But hasn’t it been shown that lie detectors have a very poor track record of accuracy? So, isn’t this more security theater?

Federal agents have launched a criminal investigation of instructors who claim they can teach job applicants how to pass lie detector tests as part of the Obama administration’s unprecedented crackdown on security violators and leakers.

The criminal inquiry, which hasn’t been acknowledged publicly, is aimed at discouraging criminals and spies from infiltrating the U.S. government by using the polygraph-beating techniques, which are said to include controlled breathing, muscle tensing, tongue biting and mental arithmetic.
[...]
By attempting to prosecute the instructors, federal officials are adopting a controversial legal stance that sharing such information should be treated as a crime and isn’t protected under the First Amendment in some circumstances.
[...]
Citing the scientific skepticism, one attorney compared the prosecution of polygraph instructors to indicting someone for practicing voodoo.

What’s the next subject to be made illegal to teach?



  1. Mr Diesel - Bobbo who thinks nothing is wrong with child porn says:

    Any subject that raises the intelligence of the low information voters. It seems it is already illegal to pass on knowledge in schools since we are spending more than ever before and thanks to the unions kids are getting dumber and dumber.

    • jpfitz says:

      Today I listened to a report on Common Core teaching. The instructor was demonstrating how it’s not bad if a child multiplies 3 by 4 and answers with 11, as long as the student can explain why 3×4=11. The answer has to make sense, in a critical thinking manner I’m guessing, which freaked me out. How stupid are the kiddies going to be in ten years. Critical thinking and being able to express thoughts are all well and fine, but not in the area of simple math. Ah, maybe I’m just being anal today.

      http://youtube.com/watch?v=DW0VxxoCrNo

  2. msbpodcast says:

    What’s the next subject to be made illegal to teach?

    Critical thinking, math or physics…

    This country’s going down the toilet, and your politicians are there, just jiggling the handle.

    Can you even name the fuckers who you sent to congress, or pick their faces out of a line up? Does it even matter?

    Abandon all hope, pucker up and kiss the oligarchs’ assholes.

    They’re bad, but not as bad as the 1%ers, who’ll expect you a eat what come out.

    We 99%ers would do much better with selected representation.

  3. dbg says:

    There is absolutely no scientific evidence whatsoever to back up the purported effectiveness of so-called “lie detectors”. It is unconscionable that the government uses the things in the first place.

  4. Chris H says:

    I guess that episode of Seinfeld where George Constanza advises Jerry on how to beat the lie detector should be banned…

  5. pedro says:

    That won’t stick. When they use the lie detector on the guy, he’ll pass

  6. IG says:

    Wouldn’t we want to hire those that are skilled enough to beat a polygraph? A very useful skill for a deep cover agent.

    • Tim says:

      Very insightful. Yes, it is intimidation and to some degree to let a profiler get a read on the state of willingness of the participant by using his own subjective perception.

      Of course, it is for the citizenry and stupid jurors — “He refused the polygraph!??” It’s like refusing a breathalyzer even if one had not drank a drop it’s an automatic revokation of license {that thing we must submit to because we are conditioned to believe a right to travel is really a government granted privilege and they will shoot, if that premis is challenged}.

  7. spsffan says:

    I actually took a polygraph years ago. I didn’t try to lie, as I had nothing to cover up. But the experience was interesting. I was a very nervous 20 year old though, and I knew that my answers would implicate a co-worker, even if I had not witnessed the crime.

    Anyway, I can understand how some people could learn how to fool the machine, so they aren’t foolproof, but I’d say that they are right about 80-90% of the time. Interesting testimony, but still room for a reasonable doubt.

    Nobody and I mean nobody could fool my grandmother, though. But she’s dead.

    As for prosecuting the instructors, well, as long as corporations are people, why should the 1st amendment matter anyway? 1984 is just coming a bit late and in bits and pieces, but it is coming. Keep your powder dry.

    • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with movie references says:

      Lie detector, sly detector. How do you know your Grandmother is dead??? I know…hurts to think MiMaw just took off to the islands.

  8. NewformatSux says:

    Teaching people about Obama’s housing policies is a federal crime for which you can be prosecuted.

