For the record: The "agent" did not tell me he "wanted to fool a polygraph". I did not teach him how to lie on a polygraph! The "agent" told me he was just worried about losing his job as a deputy WHEN he told the CBP that he had "smuggled drugs into a jail and had received sexual favors from an underaged girl". He did not tell me he was going to lie about it, and I did not teach him how to lie about it! In fact he indicated to me that he was going to tell this to the CBP polygraph operator when he took his polygraph test. He just said he was worried about what the sheriff would do - he was afraid he would lose his job when he told CBP what he had just told me. I had never had anyone tell me anything like that, and it struck me as odd that he would volunteer that information - it took me completely by surprise. I also suspected he was either or mental patient or a polygraph operator playing games with me because it was obvious that what he was saying was bullshit because of the way he acted when he said it. I have been interrogating people for over forty years, and I know bullshit when I hear it! I knew he was bullshitting me, but I didn't know why and I didn't care why. But I was confused and also very angry that he would come it my office and say something like that. So I did tell him to stop playing games, and if you read the book you will see that I started playing head games with him. I turned the tables on him and started acting like a crazy man - it was very amusing for me and very frightening for him and in the book I tell about it in detail. Finally after my crazy act was concluded I told him to quit with the nonsense and get out.
That is why I wrote about this in the book - to set the story straight. And I had never seen the need to have a "don't ask, don't tell" policy since I don't teach people how to "defeat" the polygraph - I teach them how to pass because just telling the truth only works about half the time. But, since the government has tried to play these silly games as a ruse to use criminal charges to silence me, I have instituted my "terms of service agreement" which is clearly posted in my manual, and my website - and I read it to everyone prior to letting them take practice tests - and I make them agree to my terms which are as follows: "As long as the polygraph is used to frighten and intimidate people - and as long as truthful people are falsely accused of lying, I will provide this information so they can protect themselves. If you are going to take a polygraph test, you must have the KNOWLEDGE you need to be PROPERLY PREPARED TO PASS YOUR POLYGRAPH TEST! When you come to me for personal training and to take some practice polygraph tests, I assume that you are a truthful, honest person who knows that nervousness can cause you to fail - and you do not want to be falsely accused of lying. And I also assume that you know that just telling the truth only works about half the time unless you are properly prepared. I will get you PROPERLY PREPARED TO PASS - NERVOUS OR NOT - NO MATTER WHAT! But I will not knowingly train you or assist you in any way if you tell me you plan to lie. I will not listen to any admissions or confessions of wrong doing. And if you violate any of the terms of this agreement I will tell you to leave immediately." According to what Schwartz is quoted as saying, it is obvious that this investigation was an attempt by one vindictive polygraph operator to stop me because I have been "protesting the loudest and longest against polygraph testing". It is clearly an attack on my 1st Amendment rights to free speech - nothing more, nothing less!
Describing my training as teaching "countermeasures" so liars can pass the polygraph "test" is the same thing as describing the polygraph as a "lie detector"! Both descriptions are PURE, UNADULTERATED BULLSHIT! The word "countermeasures" can only be used to describe polygraph chart manipulation by the subject of a polygraph "test" when two conditions are met: 1) The polygraph "test" must be proven to be 100% accurate and reliable as a "lie detector", and 2) the person is attempting to deliberately lie. There is never a case where BOTH of these conditions are met. In other words, you could only claim "countermeasures" are being used to thwart the polygraph operator's ability to detect deception IF the polygraph is able to detect deception accurately 100% of the time and that that deception would be detected were it not for the use of "countermeasures" by a person intent on being deceptive. But, since many people know that just telling the truth only works half the time - i.e. the US Supreme Court, and the NAS report, among others, saying it is no more accurate than the toss of a coin - then a prudent person would try to mitigate the very strong probability of being falsely branded as a liar by learning how to produce a "truthful" chart. That would not be using "countermeasures" - that would be using common sense!
