be tarred and feathered. Has the school system finally gone over the deep end?

My previous post, though somewhat lacking in tact, was sound advice. Any legal action, in my opinion, should have the goal of removing the Principal from his job.

Should have hired a lawyer in the first place. 

Send a 10 year old child into a polygraph room.  People like you make me sick. 

ANYONE WHO WOULD EVEN TOY WITH THE IDEA OF MAKING A 10 YEAR OLD CHILD TAKE A POLYGRAPH, SHOULD BE STERILIZED SO THEY CAN NOT CONTAMINATE THE COLLECTIVE GENE POOL ANY FURTHER. 

Some people make me want to vomit

Dear Ark:

Thanks.  This principal is also doing the same thing to three other kids.  He came from Texas and a very arrogant and vulgar individual. 

The lawyer that myself and two other parents are going to see today plan to go after him. 

Thanks for your response as I did not get all of my facts right the first time.  I have MS and I have good days and bad days.
Thank George as well as I did try and download that book but my system time out.

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 31, 2017, 01:05 AMSend a 10 year old child into a polygraph room.  People like you make me sick. 

Joe, your [é]ire should be directed at the polygraph examiners who are willing to accept a 10 year old as a subject. Should you not police your own? Remember, that many ordinary folks like Mary have little knowledge of the polygraph other than what's they've seen on TV or in the movies.

Quote from: Arkhangelsk on May 31, 2017, 01:28 PM

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 31, 2017, 01:05 AMSend a 10 year old child into a polygraph room.  People like you make me sick. 

Joe, your [é]ire should be directed at the polygraph examiners who are willing to accept a 10 year old as a subject. Should you not police your own? Remember, that many ordinary folks like Mary have little knowledge of the polygraph other than what's they've seen on TV or in the movies.

You of all people should know my efforts to have us police our own.  In fact my pleas for the industry to' reasonably, police our own; and the warnings of the consequences of not doing so, have left me blacklisted, ostracized, and near bankruptcy.

I actually stand up for better policing in the industry, and I pay an actual price for it every day.  With all due respect, until you live a month of my hell I am forced to suffer for "the right thing."

Do not preach to me about this industry and its need for responsible policing from within.  Not a single person on the message board knows what I have been though, in the name of the "right thing" and how often frankly I regret it.

It will be 10 years in August of this year, that I will have been around.   In the beginning of 2008, will be the 10 year anniversary of me becoming the most honest and hated polygraph examiner in all the world. 

Do you know how I survived this long?  Because I had to be better than everyone else, just to scrape by.  I had to care about my examines and my vocation, more than anyone else.  I had to put 110% into EVERY TEST, even when I was exhausted of putting my face into the raping machine that is the Texas Polygraph Industry. 

Every time these people had someone make a bogus call, or send a bogus email, to get me to bite to do something unethical for money, as much as I needed that money, my integrity always meant more. 

I have gotten phone calls to test the 10 year old kid, many times; I get about 2 or 3 of them a year.  I am never sure if its one of these ass clowns down here or if it is for real.  In any case, I tell them the same thing I told Mary.  I am not shy about telling them what I think anything, that would undermine my integrity; and each and every time the conversation ends with the phrase, "GO FUCK YOURSELF."

What I left here on this thread was kind compared to what was there last night.

You bring up TV and the movies.  I'm sorry to be so blunt, but if you believe what you see on TV and the movies, then you deserve to be hit upside the head with a tac hammer; because clearly Darwin dropped the ball and missed that person entirely. 

If she is stupid enough to believe what she sees on TV and the movies, then I have a 7 course roadrunner meal waiting for her in my office.  It was prepared by a coyote that professes himself to be a, "Super Genius."

Moreover show me one movie or TV show that shows any realistic interoperation of a 10 year old child taking a polygraph examination.  Go ahead, I'll wait.

I am not a fan of the word, retard, but, anyone who would think that polygraph is appropriate for a 10 year old child, is more fitting of that title than any mentally disabled person I have ever had the pleasure of meeting.  In fact, most mentally disabled people that some people would refer to as "retards" are Rhodes Scholars compared to anyone that would think it be a good idea to give a 10 year old child a polygraph examination. 

Lastly, let me tell you EXACTLY where she lost 150% credibility in my mind.

Quoteand Mike Alawait (Tampa FL) I think the last one is an Arab

What the fuck does that have to do with anything? 

What does being, Arab, have anything to do with if someone is a good examiner, or a good person?  She lost all credibility in my mind, boom, right there.

Personally, she owes Mike an apology for the passive aggressive racist implication, in my opinion. 

Having said that, we only know what she told us was said. 

Now I am going to do something I have NEVER done before on this message board, so brace for impact; this will likely never happen again.  I am going to give the benefit of the doubt to the examiners in question; that they may not have been told all the details of the case.  I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt, to the examiners in question, that reading it here, was the first time they became aware that the subject may have been a 10 year old child. 

Wow, I can't believe I just typed those words.  That is the first time, that the benefit of the doubt, wasn't to the complaining party first.  The first time in 10 years. 

Now, having said that, if what she said is true, ANY examiner willing to administer a 10 year old child a polygraph examination, barring a court order, should be brought up before an ethics committee and disciplined. 

Any principal that thinks a polygraph examination is appropriate for a child, should never work in any school ever again and should have every disciplinary case he or she has been involved in reviewed. 

Any parent that would entertain the idea of a 10 year old child being polygraphed, should be sterilized; so as to avoid the further dumbing down of the collective gene pool.  I stand by my opinion.

Anyone who would even entertain the idea, should be ashamed of themselves. 

I want to say so much more about where I feel the industry is going.  But I will save that for another time, in a different string.

I promise two things

1, I will tell the truth

2 NO ONE WILL LIKE IT

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 31, 2017, 05:14 PMNow, having said that, if what she said is true, ANY examiner willing to administer a 10 year old child a polygraph examination, barring a court order, should be brought up before an ethics committee and disciplined. 

Are you going to exhibit the same zeal toward this end as your diatribe against Mary? You have their names, find out if the allegations are true and if so, get the ball rolling.

I'm almost insulted that you ask the question. 

Name one time that I haven't stood up for the right thing?  Name one.

Having said that, of course they are not going to say, "yup, we did and said it all."  WTF man.

Unless I hear confirmed tapes, I can't say I'm going to her side here.  I don't know these examiners personally and they have done me no wrong and I have no relevant, consistent proof or evidence in which to even question them about it, not that they would even talk to me. 

If I did have reliable evidence, I should point out that any rant I would go on would be treated as this one will be; it will be ignored by the per on or people who need to wake the fuck up, and smell the maple-nut crunch.

If I can't get anyone to do anything about what is happening in Texas, with the mountains of undeniable evidence I have against TAPE the flying monkeys, what makes you think I can get any ball rolling with them?

At least in Texas, I have a legitimate gripe.  Outside of Texas, it seems, all i can do is run to the end of my chain and bark, and hope someone hears me for a change.

Does that mean I wouldn't go off, of course not.  I'm hated for being fair independent and unbiased in the industry.  On the flip side, I am some times hated by you guys for being fair independent and unbiased; and this will just have to be one of those times.

Even if they were willing to do the test, God I hope not, she shares some responsibility or being so stupid and weak minded for entertaining the idea. 

Bottom line, there is more than enough tumidity to go around for everyone here. 