  9. Dallas says:

    I support the idea of cracking down on deception artists, bomb makers, gay cure withcraft and curing baby illness with prayers.

    • Tim says:

      “”Thirty Hellens agree: You can’t pay too much for a good pair of shoes.

      “”My God! Your feet are what you walk on — Helen Bryant

      http://youtube.com/watch?v=BDTZcj8Xink

      But, have you lost hope that perhaps science can still cure sniveling little rat-faced gits?

    • NewformatSux says:

      Where do you stand on beating up people following you that you think are gay?
      How about locking up the gay partner of a journalist who is leaking national security secrets?

      • pedro says:

        Asking such questions to a hypocrite the size of DUhllass is a waste of time.

  10. Guyver says:

    But hasn’t it been shown that lie detectors have a very poor track record of accuracy?

    In a court of law yes. For background security checks no.

    Many jobs which require Above TS security clearance require an interview by someone who is usually a seasoned interrogator (so that he / she can read your body language). You’re hooked up to a lie detector as well as sweat sensors and another sensor you sit on (apparently you unconsciously may clench your backdoor muscles if you’re trying to be deceptive).

    No single approach is foolproof on its own. Some prescription meds can make you out to be a liar even when you’re being truthful.

    But if you take everything collectively, the tests altogether make a very compelling litmus test. Ultimately the interrogator’s job is to make you comfortable and ease you in with softball questions since they know most people are going to be very nervous about the whole process. They are also are required to know if a test may be compromised due to external factors (i.e. prescription meds, etc.).

    The government may consider the whole process “proprietary”. And I can understand why they may be protective over some sharing information on how to thwart such background processes. It’s about maximizing the filtering out of people who are clearly red flags. In a post-Snowden world, people see it as an abuse of power. In the context of national security (the nuclear option for the government), those in the know sharing how to thwart the process shouldn’t be surprised of being brought up on charges. Am I excusing it? Nope.

    Just explaining that I can understand why they’re being so protective. Their concern is having moles from foreign governments within ours (not as if there aren’t any now). If you remove the effectiveness of the background check process for Above TS, then you open this country up for exploitation even further by foreign entities.

    What are the motivations of those trying to show others how to thwart the tests? In whose interest is it in?

    • MWD78 says:

      just a thought. if a government were sending someone here to become a mole and infiltrate sensitive parts of our government, wouldn’t THEY train the operatives before they were sent? i mean coming here in a post-9/11 world and then looking for training on how to thwart security checks is like signing up for a flight school and making it known that you don’t care about how to take off or land an airplane.

      • Tim says:

        *signing up for a flight school*

        According to the official 911 conspiracy theory, why would anyone try to change or fix what is not yet broken?

  11. Guyver says:

    That all said, I also recall reading a while back (New Scientist?) that someone believes they’ve developed a brain scan that focuses on the part of our brains involved with lying / deception…. they believe it’s 100% foolproof if perfected.

    • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with movie references says:

      Michio Kaku just said they can scan the brain and identify the exact word you are thinking of. Right now they have figured out two words: apple and one other.

      Its just the start. Interesting the brain contemplating the world has in its structure the perceived world. Complicated. Most interesting things are.

      Show after that (Evolve-Communication) showed that prarie dogs can communicate way much more than we give those chirps credit for but with training (like the lie detector==get it?) even a human can listen and hear the dogs telling one another a human dressed in blue is out and about as opposed to one dressed in red. Same with coyotes–what direction and how fast they are moving.

      Life on Earth. A beautiful thing.

      • Tim says:

        “”Well, he’s not thinking ‘apple’ so it is most definately scrambled squirrel brains with a sprig of parsley.

      • Guyver says:

        Michio Kaku just said they can scan the brain and identify the exact word you are thinking of. Right now they have figured out two words: apple and one other.

        I think I’ve seen that or something similar to what you’re describing. I believe they’re trying to teach computers to interpret our thoughts by way of showing individuals pictures of things and having test subjects think of or stare at the image while their brain waves are recorded.

