Polygraph Operator Daniel E. Sosnowski Makes a Killing in Iraq

[George W. Maschke]

Daniel E. Sosnowski

Polygraphy may be bullshit, but it can be highly lucrative bullshit for those with the right connections. On 21 April 2008, the Department of the Army awarded polygrapher Dan Sosnowski's S.O.S. Services, Inc. a contract (see attached PDF) in the amount of $365,440.00 for the provision of "Polygraph Training and Equipment" in Iraq.

Sosnowski, of Marietta, Georgia, is a long-time board member of the American Polygraph Association is currently that organization's president-elect.

It's worth noting that at least some Islamist insurgents in Iraq are well aware that polygraph "testing" is a fraud. See "The Myth of the Lie Detector" published in the Iraqi jihadist e-zine, Al-Fath, and available here in English translation. And for discussion, see Al-Qaeda Has Read The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.

[SanchoPanza]

Polygraphy may be bullshit, but it can be highly lucrative bullshit for those with the right connections

It seems the Department of the Army disagrees with you regarding the value of polyraph.

I have long maintained that profanity is the refuge of the weak-minded or intellectually maladroit. You seem to resort to it it whenever you find yourself outside your comfort zone or when you are trying to emphasize a point.

It's worth noting that at least some Islamist insurgents in Iraq are well aware that polygraph "testing" is a fraud. See "The Myth of the Lie Detector" published in the Iraqi jihadist e-zine, Al-Fath, and available here in English translation. And for discussion, see Al-Qaeda Has Read The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.

Thoughout your postings I am amazed that you can appear so proud at the prospect that your information is being used by the enemies of our country while denying any responsibility for the translation of that information. Even if one believes you when you claim you did not translate your book into Arabic or Farsi, I can't help but wonder whether or not you have communictaed the information contained in your book to the enemies of our country, perhaps in another way?

My question is this:
Have you ever participated in a conversations or correspondance in Arabic, Farsi, Persian, or any of the other languages natively spoken by Al Qaeda , the Taliban, or Islamist insurgents  in Iraq or Afganistan in which you describe or explain the countermeasures described in your book?

Sanch Panza

[George W. Maschke]

Polygraphy may be bullshit, but it can be highly lucrative bullshit for those with the right connections

It seems the Department of the Army disagrees with you regarding the value of polyraph.

To be sure, it does. But then again, the Department of the Army also disagrees with the National Academy of Sciences regarding the value of polygraphy.

I have long maintained that profanity is the refuge of the weak-minded or intellectually maladroit. You seem to resort to it it whenever you find yourself outside your comfort zone or when you are trying to emphasize a point.

Yes, I used "bullshit" for emphasis, because "humbuggery" and "poppycock" are too quaint.

It's worth noting that at least some Islamist insurgents in Iraq are well aware that polygraph "testing" is a fraud. See "The Myth of the Lie Detector" published in the Iraqi jihadist e-zine, Al-Fath, and available here in English translation. And for discussion, see Al-Qaeda Has Read The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.

Thoughout your postings I am amazed that you can appear so proud at the prospect that your information is being used by the enemies of our country while denying any responsibility for the translation of that information. Even if one believes you when you claim you did not translate your book into Arabic or Farsi, I can't help but wonder whether or not you have communictaed the information contained in your book to the enemies of our country, perhaps in another way?

My question is this:
Have you ever participated in a conversations or correspondance in Arabic, Farsi, Persian, or any of the other languages natively spoken by Al Qaeda , the Taliban, or Islamist insurgents  in Iraq or Afganistan in which you describe or explain the countermeasures described in your book?

That's no business of yours.

[SanchoPanza]

Polygraphy may be bullshit, but it can be highly lucrative bullshit for those with the right connections

It seems the Department of the Army disagrees with you regarding the value of polyraph.

To be sure, it does. But then again, the Department of the Army also disagrees with the National Academy of Sciences regarding the value of polygraphy.

I have long maintained that profanity is the refuge of the weak-minded or intellectually maladroit. You seem to resort to it it whenever you find yourself outside your comfort zone or when you are trying to emphasize a point.

Yes, I used "bullshit" for emphasis, because "humbuggery" and "poppycock" are too quaint.

It's worth noting that at least some Islamist insurgents in Iraq are well aware that polygraph "testing" is a fraud. See "The Myth of the Lie Detector" published in the Iraqi jihadist e-zine, Al-Fath, and available here in English translation. And for discussion, see Al-Qaeda Has Read The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.

Thoughout your postings I am amazed that you can appear so proud at the prospect that your information is being used by the enemies of our country while denying any responsibility for the translation of that information. Even if one believes you when you claim you did not translate your book into Arabic or Farsi, I can't help but wonder whether or not you have communictaed the information contained in your book to the enemies of our country, perhaps in another way?