If she wants to protect her kid, she needs to get a lawyer.  Tell the kid to not talk to anyone without a lawyer, no matter what they say to try to trick him.  have the lawyer explain to the kid, IN 10 YEAR OLD LANGUAGE, what he should do if they try to trick him.

lastly, never trust anyone but you to do the right thing. 

people will often do the wrong things, because it's always easier than doing the right thing, every time.

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 31, 2017, 05:14 PMIn the beginning of 2008, will be the 10 year anniversary of me becoming the most honest and hated polygraph examiner in all the world. 

ROTFLMAO!

Let's see how honest you are, Joe...

Scientifically speaking, how accurate is the polygraph "test"?

according to your study? lmao

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 31, 2017, 08:17 PMaccording to your study? lmao

My micro-study -- I use that term because it involved just one (1) examiner -- concentrated on incident-specific criminal tests administered by the police.

As the late great Dr. Drew Richardson often pointed out, such exams are subject to influence, as from case detectives.

So, I'll rephrase...

How accurate is your run-of-the-mill PCSOT "test"?

After you claim the percentage of accuracy, kindly cite the proof.

[cue crickets]

People, watch -- and learn.

The self-proclaimed world's most honest forensic psycho-physiologist doesn't know whether to shit or go blind.

Why? Because there is no there there.

The "test" is a sham.

I'll direct you to the 2011 metta analysis study.  I am however, and I am not alone here, disappointed in the lack of follow up studies of any notoriety, unless someone can point any out on the polygraph side of things. 

Sadly, when you are ostracized and blacklisted, CEU options are limited. 

Having said that, I sleep just fine at night offering the service that I offer, which has been fair, independent, and unbiased to all.    I must be doing something right, because the blacklisting and slander campaign is till going here in Texas, despite my testing outperforming the vast majority of my competition, time and time again.  And to think; I don't have to treat people badly or have a high inconclusive rate to achieve this.

Having said that, when there are examiners out there like some of my competition here in DFW, if the problem is systemic, how could accurate numbers be compiled to begin with?

It seems to me, before any reliable study can even be entertained, the industry must first address the proven problem,  for which there can be no denial exists (at least here in Texas), of examiners performing tests with the motivation of padding numbers or being lazy; and performing tests outside of standards.

There is the truth.

Now everyone is angry, and I don't care any more.

Fair, Independent, and Unbiased, means just that. 

On the other ned of the spectrum, Dan, come on 100%?  Come on.... Seriously? 

Here is the plain and simple truth, that you will not like, and don't want to hear.  POLYGRAPH ISN"T GOING ANYWHERE!  It will always be here

Now to tell the truth to the industry, simply because I can and there is not much more they can do to me anymore.  In short, I stopped believing that giving a fuck is getting me anywhere.  Having said that, I am out for myself now. 

I have decided that pissing off both sides with the truth, is the best thing to keep my integrity and reputation for being unbiased, intact.  I have no friends, and have decided to embrace it and let it keep me warm like a blanket. 

Both sides are in need of some serious waking up to your own realities.  The problem is, both sides are polarized to one side or the other, not a one of you, including you Dan is willing to listen, be reasonable, and fix the things that are broken to a point where no one is really happy, but everyone, agree to disagree. 

I swear I would enter into a state of shock, if either side ever said to the other, "gee you have a point"


If we don't start policing our own, INCLUDING those who are in comfortable seats of power in the establishment, we will lose all credibility, all the public trust, and another eppa is not only a prediction, it may be a forgone conclusion.  The industry needs to step up, man up, and clean up. 

We need to start seeking out people of integrity and character, because all the PhD's in the world, don't mean a damn thing, if we don't have examiners of good character that mean more to the industry over than the entitled establishment who care more about the protection of their fiefdoms than the protection of the industry's integrity.

Integrity does not mean circling the wagons and protecting the unethical and fiefdom lords.  It means a fair and open market, where examiners compete on a level playing field.  Standards and rules are enforced.  Anticompetitive behavior is not tolerated, and those who practice in anti competitive behavior get shunned, and examiners who believe that everyone earn their own way, are embraced.

Competition breeds a better environment, for the examiner and the examinee.  Examiners should be held to our own test when necessary. 

I do not advocate the destruction of this industry.  What I do advocate is an industry where there is more accountability, transparency, responsibility, and integrity.  We should be an industry, where we set the standard of character; where we are the examples.  Because what we look like in some areas, is an industry of hypocrites.

So there it is. 

Also, given that I am still the only examiner who has EVER publicly put my money where my mouth was about the test, and bet my future on it; DON'T YOU EVER QUESTION MY INTEGRITY AGAIN.

You know better.  The people you need to question are in a list of people on papers filed in 2008.  They are suck famous polygraph examiner, and trusted by the establishment, get them on the phone and put them on the spot.

You know better than to do that with me.

The only hard evidence that you have that examiners are actively scared of their own test, comes from me.  So have some fucking respect

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 31, 2017, 09:03 PMI'll direct you to the 2011 metta analysis study.

The APA's own "meta-analysis"? IMHO, that's a statistical circle-jerk extraordinaire.

But let that go.

You trust the APA to tell the truth about polygraph "test" accuracy?

Joe, please get a clue.

For fifteen (15) years -- eleven (11) of them after the devastating NAS report -- the APA publicly proclaimed 98% accuracy.

There is nothing in the 2011 APA meta-analytic survey that is PCSOT specific.

Once again -- with feeling -- there is no there there.

The "test" is a crapshoot.

So tell us, Honest Joe, how accurate is a run-of-the-mill PCOST "test"?

Quote from: danmangan on May 31, 2017, 09:17 PM

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 31, 2017, 09:03 PMI'll direct you to the 2011 metta analysis study.

The APA's own "meta-analysis"? IMHO, that's a statistical circle-jerk extraordinaire.

But let that go.

You trust the APA to tell the truth about polygraph "test" accuracy?

Joe, please get a clue.

For fifteen (15) years -- eleven (11) of them after the devastating NAS report -- the APA publicly proclaimed 98% accuracy.

There is nothing in the 2011 APA meta-analytic survey that is PCSOT specific.

Once again -- with feeling -- there is no there there.

The "test" is a crapshoot.

So tell us, Honest Joe, how accurate is a run-of-the-mill PCOST "test"?

And I respect your somewhat valid opinion.  that is the difference between you and I Dan, I look at things though independent and unbiased eyes. 

I always had a problem with the 98% number, the same as I have a problem with your BS 100% number.

I'm more inclined to believe the 93% number (specific issue).  In either case, I trust the test enough to bet my life on it.  Tell me another polygraph examiner on the pro polygraph side that has done the same.

Also consider this, if there was a truly reliable way to "beat the test," without getting caught, and the accuracy is so low, and I am so trusting, why did every examiner involved with my case not step up, beat their tests, and then pray that I came up a false positive?  You'd think they would have the advantage, if your theory were true.

Easy way to get rid of me, which would leave you as their only opponent.  You, who has only biased numbers from the other side of the dense backing you up; the same way the APA has biased numbers backing them up.  Frankly, they only evidence there is any documented corruption in the industry, comes from me. 

If they saw a better than average chance ti be rid of me, they would have taken it.  After I disappear, ealing with your baseless accusations (with my evidence gone) is inconsequential.   

Face it Dan, you are not a threat to them, and they are not worried about you.  You don't even show up to meetings to look them in the eye.  Must be hard to see beyond all that lace huh?