        Over time and many test subjects later they’re hoping that they’ll accumulate a dictionary of brainwave patterns for thoughts / images.

  12. Mextli says:

    Just more intimidation; no different from detaining David Miranda.

  13. sargasso_c says:

    It’s illegal to practise voodoo? Uh oh!

    • msbpodcast says:

      No, its not illegal to practice voodoo, (or medicine come to think of it,) but it is illegal to claim that you’ve got it all figured out.

      The standards of proof and repeatability for voodoo are insanely lax however. :-)

  14. Uncle Dave says:

    Suppose you’re a psychopath/sociopath (yes, I know there’s a debate over whether there is a difference) who has no emotions to control. Doesn’t that make you the perfect person to infiltrate whatever since you could naturally fool a lie or related detector? Do they test for this separately as part of hiring for sensitive jobs?

    • Tim says:

      Well, yes. But, I got the job. I found the ability to feign loyalty to my employers — Give them what they want.

      http://youtube.com/watch?v=iVlkZVAw8Gc

    • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with movie references says:

      I like the test where you show people some truly horrible picture and normal peoples’ irises shrink. In psycho’s it expands. I’m sure there is a brain scan differentiation but mind readers have been using the iris response for years.

      • Tim says:

        That is also relevant when encountering dogs. They communicate by pupillary modulations. It’s not so much that they ‘smell’ fear as it is that your iris dialated which can be interpreted as fear, aggression, or being horny. It depends on the personality of the dog, but usually the response is the same bitch-slap you’d get from an unwilling girlfriend.

    • pedro says:

      Yes. Psycopath/sociopaths lie naturally because for them, is just no a lie.

  15. LibertyLover says:

    I’ll be so glad when Obama gets elected and puts a stop to all of this thought police bullshit. It’s gonna be a breath of fresh air!

    • spsffan says:

      Well Libby,

      I understand the sentiment, but at the same time, do you (or anyone else) think that either McCain/Palin or Romney/what’s his name would have been any better?

      As miserable as the Democrats are on civil liberties, they are about a half point better than the Republicans. Heck, even the Libertarians put up one of the authors of the Defense of Marriage Act in 2008~!

      • Dallas says:

        agreed. The democrats are the least distasteful.

        Libertywhiner is just ticked off because Obama didn’t approve his fracking project.

        • jpfitz says:

          Ohh, the nasty “distasteful” attack at you I’ll not unleash. You are the biggest suck up to the new stasi.

          • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

            You only think the dumbo aren’t worse than Pukes because you don’t have a vagina to be probed against your will.

            You may think that is a slim difference, ….. but there it is.

          • Dallas says:

            Don’t make me go capslock on your ass.

          • jpfitz says:

            You tell em bobbo.

            I expected Pedro to chime in.

            Please save me from those caps lock, what caliber are they by the way ? Let me put on my cap lock proof vest first.

          • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

            jp–I was talkin’ to YOU. I know==weird when the posting order actually works.

            No rational person can disagree that the Dumbo’s while still corrupt and 95% corporate bought and owned by the SUPER RICH are still not as distasteful as the FERP’s.

            As stated: “Its slim, but there it is….”

          • jpfitz says:

            I kinda figured that but played it out. Ah, d or r today is the same. I see no difference between the two parties anymore.

    • LibertyLover says:

      For those of you who said that the Dems were the least distasteful solution, shame on you.

      Shame on you for picking the lesser of two evils, which is still and always evil.

      Shame on you for not taking your job seriously enough to look for a tasteful candidate, and sticking with him or her regardless of perceived chances, because your self esteem was so low that you wanted, you needed, to grasp onto anything that made you feel like a winner.

      History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period [...] was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. MLKJ

      And most of you all, shame on you for treating it as funny. This country is sinking into a morass of fascism and you laugh about it.

      “I’ve found out why people laugh. They laugh because it hurts so much… because it’s the only thing that’ll make it stop hurting”

      “But that’s not all people laugh at.”

      “Isn’t it? Perhaps I don’t grok all its fullness yet. But find me something that really makes you laugh sweetheart… a joke, or anything else- but something that gave you a a real belly laugh, not a smile. Then we’ll see if there isn’t a wrongness wasn’t there.”