My question is this:
Have you ever participated in a conversations or correspondance in Arabic, Farsi, Persian, or any of the other languages natively spoken by Al Qaeda , the Taliban, or Islamist insurgents  in Iraq or Afganistan in which you describe or explain the countermeasures described in your book?

That's no business of yours.

Thank you  Considering everything else you deny; your lack of denial here tells me what I need to know.

Did you translate your book into any of those languages?

Sancho Panza

[George W. Maschke]

Thank you  Considering everything else you deny; your lack of denial here tells me what I need to know.

And what precisely is that?

Did you translate your book into any of those languages?

No. If I (or anyone else acting in cooperation with AntiPolygraph.org) had done so, such translations would be available on this site.

[SanchoPanza]

Thank you  Considering everything else you deny; your lack of denial here tells me what I need to know.

And what precisely is that?

Did you translate your book into any of those languages?

No. If I (or anyone else acting in cooperation with AntiPolygraph.org) had done so, such translations would be available on this site.

Well let's see, for starters, you deny translating your book into Arabic, Farsi, Persian, or any of the other languages natively spoken by Al Qaeda , the Taliban, or Islamist insurgents  in Iraq or Afganistan.

But you don't deny having participated in a conversations or correspondance in Arabic, Farsi, Persian, or any of the other languages natively spoken by Al Qaeda , the Taliban, or Islamist insurgents  in Iraq or Afganistan in which you described or explained the countermeasures described in your book.

Are you familiar with the doctrine of tacit admission as applied by courts in the United States?  

Sancho Panza

[T.M. Cullen]

Well let's see, for starters, you deny translating your book into Arabic, Farsi, Persian, or any of the other languages natively spoken by Al Qaeda , the Taliban, or Islamist insurgents  in Iraq or Afganistan.

What difference does it make if insurgent, or Al Qaeda types use the info in GM's book?   According to you, the info contained in it is bunk.  Countermeasures do not work, and can be detected!  The NAS report is Bullshit!

So why all the fuss?  

OTOH, if the info contained in the book is true (the polygraph is bogus),  and the advice given in the book DOES WORK, and is being used by our nation's enemies, and you KNOW this is the case, yet you, your cohorts, the DOD bureacrats, the intel agencies...etc. still cling stubbornly to it, and protect it like some washed up old actor, despite warnings by the NAS, THEN THAT is the real problem!  You are letting stupid personal pride stand in the way of our nation's security!  All to make a lousy buck!  You're either deluded or a traitor!  Maybe both!

There is going to be REAL political HELL TO PAY, when the truth about US government policy concerning the polygraph becomes widely know by the public.  I hope it happens during my lifetime!

"Well, duh, the polygraph isn't perfect, but, well, duh, it's the  only thing we have.  Guess we'll just have to keep it.  It's not very reliable, but we gotta rely on something, to some extent.  The American people expect it.  Maybe we'll have the NAS produce another report on the polygraph for congress, so we can ignore that one too!  Let's go guys!  Tee time is at 8!"  

What BULLSHIT!

TC

[George W. Maschke]

Well let's see, for starters, you deny translating your book into Arabic, Farsi, Persian, or any of the other languages natively spoken by Al Qaeda , the Taliban, or Islamist insurgentsin Iraq or Afganistan.

That's correct. I haven't translated The Lie Behind the Lie Detector into any language. Should I in future do so, such translation will be made available for download on AntiPolygraph.org.

But you don't deny having participated in a conversations or correspondance in Arabic, Farsi, Persian, or any of the other languages natively spoken by Al Qaeda , the Taliban, or Islamist insurgentsin Iraq or Afganistan in which you described or explained the countermeasures described in your book.

No. I neither confirm or deny it. It's none of your business. For starters, I respect the privacy of the people who have communicated with me regarding polygraphy, and I'm reluctant to say anything to you (or anyone else) regarding my private correspondence. It's simply no business of yours.

But moreover, I deeply detest and disavow the bigotry and racism implicit in your question, the unspoken subtext of which is that speaking with anyone about polygraph matters in languages such as Arabic or Persian (the vast majority of whose speakers, like those of every other language, are not terrorists) is somehow tantamount to an act of disloyalty to the United States.

Are you familiar with the doctrine of tacit admission as applied by courts in the United States?

I am not a defendant on trial in your polygraph star chamber. If that disappoints you, you can go pound sand.

[SanchoPanza]

Tap dancing obviously isn't your forte'.  Excuse me, I meant to say you just aren't very good at it.

Absence of your denial is clearly a tacit admission. In other words a party's silence when confronted with a statement made in his presence under circumstances that would normally call for a denial constitutes an admission.

You aren't in court or a "Star Chamber proceeding.

The First Amendment protects you from any tangible penalty that might result from a truthful response here, other than the possible exposure of information of which you would prefer your supporters remain ignorant. No one has asked you for the identities of the people to whom you have spoken and their privacy is not a t risk for exposure.