In fact, you had a chance to debate them last you, you backed out when you realized that a debate would be unbiased and have rules. 

You'll back out this year too

Joe, you dodged the question.

How accurate is a run-of-the-mill PCSOT "test"?

After you claim the accuracy, please cite the evidence.

Hello

If we purchase an EyeDetect machine to do employee theft exams do we have get a license or be licensed under state polygraph laws.  I asked this question to a few state polygraph associations and no one ever got back to us. ]We were looking to do employee theft exams in three states. When \ you read DOL regs it only talks about polygraph! Lawyer says he cant get a response from DOL and even after sending two letters and it has been 4 months. We have spent hours researching this problem and ready to give up.

If you get to Answer with BS like IMHO, well, I do too.

Besides you said that specific issue testing was 100% accurate.

I'm saying it's 93

hmmmmmmm this is a pickle isn't it?

Because fact is, NAS is 2003, meta is 2011, and both in my honey opinion are biased studies.  base on my experience I'm more inclined to go from 80 to 93, in my honest opinion. 

Personally, I would like to see a honest effort on both sides to study the issue in a manner that is independent and unbiased.  there in is the rub. 

neither side would cooperate

QuoteHello

If we purchase an EyeDetect machine to do employee theft exams do we have get a license or be licensed under state polygraph laws.  I asked this question to a few state polygraph associations and no one ever got back to us. ]We were looking to do employee theft exams in three states. When  you read DOL regs it only talks about polygraph! Lawyer says he cant get a response from DOL and even after sending two letters and it has been 4 months. We have spent hours researching this problem and ready to give up.

What state are you in? Which states do you seek to "test" employees?

now that I have answered your question, and I have answered it.  Are you backing out of any idea of a strictly moderated debate?

QuoteHello

If we purchase an EyeDetect machine to do employee theft exams do we have get a license or be licensed under state polygraph laws.  I asked this question to a few state polygraph associations and no one ever got back to us. ]We were looking to do employee theft exams in three states. When  you read DOL regs it only talks about polygraph! Lawyer says he cant get a response from DOL and even after sending two letters and it has been 4 months. We have spent hours researching this problem and ready to give up.

you won't get anywhere in texas, don't waste your time

Joe, you DODGED my question.

The APA meta-analytical survey has no PCSOT-specific data. as in NONE.

Please tell us, Honest Joe, how accurate is a run-of-the-mill PCSOT "test", then cite the evidence.

QuoteIf we purchase an EyeDetect machine to do employee theft exams do we have get a license or be licensed under state polygraph laws.

I remember once in California, they outlawed "gasoline" powered leaf blowers. Gardeners simply switched to ethanol and there was nothing the government could do. My guess is that EyeDetect would not be affected by the EPPA, which is germane to employee theft investigations. Similarly I assume that state licensing verbiage stipulates "polygraph." Now I see the wisdom in an early launch.

I respectfully disagree, as usual, you don't like my answer.  That does not mean I didn't answer your question.  In fact, my answer benefits you on this if you would just read it.

I swear to god, you're like Dallas County Probations administrators.   You don't like the end result, but fail to read the damn reports to see the benefit. You're just not as bright as you play off as. 

Anyway, I'll take you dogging your question, that you're backing out like ya did last year. 

I keep handing you golden opportunities, and you keep stepping on them.  This is one of the reasons you will never be elected as APA president.  You don't know when to get out of your own way.   

UGH, I have a better chance of winning that elections, and I am not even a member

Quote from: Arkhangelsk on May 31, 2017, 10:02 PMI would venture to guess that state licensing verbiage stipulates "polygraph."

Wrong.

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXXI/Chapter149/Section19B

Yea, the Peoples Republic is pretty strict about these things

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 31, 2017, 10:11 PMI respectfully disagree, as usual, you don't like my answer.

But you failed to answer the question, Honest Joe.

How accurate is a run-of-the-mill PCSOT "test"?

Once you claim the percentage, cite the evidence.

Oh wait, there is none.

The "test" is bullshit.

Interesting, so they could not even use Statement Validity Analysis, Reality Monitoring or even looking for verbal and nonverbal cues to deception. But then again what do you expect from a state with a senator with a bad haircut who thinks she's Pocahontas.

Dan, BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE, if you can't read that I'll get a tac hammer

I am going between you and the APA's numbers, and NAS

And my honesty and integrity is not subject to your narrative.  And we want to talk about shams, lets talk about your 100% number.  Where did you get that number Dan; the Book Of Mormon?  Or did ya visit the Scientology center on Beacon Hill?  lmao

Quote from: Arkhangelsk on May 31, 2017, 10:19 PMInteresting, so they could not even use Statement Validity Analysis, Reality Monitoring or even looking for verbal and nonverbal cues to deception. But then again what do you expect from a state with a senator with a bad haircut who thinks she's Pocahontas.

ha! pocahontas

Quote from: Arkhangelsk on May 31, 2017, 10:19 PMInteresting, so they could not even use Statement Validity Analysis, Reality Monitoring or even looking for verbal and nonverbal cues to deception. But then again what do you expect from a state with a senator with a bad haircut who thinks she's Pocahontas.

Ark, I'm a born and bred Masshole. In this case, I agree with the Commonwealth.

At least for once, they got something right.

Such a "test" is a sham -- regardless of its form factor.

Dan, you might be a lace curtain Irish, but don't insult my kind by being a pretender

I wish you luck in your "campaign."  You don't stand a snowballs chance in hell.  I have a better chance of winning TAPE's examiner of the year award than you have of winning. 

Frankly, until to start showing up to meetings, and treating others with some level of respect, you couldn't win an election to be the APA package boy.

Dan, you're going about things wrong.  But go ahead, keep doing what you're doing.  Takes the heat off me for a few months a year 

Alas, Honest Joe, it is you who is the pretender.

You pretend the "test" is scientifically legitimate.

It is not.

I don't pre tent the test is legitimate, I bet my life on it three different times.  I count on it.

having said that

You really need to learn how to get out of your own way.  You will never win any elections like this. 

But like I said, keep wasting your time, every time you do, it benefits me. 

Oh and when you back out of opportunities like you do, you turn your back on the future, just like the APA does when they don't listen.  Hey, you have something in common, both you are the APA have the same goals, impotence

Good luck on your campaign 

Now, I have to turn my back on you..

Good luck

Honest Joe professes to be a true polygraph "test" believer.

Honest Joe is not part of the solution.

Honest Joe is part of the problem.

Capiche?

Whatever helps you sleep at night Dan.

I wonder if you even know what you really want.  Because it seems to me, you want to belong, you want to be a polygraph examiner, but not if you're not king of the hill. 

You say you're committed to the betterment of polygraph.  You're only committed to its destruction. 

One of my new goals, is to have a bigger impact making polygraph better, for both examiners and examinees, than you will ever achieve in attempting destroying it.

You're throwing away what is left of your future.  The APA is going to chew you up and spit you back out, you are neither hot or cold.

What a waste of a perfectly good membership. 

good luck in your future endeavors 

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 31, 2017, 05:14 PM
What does being, Arab

More interesting than whether or not he is Arab is his surname.   I presume that it is a variant of "Alawite", which was the "ruling house" of Syria, from which sprang such notables as the al-Assad clan!

::)

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 31, 2017, 11:31 PMYou say you're committed to the betterment of polygraph.  You're only committed to its destruction. 