      ― Robert A. Heinlein, Stranger in a Strange Land

      • Dallas says:

        There are no tasteful candidates.

        YOU, as well as I, will ALWAYS be voting for the least distasteful candidate.

        BTW, I would be a very tasteful candidate but I am not well known outside of my circles. I need to show my big dick or something and get my name out there.

        • LibertyLover says:

          There are no tasteful candidates.

          There are always tasteful candidates, even if you have to write them in.

          Personally, I would find one who I knew wasn’t lying through his teeth to be tasteful.

          • spsffan says:

            Um, Hitler wasn’t lying through his teeth. He even wrote a book stating what he planned to do.

            And, yet, he turned out to be rather distasteful.

            I can tolerate some obviously overstated campaign promises. That’s how the game is played, whether I (or you) like it or not. But it is my evaluation of the candidate him(or her) self that matters.

            A write in? For city council in Talent, Oregon, perhaps. But not for president. Third party is bad enough, but at least the vote registers. You’d might just as well stay home. That said, I did write in for my Congressional race last time. With the cockamamie primary system they instituted here, the top 2 vote getters in the primary are the ONLY names that appear on the general election ballot. In my district that was the incumbent Democrat and a Republican who didn’t even have a website, and from what I could discern, lived about 100 miles away from the district. This absent Republican still got something like 25% of the votes cast!

            It will always be a balance of the least unpalatable verses the next worst option, unfortunately.

          • pedro says:

            WRONG! Hitler was not only lying thru his teeth (Die Grosse Luege, ever read Mein Kampf?) but was also committing terrorist acts and blaming them on his political targets (Der Reichstgabrand?).

            Typical democrap dialectic

      • Tim says:

        Minds and candidates are a terrible thing to taste.

  16. Frank says:

    Well, I might have expected this, when Ward Cleaver gives the test to Mr Rogers

  17. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with movie references says:

    What’s the next subject to be made illegal to teach? /// My Magic Eight Ball is sticking, but we could start with what is already illegal?

    1. Contraception
    1b–Family Planning
    2. Safe Sex
    3. Evolution
    4. Effects to the Environment from Hooman Activities
    5. The unavoidable conflict between capital and labor
    6. How effective government is necessary to prevent the death of the middle class

    ……….hmmmmmm….. I’m seeing a pattern.

    • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with movie references says:

      …. and closely related we have: How to beat being identified: http://wired.com/threatlevel/2013/08/ip-cloaking-cfaa/

      A point: knowing and teaching unrelated to an actual conspiracy to violate the law should always be legal.

      Its the doing of what you know that should be subject to law.

      Not a fine point.

      • jpfitz says:

        You’re not helping my disposition today bobbo. The internets are becoming a mine. One by one companies and sites are leaving, not wanting to be apart of the draconian net capturing meta data.

        Today Groklaw is gone. Tomorrow Dvorak Uncensored? I for one hope not.

        http://groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130818120421175

        • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

          Yeah, I read that one too and almost linked to it but the post was a bit “whiney” to me. She didn’t really give reasons for her dismay–just that she was.

          Its like highschoolers: give them team colors and they tribe up to hate the other colors. Its called the human condition–aka==stupid.

          So–give Americans a so called constitutional right and they tribe up to hate if it is encroached upon. Its called the human condition–aka==stupid.

          If you “know” your conversations are tapped, why not just adjust and enjoy your life regardless? Why let the gubment control?? Why not understand what it is you want to say but not if its made public?

          Your answers are your own, but you owe it to yourself to think thru the issues rather than suffer a massive kneejerk.

          • jpfitz says:

            So, you have burned the Constitution along with some here. Encroached upon, your mincing words. How about the law being broken, and don’t parry with the “patriot act”. The human condition is all encompassing bobbo, that means you’re in this too. I have nothing to hide from prying eyes, I am dumbfounded at your ease of letting the ptb trample upon your rights. How about my rights, and the other Americans feeling a distrust of their gov’t.

