Comments for AntiPolygraph.org News https://antipolygraph.org/blog News about polygraphs, voice stress analyzers, and other purported "lie detectors." Tue, 12 Nov 2013 13:13:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.7.1 Comment on U.S. Customs and Border Protection Polygraph Chief John R. Schwartz on Interrogation by newsrider https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2013/11/10/u-s-customs-and-border-protection-polygraph-chief-john-r-schwartz-on-interrogation/comment-page-1/#comment-348469 Tue, 12 Nov 2013 13:13:48 +0000 https://antipolygraph.org/blog/?p=1130#comment-348469 Why are polygraph test legal anymore? It is proven time-and-again to be just another Gestapo-Nazi technique to itimidate people.

]]> Comment on U.S. Customs and Border Protection Polygraph Chief John R. Schwartz on Interrogation by George Maschke https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2013/11/10/u-s-customs-and-border-protection-polygraph-chief-john-r-schwartz-on-interrogation/comment-page-1/#comment-348167 Mon, 11 Nov 2013 10:23:57 +0000 https://antipolygraph.org/blog/?p=1130#comment-348167 Polygraph techniques used in pre-employment screening and criminal investigations are similar. Usually some form of control/comparison question test (CQT) is used, though the CIA and NSA use the relevant/irrelevant technique, which is not so commonly used in criminal investigations nowadays. AntiPolygraph.org does not ever recommend taking a polygraph “test,” though we understand that in some situations, it is difficult for an individual to refuse.

]]> Comment on U.S. Customs and Border Protection Polygraph Chief John R. Schwartz on Interrogation by George Maschke https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2013/11/10/u-s-customs-and-border-protection-polygraph-chief-john-r-schwartz-on-interrogation/comment-page-1/#comment-348166 Mon, 11 Nov 2013 10:18:16 +0000 https://antipolygraph.org/blog/?p=1130#comment-348166 Good catch. Perhaps Schwartz was simply mocking explanations suggested by examinees who continue to maintain that they were truthful after the all-knowing lie detector finds them “deceptive.”

]]> Comment on An Attempted Entrapment by George Maschke https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2013/11/03/an-attempted-entrapment/comment-page-1/#comment-348164 Mon, 11 Nov 2013 10:13:44 +0000 https://antipolygraph.org/blog/?p=1109#comment-348164 Excellent point.

]]> Comment on An Attempted Entrapment by mary https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2013/11/03/an-attempted-entrapment/comment-page-1/#comment-348163 Mon, 11 Nov 2013 10:10:43 +0000 https://antipolygraph.org/blog/?p=1109#comment-348163 And when, pray tell, is entrapment appropriate?

]]> Comment on U.S. Customs and Border Protection Polygraph Chief John R. Schwartz on Interrogation by Daniel https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2013/11/10/u-s-customs-and-border-protection-polygraph-chief-john-r-schwartz-on-interrogation/comment-page-1/#comment-348077 Mon, 11 Nov 2013 00:26:34 +0000 https://antipolygraph.org/blog/?p=1130#comment-348077 Nice article. How is taking a polygraph different between a test for a job and in a criminal investigation? Do you ever recommend taking a polygraph test, even though polygraph is junk science?

]]> Comment on U.S. Customs and Border Protection Polygraph Chief John R. Schwartz on Interrogation by Perry Mason https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2013/11/10/u-s-customs-and-border-protection-polygraph-chief-john-r-schwartz-on-interrogation/comment-page-1/#comment-348051 Sun, 10 Nov 2013 20:40:44 +0000 https://antipolygraph.org/blog/?p=1130#comment-348051 Methinks there is no “Swartz Helpful Interrogation Test”. There is, however, an interesting acronym for it.

]]> Comment on An Attempted Entrapment by Fascist Nation https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2013/11/03/an-attempted-entrapment/comment-page-1/#comment-347641 Sat, 09 Nov 2013 02:06:53 +0000 https://antipolygraph.org/blog/?p=1109#comment-347641 It really frosts me with the trillions confiscated annually with the implied gun in purloined taxpayer dollars they are trying to set you up on computers running XP. Inexcusable! ;-)

]]> Comment on An Attempted Entrapment by George Maschke https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2013/11/03/an-attempted-entrapment/comment-page-1/#comment-346736 Mon, 04 Nov 2013 20:57:01 +0000 https://antipolygraph.org/blog/?p=1109#comment-346736 J, it is not our normal policy to publish the names of individuals who contact us. But this case is an exception. It seems crystal clear that the e-mails were a set-up. It was certainly no attempt to buy our product: we’re not selling anything. All of the information on AntiPolygraph.org is available for free.

In documenting this attempted entrapment, I think it was important to provide the raw source of the e-mails that I received, which I did. The raw source includes the sender’s (supposed) name, e-mail address, and originating IP address. This is so that others can review and evaluate the evidence for themselves.

]]> Comment on An Attempted Entrapment by George Maschke https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2013/11/03/an-attempted-entrapment/comment-page-1/#comment-346733 Mon, 04 Nov 2013 20:44:58 +0000 https://antipolygraph.org/blog/?p=1109#comment-346733 Mat,

Thank you for this advice, which I think is sound. When I first received the e-mail, I was indeed concerned about possible malware, so I opened the PDF with Document Viewer on a virtual machine running Linux from a Live CD ISO file.

I didn’t notice anything fishy about the file itself. However, if you, or any other reader, have the skills to check the PDF file for a malicious payload, you can extract it from the EML file, which is available here.

]]>