Joe, as I made clear in my candidate statement, I am committed to making the APA honest, ethical and accountable. To make that happen, some organizational and cultural deconstruction will be necessary.

There will be significant business erosion as well -- a form of collateral damage, if you will -- as the risks, realities and limitations of the polygraph "test" become more widely known.

For some years now, the APA has laid vigorous claim to the mantle of scientific legitimacy for polygraph "testing," but I call BS.

If the polygraph "test" is indeed scientifically legitimate, there would be no objection to a bill of rights for test takers. There would be no stonewalling when it comes to obtaining complete polygraph files for independent review. And finally, there would be no institutional resistance to a countermeasure challenge series.

Yet, the APA fears all of those things.

Now, if the APA were to reverse course and admit the polygraph "test" is merely a pseudo-scientific gimmick that's used mainly as an investigative tool to help elicit confessions, I'd have no qualms whatsoever -- and I'd resign forthwith from the APA.

Clearly, if polygraph is to ever pass muster as a legitimate forensic science, the APA must not shun scrutiny of the "test" and its related practices.

In my view, Joe, the APA needs to be figuratively dismantled and rebuilt

and who's going to do it, you?  In YOUR image.

You are nothing more than a negative image of the establishment who wants to keep the monopolies, anticompetitive behaviors, lack of real oversight, responsibility, and accountability.

It's the same picture, just a different view of the same message.  You are not change, you are the same as them, only other than the appearance of a "democracy," with you it will be outright dictatorship. 

In essence you are Tump and Hillary rolled into one ugly, arrogant person. 

After reading what I just read, I don't see how anyone can vote for a potential despot.  Your way is not the way.  You will never become president, in Fact, you will never gain any office in the APA with your platform. 

You're not even a threat to the industry, Dan.  Which explains why they never tried to actively kick you out, the way they have tried to actually do so with me.  They see you as the Dog who will do little more than run to the end of your chain and bark; even if let off your chain, you would be ineffective and impotent.

I say this because even if ........ IF you got any office in the APA, it would be you against everyone else, and you lack the one tool needed to get anyone on your side to effect your change, the ability to reason.

I said it before, I'll say it again.  Your way is to destroy and rebuild in your image, on a faulty foundation.  The APA needs people who will square and level the foundation; and build on that.

Yours is a way to benefit only you.  I suspect people voting for you do so out of a lack of real option from the status quo.  It has little to do with your vision.

The other two guys, are viable candidates.  You are the idiot that wants it all handed to you, because you want it your way, to benefit only you. 

I checked the weather in hell, because unlike you, I have been though all nine rings, I paid more than my dues.

NEWSFLASH:  it's still hot there with zero chance of even a light breeze, much less a snow squall. 

I'd rather the devil I know, before I would accept a despot with only a desire for self ambition. 

What is sad is, I have yet to see anyone who has the balls to enact change that would be beneficial to all.  it is possible 

Quote from: xenonman on Jun 01, 2017, 03:29 AM

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 31, 2017, 05:14 PM
What does being, Arab

More interesting than whether or not he is Arab is his surname.   I presume that it is a variant of "Alawite", which was the "ruling house" of Syria, from which sprang such notables as the al-Assad clan!

::)

I will have no part of racism.  If he is dirty, prove it with facts, not an assumption of race.  No good comes from assuming a mans character by race or religion.

Hell i could beat you if it came down to me and you.  that is how little chance you stand

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 01, 2017, 08:18 PMAfter reading what I just read, I don't see how anyone can vote for a potential despot.

ROTFLMAO!

Pour yourself another one, Honest Joe.

Would you care to make a wager as to what percentage of the votes I'll receive for president-elect?

Think it over and get back to us.

And then, state how accurate a run-of-the-mill maintenance PCSOT "test" is, followed by citations of studies in peer-reviewed scientific journals that support your claim.

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 01, 2017, 08:25 PMI will have no part of racism.  If he is dirty, prove it with facts, not an assumption of race.  No good comes from assuming a mans character by race or religion.

I was just interested in the fact that his name appears to have been derived from that of the clan from which so many of Syria's leaders and elite have originated. :-?

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 31, 2017, 10:30 PMDan, you might be a lace curtain Irish, but don't insult my kind by being a pretender

Is a "lace curtain Irishman" similar to a "two-toilet Irishman"?  ;D ;D

Quote from: danmangan on Jun 01, 2017, 08:46 PM

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 01, 2017, 08:18 PMAfter reading what I just read, I don't see how anyone can vote for a potential despot.

ROTFLMAO!

Pour yourself another one, Honest Joe.

Would you care to make a wager as to what percentage of the votes I'll receive for president-elect?

Think it over and get back to us.

And then, state how accurate a run-of-the-mill maintenance PCSOT "test" is, followed by citations of studies in peer-reviewed scientific journals that support your claim.

Alright Dan, you really want to do this?

Ok

Quote from: xenonman on Jun 01, 2017, 11:54 PM

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 31, 2017, 10:30 PMDan, you might be a lace curtain Irish, but don't insult my kind by being a pretender

Is a "lace curtain Irishman" similar to a "two-toilet Irishman"?  ;D ;D

World hates a smarts, except me.   Nice one.  ^5

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 02, 2017, 01:03 AMNice one. 

I learned that one from a book which I once read on the Boston school busing crisis of 1975.  The term was apparently used by "Southie" residents in describing those of Irish descent who had "made it" and moved to Wellesley or other choice Boston suburbs!   :D ;)

wow, unlike dan you pay attention.  I knew there was a reason I liked ya. 

Having said that, the busing issue, was more a race issue than that of disdain for those who, "made it" out of places like, Old Colony and a like. 

Even then, it wasn't would out resentment or disdain.  It was a term received for people who forgot their roots, and thought their shit didn't stink, and also for those born with a silver spoon in their mouths. 

Or at least that is how I saw terms like that used.

Dan, talks of struggle of demanding that the APA be more transparent, reliable, accountable, or fair.  Fact is, he has done ZERO to actually put his neck on the chopping block for his so called "ideals."  He has risked nothing, and knows nothing, about what it is like to actually put your neck out for those ideals, and to be made to suffer for doing so. 

Dan puts on a good show, but what he is really good at, is convincing people that he is a hero, by virtue of being brave, or by standing up to the big bad polygraph establishment; when he can't even come to an APA conference and look people in the eye, while he spouts out the garbage that he does.

He has never once, "stood up to them" directly, and at any great risk or peril.  He has never challenged the establishment in a real way. He has never once, to my recollection, sat before any governmental committee and demanded toughing regulations or licensing.  He has never once looked into the eyes of his adversaries and taken them on, eye to eye, man to man.   

He has never outed any real corruption in the industry, on his own, and offered up any proof other than quoting AP or NAS or offered up any direct or damning evidence to support his claims; unless you count ad hominem argumentation (he is awesome at that).  He's also good at ridding the coattails of those who have. 

When it's time to put up or shut up, Dan is MIA.  That is a fact.  He's happy to sit on the hill and survey the battlefield, but cowers at fighting in the trenches. 

All he does, and counts as victory, is ask the same questions over and over; claim no answer has been made; when an answer is offered; it's just not an answer that fits his narrative.  All while, and in an effort to avoid answering any real questions himself.

He has avoided, fair, unbiased, and independent debate, not once, but twice now.  Simply because the moderators will control every aspect of the debate, other than opening statements, closing statements, and their answers to the questions. 