Why do polygraph operators tell people not to research the polygraph before they take their test? It is very simple - the only way they can intimidate people with the polygraph is to keep them ignorant about how it works. When polygraph operators say I teach people "countermeasures" in order for them to "beat the test". I simply say, that's bullshit, because polygraph operators routinely call truthful people liars - and my technique is the only way for honest, truthful people to protect themselves from being falsely accused of lying. Go to the MEDIA page of my website www.polygraph.com and watch the CBS 60 MINUTES investigative report I helped to produce and see the proof yourself - three out of three polygraph operators called three different truthful people liars on a crime that never even happened! You may also enjoy watching me prove THE LIE DETECTOR IS BULLSHIT on Showtime's PENN & TELLER: BULLSHIT!
So, let me emphasize this - I DON'T TEACH SO-CALLED "COUNTERMEASURES" - I simply teach people how to ALWAYS PASS by knowing how to show a perfect "truthful" polygraph chart! The word "countermeasures" is a word that has been misappropriated by polygraph examiners - it is used to describe what they say is a means to thwart their ability to detect deception. But polygraph operators have always maintained that they can tell when a person is using these so-called "countermeasures". If that is true, how can anyone use them "beat" the test? But, for the sake of argument, let me ask a few more pertinent questions: If people can indeed be taught to use "countermeasures" to "beat the test", wouldn't that prove the polygraph is not a "lie detector"? Does the validity and reliability of the polygraph test demand that the subjects of the test must be ignorant about how it works? If anyone could be taught how to produce and/or prevent a reaction on the polygraph at will, wouldn't that make the whole idea of a "lie detector" a fraud? And wouldn't polygraph operators have to admit their little machine is actually just a sick joke - and that the polygraph instrument is simply a prop used by an interrogator to frighten people into making admissions and confessions? And would it not be prudent for the government to quit wasting money on something that is nothing but a fraud and a con job? The fact is the answer to all these questions is a resounding YES!
Polygraph operators do not want to debate the validity of the polygraph as a "lie detector" because they will lose! In a previous chapter of this book you saw the pathetic attempt by a polygraph "expert" to make a case for the use of the polygraph as a "lie detector". And these con men certainly don't want to answer any of the questions I have pos
Slashdot Mirror
For the record: The "agent" did not tell me he "wanted to fool a polygraph". I did not teach him how to lie on a polygraph! The "agent" told me he was just worried about losing his job as a deputy WHEN he told the CBP that he had "smuggled drugs into a jail and had received sexual favors from an underaged girl". He did not tell me he was going to lie about it, and I did not teach him how to lie about it! In fact he indicated to me that he was going to tell this to the CBP polygraph operator when he took his polygraph test. He just said he was worried about what the sheriff would do - he was afraid he would lose his job when he told CBP what he had just told me. I had never had anyone tell me anything like that, and it struck me as odd that he would volunteer that information - it took me completely by surprise. I also suspected he was either or mental patient or a polygraph operator playing games with me because it was obvious that what he was saying was bullshit because of the way he acted when he said it. I have been interrogating people for over forty years, and I know bullshit when I hear it! I knew he was bullshitting me, but I didn't know why and I didn't care why. But I was confused and also very angry that he would come it my office and say something like that. So I did tell him to stop playing games, and if you read the book you will see that I started playing head games with him. I turned the tables on him and started acting like a crazy man - it was very amusing for me and very frightening for him and in the book I tell about it in detail. Finally after my crazy act was concluded I told him to quit with the nonsense and get out. That is why I wrote about this in the book - to set the story straight. And I had never seen the need to have a "don't ask, don't tell" policy since I don't teach people how to "defeat" the polygraph - I teach them how to pass because just telling the truth only works about half the time. But, since the government has tried to play these silly games as a ruse to use criminal charges to silence me, I have instituted my "terms of service agreement" which is clearly posted in my manual, and my website - and I read it to everyone prior to letting them take practice tests - and I make them agree to my terms which are as follows: "As long as the polygraph is used to frighten and intimidate people - and as long as truthful people are falsely accused of lying, I will provide this information so they can protect themselves. If you are going to take a polygraph test, you must have the KNOWLEDGE you need to be PROPERLY PREPARED TO PASS YOUR POLYGRAPH TEST! When you come to me for personal training and to take some practice polygraph tests, I assume that you are a truthful, honest person who knows that nervousness can cause you to fail - and you do not want to be falsely accused of lying. And I also assume that you know that just telling the truth only works about half the time unless you are properly prepared. I will get you PROPERLY PREPARED TO PASS - NERVOUS OR NOT - NO MATTER WHAT! But I will not knowingly train you or assist you in any way if you tell me you plan to lie. I will not listen to any admissions or confessions of wrong doing. And if you violate any of the terms of this agreement I will tell you to leave immediately." According to what Schwartz is quoted as saying, it is obvious that this investigation was an attempt by one vindictive polygraph operator to stop me because I have been "protesting the loudest and longest against polygraph testing". It is clearly an attack on my 1st Amendment rights to free speech - nothing more, nothing less!