            Sometimes… I think you disagree to just make a point opposite, trying to feel superior, even if you don’t disagree. Make no judgements on what I just wrote, there is no disdain meant. Only a little confusion on my part. Or should I say surprise.

          • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

            Well jp==maybe you just have to read and re-read until you agree with me. Took me years to agree with myself… and I had certain advantages.

            Simple fact is the letter of the law most likely is being followed in the formal description of the program. How to treat the violations is a totally different subject.

            Dots are hard to identify and differentially discuss when they are close together.

            Ain’t that a bitch?

        • Tim says:

          The internet should be thought of as an extention of our bodies even though government never respects the biological one to start with — Always with the de-humanizing cohercive force toward molestation, inspection, injection, extraction, restriction, prohibition, and any other edict that one must, or must not do to it, or with it, or put into it as the individual sees fit.

          It sux to be their factory-farm livestock but the cows will probably get together and form a viable plan of rebellion before we do.

          • jpfitz says:

            Maybe the sheep will be lead by a brave soul that will adjust the path we’re on. Forget the cows, cows are dumb as a bag of hammers.

            “ The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who in the name of charity and goodwill shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother’s keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers.

          • Tim says:

            Yea, cows can be pretty dim. Yet, so much of the populace of this nation has had high-level formal training in double-think and bunk — If only something useful could be rendered from them? IDK, maybe pray for an EMP to reset this nation and then buy stock in Soylent Corp, after all.

  18. jpfitz says:

    Honesty is the best policy. Period.

    • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

      What about the Jew I’m hiding in my closet?

      Periods are so self contained. What about outside and around the period?

      • jpfitz says:

        Ha Ha. I guess it’s the human condition?

        In my state evolution is taught in schools, ha.

        • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

          I wonder. I might be instructive to compare a science, or maybe sociology??, books from today and going back every 10 years. I’ll bet anyone could spot changes in emphasis or presentation?

          Joke: I’d rather not be taught evolution in Left Coast Cali than be taught evolution anywhere in Texas outside Austin and one neighborhood in Dallas.

          Its funny: the South in general: proud of some very hateful things. Texas: alternates with being proud of nothing.

        • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

          Darn—in that expression of “All hat and no cattle kind of way.”

      • Tim says:

        Ohh, bobbo; Surely, nothing unsavory is going on? Skulking around scooping unsuspecting Jews off the street and stowing them amongst your dirty linens is not kosher — Now I must peruse the milk cartons.

      • jpfitz says:

        Let my people go.

        https://youtube.com/watch?v=gtLcELU1brA

        Tim won’t have to peruse milk cartons if you come to your senses.

        bobbo, wake up, when the ptb know all you do is bake cronoughts and drink beer they’ll be a knock at your door. If you can’t contribute to the big plan you’ll be interned to work at labor, or turned into soylent green. A nightmare of the future USA without the Constitution. Hopefully I’ll be dead by then. The future doesn’t look bright. More confirmations of NSA snooping came out today. I think Siberia may be a good place to move. Do you have Netflix? If so check out a film about happiness. Happy People: A Year in the Taiga.

  19. I’m a co-founder of AntiPolygraph.org and am among those cited in the McClatchy article. I think that teaching others how to pass a polygraph test is First Amendment-protected free speech, even if our government would prefer that such knowledge were not widely available.

    I invite all to download our free e-book, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, and judge for themselves whether the sharing of such knowledge should be criminalized:

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

    If you agree that it should not be criminalized, please consider sending copies to friends. You are also welcome to mirror it on your own website. Polygraphy is a state-sponsored fraud, and the public needs to be informed.

    Doug Williams, who runs Polygraph.com and had his business records seized (but was not arrested, as Fox News erroneously reported), was interviewed by Oklahoma City News 9 earlier this week. Video and transcript are available here:

    http://www.news9.com/story/23178002/authorities-investigate-ok-instructor-teaching-polygraph-beating-methods

    • Tim says:

      Thx, George Maschke.