He fails to understand, that if he is running for office, he is the one looking for a position.  It's not up to others to persuade him to let them vote for his ass, it is up to him to persuade the voter to vote for his ass.  But he wants to continue with this delusional belief that people will vote for someone who wants to put them out of business.

Ask Hillary how well that worked with the Coal Miners.

All and all, Dan will do everything he can to actively avoid the debate he asked for, and actively avoid giving any substantive answer to any relevant question, without avoiding it by engaging in clear thinking distortions and attempts to control the narrative with accusations, false claims, lies, and ad hominem argumentation. 

He is welcome to prove me wrong, and he will be given an opportunity soon to do so.

Be careful what you wish for Dan, you just might be getting it. 

Honest Joe is a polygraph indu$try apologist who is opposed to a bill of rights for test takers, as well as a countermeasure challenge series.

Explain why, Honest Joe .

Because both would be bad for business?

I gave the best polygraph challenge in polygraph history, withe REAL consequences, not just bragging rights.  SO don't preach to me about polygraph challenges. 

Here's an idea, you're a polygraph examiner, why don't YOU step up big man?  You won't, because like you just proved in your response, you aren't good at stepping up.

You call me an apologist.  I will answer that charge, after you answer, actually answer some questions.  I say this, because my answer will come from YOUR answers.

But cowards will do what cowards will do huh Dan.  You're good at asking the questions, but bad about answering. 

I sleep just fine at night knowing.... well never mind, you haven't answered my questions or my statements yet.

You are not controlling the narrative anymore Dan.

Stop being a pussy and back up what you say

It is strange isn't it everyone; how he avoids addressing why he avoids any ordered debate, but yet he says he stands up against the apa and polygraph examiners?

Funny, what I see is a coward, running from the very thing he asked for.  Why I wonder?

Could it be, that he is sacred of being eposes as someone who is all talk and no cock?  That he is someone who has done nothing off this message board or outside his comfy office to practice what he preaches?

He is just like the people he cries about.  A charlatan, a snake oil salesman, and a coward

prove me wrong anytime.

put up or shut up

Joe, look at what I've accomplished through social media alone... I get 25-28% of the votes, and I've engineered a three-way race.

I tell the truth about the "test," Honest Joe.

Do you?

Is  "passing" of a polygraph required prior to assuming the office of APA Presidency? ;D

Joe, why aren't you a member of the APA?

Are you unqualified?

Dan, 2nd place is the first loser

And yes I do tell the truth

Like here is an inconvenient truth for you.

I have done more to stand up against the polygraph establishment, to their faces, than you ever have and will..  You Have done NOTHING to stand up to them.

You have never exposed any corruption or unethical behavior, other than accusations and ad hominem argumentation.  You have never proven any of your accusations, with any solid evidence that you, YOU, obtained.  lastly, you have never done one thing to actually change the industry though real sacrifice.

I can tell you how has done all those things dan

ME

I have been singing the independent, fair, and unbiased tune when you were still on PP trying to belong. 

I have done and sacrificed more, and continue to do so, and be punished for it, than you ever have or will to fight for fair testament of examinees, transparency, etc etc

You're just a Johnny come lately punk who too scared to get on the phone with me or any examiner, and be called out to the carpet about what you have actually done, compared to what you have pretended to do.

I can be an associative member.  I have been invited to be a member. 

I know I can [pass the test to full membership.

Fact is, I am happy with where I am now.  It is an association of little politics, no pomp and circumstance.

I can be a member of the APA anytime I want.  Right now, it is not in my best interest to do so.  But keep yapping, because you're changing my mind toots

But, Honest Joe, isn't it true that you want me to lose?

Quote from: xenonman on Jun 02, 2017, 01:05 PMIs  "passing" of a polygraph required prior to assuming the office of APA Presidency? ;D

I have been clear on my potion on examiners being subject to the test.  Yea, I think that would be an awesome idea.  Dan can show off is masterful countermeasures skills

lmao

he can't even handle a wet dream

At this point

YES

I don't think you deserve it, I don't think you EARNED it.  What you forget, is all the times I tried to tell you how to win. 

You just don't want to listen.  Honestly, I don't think you want to win.

because you won't get out of your own way

Personally, honestly.

I HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF GETTING ELECTED APA PRESIDENT THAN YOU DO.

and that is saying something

Here dan

Here is what it looks like to stand up to the polygraph community 

I'm thinking maybe you need an example of what a real man and courage in the face of adversity looks like 


https://youtu.be/ddYN2jbH0Ds?list=PLfdmQbJ2BVYROwsBSdkO9eZDhyVvccFnc

https://youtu.be/oxrJsrsmFd8

https://youtu.be/c69bttNR7Eg

what Have you done to actually stand up against the polygraph establishment 

but you're too much a coward, all talk.

You talk a good game, dan, but that is all it is, talk.

You do not at, other than to run for an office, you know you will never hold.

On that note.

I have no exposed Dan for what he really is.  He talks a good ams, but he is a man of not or little action.  He's a impotent man, insisting that he has big hands.

He runs and cowers from a fight he says he is eager to engage in; simply because hates the idea of a fair fight.  wow, you are more like TAPE than you think.  If it's a fair fight, you bail like a sneak thief

Bravo Dan

I only wish you would tai my back up on your interview, so I can tell you exactly why people have really voted for you. 

I'm done with you now, BOY

You're dismissed

Over the past three years, I've gone on record to identify the industry's systemic deficiencies, drafted a remedial platform, and run for office.

As things currently stand, one in four voting APA members agrees with me.

Tell us about your base of support, Honest Joe.

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 02, 2017, 01:22 PMI HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF GETTING ELECTED APA PRESIDENT THAN YOU DO.

Honest Joe, I'm a patient man. There's no urgency for me to become APA president.

What's important to me is incremental progress, vis-a-vis a cultural shift.

Slowly but surely, I am getting APA members to realize that polygraph "testing" is a largely a sham, and that the "dedicated to truth" APA is motivated primarily by commercial interests.

As such awareness about the "test"  increases, it not only helps reduce victimization, but it's a boon for my polygraph consulting services.

ok Dan, you're tollie is going back to the, land of make believe; better go catch it.

The APA will never vote for its own demise.  What I believe it will vote for, is someone what wants to stop the victimization, encourage transparency, start backing responsible regulation within the industry, dam and and enforce free market trade, stop the sense of entitlement to the establishment so EVERYONE has to earn the business they get, insist on independent review of charts so someone is checking behind us to keep us honest, and make sure that while no examiners has a right to business, every examiner has a right to do business  in a responsibly regulated free market

To Honest Joe's point about transparency (or lack thereof)...

If anyone out there would like unbiased information about the "test" from a full member of the American Polygraph Association, feel free to call me at 603-801-5179 from 9am to 9pm Eastern Time.

I also perform, for a fee, case reviews of polygraph "tests" that produced allegedly false outcomes.

PCSOT "test" quality-assurance reviews are a specialty.

Nullification guaranteed or your money back!

Quote from: danmangan on Jun 02, 2017, 03:18 PMTo Honest Joe's point about transparency (or lack thereof)...

If anyone out there would like unbiased information about the "test" from a full member of the American Polygraph Association, feel free to call me at 603-801-5179 from 9am to 9pm Eastern Time.

I also perform, for a fee, case reviews of polygraph "tests" that produced allegedly false outcomes.