My question is no more racist than your statement:

It's worth noting that at least some Islamist insurgents in Iraq are well aware that polygraph "testing" is a fraud. See "The Myth of the Lie Detector" published in the Iraqi jihadist e-zine, Al-Fath, and available here in English translation. And for discussion, see Al-Qaeda Has Read The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.

My question seeks only to determine your level of participation in the aquisition of this information by "Islamist insurgents", "Al Qaeda" and the "Taliban".

No one has made the case yet that you have intentionally provided this information to the enemies of the United States. I, for one, leave open the possibility that you were duped by the agents of our enemies.

Sancho Panza

[George W. Maschke]

While the Federal Procurement Data System report of the contract awarded to Dan Sosnowski is short on detail regarding just what services he is required to perform thereunder, the solicitation for the contract (see attached Microsoft Word document) provides additional detail.

In short, Sosnowski's $365,440 contract is for the provision of 8 polygraph instruments and the training of 8 Iraqi Ministry of Defense and Ministry of Information employees as polygraph operators so that they can institute a polygraph screening program in the Iraqi government. The training was to run six months from 1 May 2008 to 31 October 2008. The U.S. Government was to provide Sosnowski with free lodging, meals, and training facilities.

The solicitation period opened on 21 March 2008 and closed a mere ten days later, suggesting that the U.S. Army was not seeking genuinely competitive bids, but had an awardee in mind from the outset. Nice work if you can get it.  

[SanchoPanza]

(the polygraph is bogus),and the advice given in the book DOES WORK

First Mr. Cullen the polygraph is not bogus. It works, just like polygraphers say it does.
Second. Dr. Maschke and his co-author have been asked on more than one occasion to produce  a single research study that both (a) proved that the countermeasures he  teaches are an effective means of passing a polygraph and are undetectable and (b) cited in their book TLBTLD as the source of the advice or training for effective and undetectable countermeasures.
They haven't been able to find one(not even one) yet.

What difference does it make if insurgent, or Al Qaeda types use the info in GM's book?

Third. In case you haven't heard the news, Our government has determined that Dr. Maschke is not ever going to be placed on their list of people who gets to decide what information should be translated and released to the enemies of our country. The fact that YOU both believe that his countermeasures work and are OK that the information has been translated for our enemies reveals volumes about you. Have you ever wondered why if Dr. Maschke was able to convince our government that polygraph didn't work why he would think countermeasures are necessary?  If it doesn't work why does it have to be defeated by cheating?

Sancho Panza

[SanchoPanza]

The solicitation period opened on 21 March 2008 and closed a mere ten days later, suggesting that the U.S. Army was not seeking genuinely competitive bids, but had an awardee in mind from the outset. Nice work if you can get it

One thing about public contracts is that he can't respond to questions concerning his activities with "It's none of your business" He can't tap dance around claiming to "respect the privacy" of his business contacts and he certainly can't try to play the race card to try and shift focus away from his behavior.

You insinuated that their was something improper with the way that his contract was awarded.

If you really believe that there was collusion or "bid rigging" involved, why don't you lodge a complaint with the Department of the Army or the GAO?

Sancho Panza

[George W. Maschke]

Sancho Panza,

Indeed, it appears to me that the Department of the Army's offer was tailored for a single contractor and that the contract was not awarded competitively. Ten days is very short notice on which to prepare a bid on such a contract.

But what I find most troubling is not that our government may have spent more than it might have to train eight Iraqis as polygraphers, but rather that the entire project is a complete waste of U.S. taxpayer money. Polygraphy is a pseudoscientific fraud, and to the extent that the Iraqi government places any reliance on the auguries of its newly indoctrinated polygraph chartgazers, it will undermine its security.

[SanchoPanza]

Polygraphy is a pseudoscientific fraud

If you could really prove that statement, cheating on the test would be unnecessary. Polygraph is not "pseudoscience" and it is not fraud.

Like I said before , if you think that Daniel Sosnowski has committed some crime or colluded with the Department of the Army in some type of bid-rigging scheme, why don't you lodge a formal complaint with the Department of the Army or the GAO instead of tossing about unsupported allegations ? Could it be that you won't lodge a complaint because you know you lack credibility with the U.S. Government?

Sancho Panza

[George W. Maschke]

Polygraphy is a pseudoscientific fraud

If you could really prove that statement, cheating on the test would be unnecessary. Polygraph is not "pseudoscience" and it is not fraud.

I'm afraid you are blinded by self-interest in your assessment of the scientific merits of polygraphy.

Like I said before , if you think that Daniel Sosnowski has committed some crime or colluded with the Department of the Army in some type of bid-rigging scheme, why don't you lodge a formal complaint with the Department of the Army or the GAO instead of tossing about unsupported allegations ? Could it be that you won't lodge a complaint because you know you lack credibility with the U.S. Government?

For the moment, I am content to leave that option to such of Mr. Sosnowski's competitors as may feel they were unfairly disadvantaged by the contract award process.