      And now, back to the screening…


      “Have you ever heard of AntiPolygraph.org ?
      “No.
      “Would you ever visit AntiPolygraph.org ?
      “No.
      “If you did, you would tell us truthfully, wouldn’t you?
      “Yes.
      “Would you ever disseminate information found there?
      “No.
      “Do you know what a “sacrifice” relevant question is on pg. 96 of lie-behind-the-lie-detector-1.pdf is?
      “No.
      “You are fucking with us, aren’t you?
      “Hells Yea!!
      “Yes or no only, please.
      “No….

      • jpfitz says:

        Very good. Lol.
        Reach across the tubes and smack bobbo in the back of the head to wake him up. I think bobbo has rolled up the Constitution and stuffed some wacky weed in it and smoked the darn thing.

        • Tim says:

          I’m reserving the full backhand for that Texas town backward dolt with the vinaigrette cross-dressing thoughts for demanding Snowden is a traitor for not facing up to his actions in ‘merikun courts.

          Paul Joseph Watson had this linked on his site, propagandamatrix —

          “”Judicial procedures concede to authorities a power to decide about speech what they have no moral power to decide. Telling the truth about the empire is one thing, and that can be done from outside America. Fighting it on its own turf is another. This elevates the empire and treats it as if it has a moral standing that it does not have. Whatever shred of moral foundation the Constitution once gave to the United States has long since been destroyed. Even less does that document morally support the existing empire. The empire is a morally irrelevant and empty construction when it comes to free speech and should be treated as such.

          http://lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/glenn-greenwald-should-not-enter-the-u-s/

          bobbo is holding on to the letter of the law but, to his credit, he has conceded that, perhaps, the spirit of it should hold some weighting.

          The Devil and the Law —
          http://youtube.com/watch?v=d9rjGTOA2NA

          Ahh, so rude to talk about people standing right next to them. No matter, I’ll through it their way when next it presents itself to do so.

          • jpfitz says:

            Better rude than a conforming traitor, giving up on the principles that make USA great. If my 75 year old mom who is computer illiterate believes that the current state of the government is wrong, then I still have hope. Too many are afraid of speaking up which as you have stated is a form of first ammendment squelching. I will not be silenced, and call out the meek to grow a set. The laws apply to all, if the executive branch is trashing the Constitution then justice should be served.

          • jpfitz says:

            No intention of doing harm to anyone here, especially bobby who was the first to reach out and calm me during a upsetting exchange back when that Norwegian nut murdered all those children. I was fairly new here and was shocked by tead’s comments.

  20. NewformatSux says:

    It is illegal to teach that the President is ignoring the Constitution and should be impeached.

    • Dallas says:

      Correct. Public schools should be teaching factual topics and especially math and sciences so that America can become more competitive in the world economy.

      You may teach that and witchcraft around your dinner table. That is a right you have.

      • pedro says:

        Teaching people to recognize when someone’s using the constitution as toilet paper is against democraps like DUhllass & should not be taught in public schools.

      • pedro says:

        Let me round of the idea because hypocrite lemmings might not fully understand.

        Teaching how to recognize when a repuke uses the constitution as toilet papaer should be taught in schools & teachers should reinforce the subject by taking the kids to rallies against the repukes.

        On the other hand, teaching how to recognize when a democrap uses the constitution as toilet paper is unconstitutional and the teacher should be fired immediately. Other teachers should reinforce the idea by taking the kids to rallies against the teacher who dares to teach such heresy.

        • Tim says:

          Don’t teach them anything but how to live in a prison and then mow the little bastards down in an active shooter drill — makes for a much better news cycle.

        • Dallas says:

          I don’t understand your gibberish. You need a comma or period in there somewhere or start all over again. It seems to have something to do with children and rallies.

  21. NewformatSux says:

    It is illegal to teach how to avoid the ObamaCare taxes.

    • Dallas says:

      Not true. You can buy the ObamaCare Survival Guide for $19.95.

      • NewformatSux says:

        That’s amateur hour. I stand to make lots of money from ObamaCare, by managing workarounds.

        • Tim says:

          I predict a surge in black market organ harvesting. Lots of ObamaCare inspectors are going to be waking up in strange bathtubs minus one or more kidneys with a note on their toe instructing to dial the PPACA referral service.