PCSOT "test" quality-assurance reviews are a specialty.

Nullification guaranteed or your money back!

Unbiased, thats funny

Honest Joe, I agree with NAS as well as with the legal, medical and scientific communities.

The "test" is pseudoscience.

It is the APA that's biased.

I think you're both biased.

One is destructive to protect the status quo, generally speaking, and there are exceptions to the rule.

the other is just plain destructive for reasons even unknown to himself.

One has a purpose, at the vey least

One claims to have a purpose but lacks any substantive action.

Joe, my purpose is to tell the truth about the "test" and reduce victimization.

As for action, I review cases on a routine basis and provide a remedy for victims of the "test."

As a broader action, I am running for APA president-elect, which gives me a platform to educate the electorate.

Should I prevail in the APA, I will have a three-year window of  office holding, which I will use as a bully pulpit, to better educate the public at large -- primarily through media outlets.

ok so you want a platform, but yet you pussy out every time you're given one when you find out you'll be expected to actually answer questions?

This is a big part of my problem with you as of recent.

Also you keep saying you are going to rule from a bully pulpit, and you think that will get people to vote for you>  are ya smoking crack, or are you just that easy?  The more you say garbage like that, the less likely you will achieve that goal.

You make me want to join for no other reason to be a vote for anyone but you. 

You Dan, have been the biggest disappointment since the crucifixion

Honest Joe, we realize that you (and your "kind") are but one-toilet Irish, but please make an effort to curb your vulgar discourse.

But even if you cannot, I'll answer your questions over the course of this evening -- right here, on the world's greatest, most authoritative web site on polygraph "testing" -- antipolygraph.org.

Fire away, boyo.

will you?  8-)

Try me.

ok lets put you to the test

remember you said you'd answer any question

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/maxprovocateur/2017/06/03/special-show

Honest Joe,

Post your questions here on AP.

I'll answer them. Every single one.

Quit stalling, as I sign off at midnight ET.

awww thats so cute
he's nervous

lets give the nervous nancy some encouragement.

this is exactly what he asked for, twice.

now he's backing out, because he won't be able to control the narrative 

seems as though Danny boy has lucked out. 

for whatever reason, we have equipment failure. 

oh well aways tomorrow, or sunday, or monday

this is what you asked for in another string dan

wish granted

why would you run?

let me get the equipment issues fixed, post followup episode soon

Honest Joe, I am retiring (for the night) at 11:59PM, ET.

Please ask your questions now.

I'll answer every one.

But please act soon.

I'm getting tired.

damit

OK, faulty cable. 

Pick new one up tomorrow, we will give damn another shot at being the first to use a broadcast forum to sell his candidacy. 

He did say he was willing to answer all questions, lets see if he can do that outside of an environment where he can't manipulate or control the narrative.

Fankly, if he can't handle this, how do you think he will be able to handle

Quote from: danmangan on Jun 02, 2017, 05:19 PMbetter educate the public at large -- primarily through media outlets.

I mean come on Dan, its there in your own writing..... This is what you want.

Be careful what you wish for, you just may get it.

If the candidates with the APA, want in on this, I am not a hard man to get a hold of  my phone is on 24/7 and all phone calls are welcome and you'll be treated with the same respect shown to me.

If you do decide to join in on this, you'll be given equal time, treated square and on the level.  Fair independent and unbiased.

Don't just let APA read your position, reach out in a more personal way.  Tone, Inflection, rate of speech is lost in the written word. 

Lets advance forward.

If you are happy to do it, but want the first time to be APA members only, AKA the voters, I am sure an agreement can be arranged between all parties

you said you retired once and that was a lie..... wasn't it?

no..... we are doing it the way you asked for.

Go to bed, I'll get a new cable, and we will do this tomorrow, or sunday, or monday

but if I were you, i would jump on this first.

show people that you are a tail blazer into the future.

because you never know of your opponents might get smart, and capitalize on the opportunity first.

if they are smart, they will do it for no other reason but to show people they care about talking with the voters than you are.

Thats what I'd do

Anyway, time to prep questions and statements for our big day.... don't miss it

Honest Joe (ROTFLMAO),

It's 2223 by my clock here in NH.

You have exactly one hour and thirty-seven minutes to post your questions here on AP.

I will respond only in writing.

Have at it, lad.

Wow

You will not do well with the media outlets, if you can't handle me.

Doesn't bode well in regard to you being a present of the people or a strong president.

Ya have to earn that, bully pulpit, ya wee little lady.

Well makes sense you want to rule from a bully pulpit.  Only a bully runs when the going gets tough.  Wow you have so much in common with TAPE, its actually kinda amusing to me now

I'm not letting you bully me or control the narrative anymore.

Ive seen you do it for too long.  Time for someone to calling your big talking ass to the plate.

Put up or shut up

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/maxprovocateur/2017/06/03/oh-danny-boy-the-pipes-the-pipes-are-calling


12 midnight tonight


I will not be taking calls for this session, and it will mainly be meant as a blog to prep for a long process of getting Dan and the other APA Candidates to come on and answer some questions about why they feel the APA voters should trust them.

Having said that, in this episode I will mainly be addressing Dan, and his apparent need to control the narrative and be a bully.

I really do hope all members of the polygraph community listen, and get my take on this whole thing, in a deeper and more personal level than the written word.  I'll also leave the episode on line so it can be podcast later. 

Honest Joe, tell you what...

I'll give you another 24 hours.

Post your questions here, on AP.

Again, I will respond only in writing.

not going to be bullied by the likes of you.  this is what YOU wanted.  You requested this.  I would stay up and hit the link Danny boy

Honest Joe, a couple of days ago I expressed keen interest in participating in a three-way debate -- which you could moderate -- with my opponents for APA president-elect, Steve Duncan and John Palmatier.

Since that time you have made it clear that you want me to lose the election, in large part because, according to you, my purpose is to destroy polygraph -- which is your livelihood.

Given your stated prejudice against me, I see no advantage in subjecting myself to an on-air venue with a biased host/moderator -- especially one who has openly displayed such sharp and vulgar hostility as you have.

But, I will gladly answer your questions -- or anyone else's, for that matter -- here on AP.

An appropriate moderator would be someone with no knowledge of the polygraph and who has never visited this forum.

Ark, I disagree.

The moderator should be a proven victim of a false-positive polygraph "test" result.

I can just imagine the rhetorical tap dancing that would ensue...

They should be the ones who submit the questions. Also, those who say the polygraph exonerated them or helped them in some way should pose their own. The moderator should be neutral, otherwise it will just be an APA roast.

Ark, all of this is pure speculation.

It's fun, but inconsequential.

Here's the reality:

APA elections are like those for members of the high school student council.

It's a popularity contest.

Quote from: danmangan on Jun 04, 2017, 08:34 PMIt's a popularity contest.

Much as is the BI, at agencies which also employ the  polygraph! ::)

I am done asking and answering questions of you here, for now. 

I will be hitting the air again soon, and You can have your time.  I will be fair and let you get your message out so long as you are not slanderous and keep it to facts, and keep the ad hominem argument to a min.

For now I am bogged down with two things

1, I am busy with another examiner's screw up's here in Texas, as per usual.  I hate it when examiners don't follow APA or JPCOT guidelines, and in this case, actually break TDLR law. 

After addressing that, I have a family death I have to attend to back home.  SO if you have an issue with my integrity, I will be more than happy to address the issue face to face, if you'd like, time permitting. 