Describing my training as teaching "countermeasures" so liars can pass the polygraph "test" is the same thing as describing the polygraph as a "lie detector"! Both descriptions are PURE, UNADULTERATED BULLSHIT! The word "countermeasures" can only be used to describe polygraph chart manipulation by the subject of a polygraph "test" when two conditions are met: 1) The polygraph "test" must be proven to be 100% accurate and reliable as a "lie detector", and 2) the person is attempting to deliberately lie. There is never a case where BOTH of these conditions are met. In other words, you could only claim "countermeasures" are being used to thwart the polygraph operator's ability to detect deception IF the polygraph is able to detect deception accurately 100% of the time and that that deception would be detected were it not for the use of "countermeasures" by a person intent on being deceptive. But, since many people know that just telling the truth only works half the time - i.e. the US Supreme Court, and the NAS report, among others, saying it is no more accurate than the toss of a coin - then a prudent person would try to mitigate the very strong probability of being falsely branded as a liar by learning how to produce a "truthful" chart. That would not be using "countermeasures" - that would be using common sense! Why do polygraph operators tell people not to research the polygraph before they take their test? It is very simple - the only way they can intimidate people with the polygraph is to keep them ignorant about how it works. When polygraph operators say I teach people "countermeasures" in order for them to "beat the test". I simply say, that's bullshit, because polygraph operators routinely call truthful people liars - and my technique is the only way for honest, truthful people to protect themselves from being falsely accused of lying. Go to the MEDIA page of my website www.polygraph.com and watch the CBS 60 MINUTES investigative report I helped to produce and see the proof yourself - three out of three polygraph operators called three different truthful people liars on a crime that never even happened! You may also enjoy watching me prove THE LIE DETECTOR IS BULLSHIT on Showtime's PENN & TELLER: BULLSHIT! So, let me emphasize this - I DON'T TEACH SO-CALLED "COUNTERMEASURES" - I simply teach people how to ALWAYS PASS by knowing how to show a perfect "truthful" polygraph chart! The word "countermeasures" is a word that has been misappropriated by polygraph examiners - it is used to describe what they say is a means to thwart their ability to detect deception. But polygraph operators have always maintained that they can tell when a person is using these so-called "countermeasures". If that is true, how can anyone use them "beat" the test? But, for the sake of argument, let me ask a few more pertinent questions: If people can indeed be taught to use "countermeasures" to "beat the test", wouldn't that prove the polygraph is not a "lie detector"? Does the validity and reliability of the polygraph test demand that the subjects of the test must be ignorant about how it works? If anyone could be taught how to produce and/or prevent a reaction on the polygraph at will, wouldn't that make the whole idea of a "lie detector" a fraud? And wouldn't polygraph operators have to admit their little machine is actually just a sick joke - and that the polygraph instrument is simply a prop used by an interrogator to frighten people into making admissions and confessions? And would it not be prudent for the government to quit wasting money on something that is nothing but a fraud and a con job? The fact is the answer to all these questions is a resounding YES! Polygraph operators do not want to debate the validity of the polygraph as a "lie detector" because they will lose! In a previous chapter of this book you saw the pathetic attempt by a polygraph "expert" to make a case for the use of the polygraph as a "lie detector". And these con men certainly don't want to answer any of the questions I have pos