  22. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    George Maschke says:
    8/21/2013 at 2:35 am

    I’m a co-founder of AntiPolygraph.org and am among those cited in the McClatchy article. I think that teaching others how to pass a polygraph test is First Amendment-protected free speech, even if our government would prefer that such knowledge were not widely available. //// I feel compelled to ask: why do you teach this? I’m happy with “to make money.” But I wonder if there are any other more iconoclastic or even heuristic based motives?

    • Tim says:

      It is a tool of deception and oppression — Is it not enough that it should be exposed? Should it not be exposed that the 4’th amendment is dead as well as the 1’st {due to self-censorship/chilling effect}??

      I cringe to think of what compelled you to ask — I think you would agree that it was most certainly not the Power of Christ.

      • Tim says:

        Let’s just call this an ‘intervention’ because we are all concerned about bobbo’s bouncing soul — “You mean, I just want to be loved?”

        http://youtube.com/watch?v=vX3wNfw3iYY

        http://urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Volgons

        http://youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&list=PL2Lz9LTm142wqMhWnnRy3X6llne3PW3x3&v=IxPeIiU2kx4#t=98

      • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

        It is a tool of deception and oppression — /// There is an argument for oppression as well as freedom but what is the argument for deception?

        Is it not enough that it should be exposed? /// You can’t expose what everyone already knows.

        Should it not be exposed that the 4′th amendment is dead as well as the 1′st {due to self-censorship/chilling effect}?? /// Use of the lie detector touches upon the 1&4 Amends but does not violate them. FREEEEEEEEEDOM does not include the freedom to commit crime. Too many Liberty Losers make that mistake.

        I cringe to think of what compelled you to ask — well==why would someone teach others how to lie successfully? Seems to encourage criminality. No civilized, honest, non-hypocrite would support such activity.

        I think you would agree that it was most certainly not the Power of Christ. /// who? what????

        • Tim says:

          Because Truth has become treason and we still have a right to act to preserve Life, and Liberty, and that Other Ambiguous Thing.

          “”According to Paul, these are the tell-tale signs of a dictatorial government: “And when you have a dictatorship or an authoritarian government, truth becomes treasonous.

          http://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-when-you-have-a-dictatorship-truth-becomes-treasonous/

          To clarify; I’ve waited and plotted and scanned for this moment every since I learned they lied about cannabis — I was always sick of people saying “If you don’t like it here, move.” And my waved-away reply being “you people shit in everyone else’s back yard first– There is nowhere to go, not that you fucks would let me leave, anyways.”

          • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

            So what you are saying is that all statements from our elected leaders should be done under the polygraph.

            I agree.

            We should all support greater use of the Lie Detector.

            Yea, verily!

          • Tim says:

            No. What I’m saying is that our ‘elected’ leaders are psycopaths which sail right through the test. We must work hard to demonstate agility on the same playing field.

  23. Professor Kool says:

    What’s the next subject to be made illegal to teach?

    For Washington, it won’t be one of these secret courses:

    “How to pork up a piece of legislation without getting caught.”

    “How to lie effectively to your electorate, with a straight face.”

    “Spending more while claiming you’ve cut back.”

    “How to cash in on future legislation before everyone else.”

    “Building your golden parachute with taxpayer dollars.”

    • Big Toe says:

      Aren’t those all just lessons in “How to be a LAWYER”?!

      Substitute the word “taxpayer” or “electorate” for “client” and there is no difference!

  24. CrankyGeeksFan says:

    I heard a radio interview with a federal undercover agent that had to pass a lie-detector test in order to be accepted into a particular criminal organization. He avoided any discussion of how he passed the test.

    I think the interview was with the ATF agent that went into the Hells Angels that was the basis for the book No Angel.

  25. NewformatSux says:

    This is useful stuff to use against the 86 criminal investigators hired by HHS to investigate people for possible violations of ObamaCare.

  26. JimD says:

    The “Meter” indicates NOTHING, but the “Human” operating the “Detector” is the LIAR !!! And the person being “Tested” is the Victim !!! That’s the reason “Lie Detectors” are no allowed as “evidence” in courts !!!