I am on here right now, so I can make clear that I am not ignoring anyone, just addressing some serious stuff right now and this is low on the priority list. 

Quote from: Arkhangelsk on Jun 04, 2017, 08:07 PMThey should be the ones who submit the questions. Also, those who say the polygraph exonerated them or helped them in some way should pose their own. The moderator should be neutral, otherwise it will just be an APA roast.

Tell you what, If I can get everyone on board, If a public berate is allowed, two to four questions, relevant to APA administration will be taken.  Chosen at random.

If I can get everyone on board with this.  right now getting dan on board, by itself has been impossible, even last year.

He talks a good game, but when it comes to backing his talk up, I seem to be the only examiner who has the sand to back up what I say, and have been doing it here long before Dan came around

I love seeing these bulletin board shoot outs.  It's like arguing how the chicken bones should be read after they hit the floor...

Quote from: Caca_Dau on Jun 08, 2017, 07:23 PMI love seeing these bulletin board shoot outs.  It's like arguing how the chicken bones should be read after they hit the floor...

Actually, I like to use the whole chicken.  The blood sacrifice make it more accurate.

Hey if we are devolving into silly analogy, I'm gong to have fun with it.

Having said that, first you have to hypnotize the chicken, in my method

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 08, 2017, 03:11 PM
Tell you what, If I can get everyone on board, If a public berate is allowed...

Honest Joe -- or should I say "Amy Baker" -- that's a Freudian slip if ever there was one.

You have made clear your desire to see me lose in my bid for APA president elect. Further, you have repeatedly been vulgar, hostile and abusive toward me on this forum.

So, thanks for the offer to get my message out on your little radio show -- but I'll pass. Had you been fair, civil and unbiased all along, I'd probably be interested. But you weren't, so I'm not.

Once again, I am happy to answer your questions (or anyone else's) publicly on this forum. But there's no way I'll submit to a so-called debate with such a flagrantly prejudiced "moderator."

Please accept my condolences on the loss of your family member.

Actually Joe I believe that deciphering chicken bones, reading tea leaves, and tarot cards are more accurate than polygraph tests.

Dan, take some responsibility.  I got vulgar and hostile in direct response to your hostility to me as an examiner.  Wow, you are like the other examiners in Texas.  You can dish it out, but ya can't take it.

I promised you I would give you your chance, I promised you I'd be unbiased.

Personally, I think you are a destructive force in the industry, with no intent to make the industry better, or even more honest. All you want is destruction   

I do think you are a talker, and that is all you have is talk.  You say one thing and do another, you lack consistency, realistic direction, and humility. 

Lastly, you haven't EARNED any right, other than being a member of the APA, to sit in the President's seat.  You haven't held any other office; you lack ant experience in the administration of an organization like this; other than your "100% accurate and reliable study" you have contributed nothing to industry; and with that, you have contributed nothing in regard to the betterment of the industry. All you want to do is kick everyone down, without offering to pick anyone up.  Where I come from, I was taught, never kick anyone down, without offering to pick them up to be better for the ass whooping.

You lack the ability to admit when you're wrong, or even look in the mirror and ask yourself if you're being unreasonable.  Your words reflect someone that has little to no willingness to treat others on the level, and someone who is incapable of being a man who squares his actions. 

In my eyes, you are not better than the examiners you hate, and the examiners, I am battling.  Over time, I have started to realize, you are little more than a negative image of the same picture, and you have done little to dissuade that opinion.

Lastly, as you have so eloquently pointed out last year, you didn't want my "endorsement."  Which is good, because I think anyone who bases their vote on an endorsement is a brainless drone. Fact is, what difference does it make if I want you to win or not?  If given the choice, I'm not sure the other two would be any better.  In the end, no matter who gets in, I'm still fucked.

If the establishment gets in, I am still at the mercy of TAPE; and moreover, I'm without anyone to call their unethical acts to the carpet.  I am totally convinced, you would leave me hanging too, and then add the rainbow sprinkles of threatening my livelihood, as well as the livelihood of other small, good examiners. People who do their jobs well, and with respect to examinees.

Fair, independent, and unbiased.

You winning doesn't benefit me even a tenth of a precent. 

Having said that, I don't think the other two guys winning benefits me either.  I believe this makes me the most impartial person to do this.

To be fair, at least you are honest about wanting to destroy the industry.  The rest of the establishment, knows the status quo will eventually destroy the industry; but they are either in denial, or they don't care that the next generation will be left holding the deed to the house with a damaged foundation, for us to fix their greed and mistakes. 

My only interest, is people making a fair decision, based on what they hear, to make an informed decision, in regard to who will do the least damage.

I am going to continue with the broadcasts, if you want no part in it, I will go off what you have made abundantly clear here.  You know the call in number, but you'll answer my questions, or you will be gone.  I would treat the other two in the same way. 

I will not allow you to avoid the questions or twist my questions in a way that your answers are in the form of questions to me.  Frankly, there are still a lot of questions, on past posts, on this thread, you have successfully avoided answering. 

Here is a good question.  See if you can answer it without making me the bad guy.

If there are questions I have asked, which you have successfully avoided CLEARLY answering here, on this string in the past, why should I expect anything different in the future?

You'll dodge that one too, or make it somehow into questions for me. 

WAKE UP CALL.  I'M NOT THE ONE RUNNING FOR OFFICE

If I was, you wouldn't stand a chance.

I, at least want to fix the problems in the industry; and have ideas where the solutions would benefit ALL involved, including examinees. 

That is the difference between you and I.  I believe if you complain about something, you better have a solution in mind.  While I believe increased oversight and regulation are needed, I do not believe dismantling the industry is warranted at this point.

I'll post links, in advance to future broadcasts.  My suggestion is, man up

In regard to you feeling that you are net given a far chance, come down here and live a couple months of my life down here.  Then, and only then, will you know how it truly feels to have the cards stacked against you.

If any of my detractors gave me a chance to lay out my case, in a forum where people would actually listen, I'd face everyone of them, eye to eye.  You run, hide, and cry like a snowflake.  I wish that these assholes in Texas would given me half the opportunity I offer you.   

This is the thing that annoys me the most about you, you lack the ability to turn adversity into strength.  I have no respect for someone who can't see and act on that kind of an opportunity; especially when it is being handed to you.

 

 

Quote from: Caca_Dau on Jun 09, 2017, 04:49 PMActually Joe I believe that deciphering chicken bones, reading tea leaves, and tarot cards are more accurate than polygraph tests.

That is your God given American right. 

I do see humor is lost on you though

Honest Joe, in the 2014 APA elections, I received 15% of the votes for the office of president elect.

In the 2015 race for the same APA office, after an email outreach campaign initiative, I received 28% of the votes cast.

Last year, I received 25% of the APA member votes cast for president elect -- without doing any email campaigning.

Given that my platform has been consistent since 2014, I think it's safe to say that, today, one in four of the APA members who comprise the active electorate supports me -- and I have never even been to a national seminar.

This is significant because it shows an alarming schism within the "dedicated to truth" APA: The realists such as myself are gaining on the "forensic psycho-physiologist" pretenders.

In my opinion, this paradigm shift can be attributed to my rational arguments, coupled with the power of social media.

Let's review my simple, three-point platform:


1. A bill of rights –- similar to those found in the medical and mental health fields -- for polygraph test subjects, to elevate informed consent and avoid potential harms

2. Transparent research, including an ongoing countermeasure challenge series, designed to reveal polygraph's real-world accuracy and expose variations in examiner competence

3. Equality for all APA members regarding access to political and educational opportunities, thereby reducing the inequities of a de facto caste society

Sounds reasonable to me -- and evidently to many other active APA members

But let's look at what is really driving this...

Polygraph has no proven scientific basis, and there is no universal lie response. Successful application of the polygraph technique is driven by expertise, not by any scientific formula,  dumbed-down paint-by-numbers cookie-cutter "test" method, or cockamamie 'model policy."

The power of polygraph -- at least for those who are ignorant of how the "test" works -- lies in its effect as an interrogation prop.

Polygraph is pseudoscience, plain and simple. And because of that, countless thousands (maybe millions) of individuals have been victimized over the decades. That's just plain wrong.

Indeed, the liebox is a very effective electronic rubber hose, or as Doug Williams has called it for decades, a psychological billy club.

You talk about responsibility. Indeed, it's time for cultural change within the APA -- one that's based in reality, not tortured theories about probabilistics.

Now that I've successfully engineered a three-way race, my chance of winning the office of APA president elect is just as good as that of my opponents.

I am not out to destroy polygraph, but to reform it. However, some organizational deconstruction will be necessary. My supporters know that.

Your obsession with my APA candidacy for president elect seems most odd. You are not even a member of the APA, yet you devote much time and energy to meddling in the APA political process. Should you ever decide to join the APA, I suspect that, based on your YouTube videos alone, your application would be summarily denied by APA authorities.

Let me be clear: I will not participate in your radio program, because you have demonstrated an agenda against me and my politics.

But, I will answer your questions publicly on this forum -- even the ones you say I've "dodged" over the years.

So bring on the questions, or just stop meddling.

If there are questions I have asked, which you have successfully avoided CLEARLY answering here, on this string in the past, why should I expect anything different in the future?

answer that question, there is where we will start

and I am not meddling

While I have no skin in the game, in a member sense of the word, I do have skin in it in the sense of, the APA sets the standards all polygraph examiners eventually will have to follow, as all associations adopt APA standards.

So tell me again how APA politics doesn't affect me?  Go ahead, explain it to me.

You'll avoid that one too, as you avoided the question above.

Wow you really hate being called to the plate don't you.

Moreover if I was "obsessed" I'd be here every day.  AP has seen me highly motivated before. 

Fact is, I think your politics of destruction and bully pulpit are dangerous and, ugh, I hate to say this, the industry is better off without the totalitarianism you are planing. 

Your times as president will be a disaster, and I explain why in the episode linked.  Nothing will get done.  Your "bully pulpit" is useless without the membership vote, which you will have a difficult time with on up and down vote, and the board of directors. 

In the end, you will do more harm than good, and I'm not willing to live with your bad decisions and despotic temperament dictating polygraph policy.

I have been the most outspoken person against the polygraph establishment, long before you got on the band wagon.  You have gone extreme to the left, and I can't and won't go there. Having said that, I know it is up to the members in June.  If there is a way I can give another venue to make an informed decision, I will. 

What I find interesting is you won't go anywhere you can't control.  This makes me very suspicious of your intent or ulterior motives.

Personally, I am starting to think if the rule that was proposed about hold another office before you can run for president, was a good thing.  Might benefit them to revisit that. 

Also, for the record, I have been invited to join, I make the choice not to do so, at this point in time.  Frankly, at this point, it doesn't benefit me.  It would be wasted money. 

You are asking people to vote for you, who have never even loped you in the eye, or shook your hand.  You're asking them to vote for someone that doesn't respect them enough to do just that.  Sorry, maybe we just had more honor coming up where I'm from, but if you wanted someone to trust you, you at least had the respect to looking them in the eye and ask for support.

In the end, over the past couple of years, I have come to be very suspicious of your motives, partly, because you avoid any personal interaction and your unwillingness to look people in the eye; thats not an admirable characteristic. 

Anyway, I am overburdening you with the two questions on this post alone.  It take a lot to dance around questions..... I get it.

Oh and you didn't engineer anything, YOU LIED. 

Not a good way to start a campaign, and again, not a good characteristic.  Be a man, come at someone head on.  Fight a fight with honor.  A wise man once told me, "A tainted win is only the start of a failure"

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 09, 2017, 10:13 PMIf there are questions I have asked, which you have successfully avoided CLEARLY answering here, on this string in the past, why should I expect anything different in the future?

Because a.) the APA election is but nine days away; b.) a large part of the polygraph world is following this forum; and c.) I need every single APA member vote that I can get.

"So tell me again how APA politics doesn't affect me?  Go ahead, explain it to me."

The APA's political processes -- such as individual elections and committee machinations -- don't affect you. But yes, some aggregate (politburo-wide) APA political decisions will affect you only to the extent you have already identified -- namely, standards and model policies.

For example, should a bill of rights ultimately become APA "law", assuming you adhere to the bill of rights protocol, you will lose a significant amount of business, as would-be subjects will wisely opt out of the "test."

As for me lying about my retirement, get real. It was tactical manipulation --  similar to what "forensic psycho-physiologists" routinely do to their clueless clients. Politicians do it all the time. Hillary often denied she was running for president in the run-up to the 2016 primaries. 

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 09, 2017, 10:24 PMOh and you didn't engineer anything, YOU LIED

Honest Joe, during those 15 years the APA claimed 98% polygraph "test" accuracy -- 10 of those years after the devastating NAS report citing polygraph's lack of scientific underpinnings, as well as the stern warnings from NAS about the marginal research submitted by indu$try sources -- did the APA lie?

Honest Joe,

Do you have any other questions for me?

If so, speak up.

Now is the time.

The American Polygraph Association elections are mere days away...

Mary Price is not a real person. Her character was created by Michael Martin, owner of the poly test org, Global Polygraph Network website.
Antipolygraph.org does very well with organic search engine queries related to polygraph and lie detection. Better than most polygraph websites.
Attacking the characters of these two Examiners, Mike and Denny, who have offices in Tampa and Orlando, and directing people to go to the Global Polygraph network website,  is business marketing and advertising.
Both Mike Allwatt and Denny Connor do not test minors under the age of 16.
After William McCallister, the retired Polk County Sheriff who was arrested for drugging women during a polygraph, in his Winter Haven office,  was removed from the Global Polygraph Network, Michael Martin lost revenue from the central Florida area. Michael Martin received complaints for years about William McCallister, but ignored them, and kept McCallister, who had previous criminal activity including credit card fraud and kidnapping intoxicated tourists from the Orlando area, active on the Global Polygraph Network, for years before he went to prison. William McCallister is back out of prison, and now selling EyeDetect tests from his wife, Helga LaPollo's mercedes sprinter mobile van. Converus, the makers of EyeDetect lie detector tests says they license EyeDetect to Helga, and not William, so its not their problem. The Polk County Sheriffs probation dept. does not care.
The Global Polygraph Network is a referrel service, that posts Examiner Info, without releasing the Examiners name, so the consumer is not able to talk to the Examiner before meeting with him. The post hundreds of Examiners that state their service includes the testing of 12 year old children.

William McCallister is out of prison.

He is now giving Converus EyeDetect lie detector tests from his wife's, Helga LaPollo's mobile office van.

They are operating under the name:

FloridaTruthVerification.com