U.S. News & World Report has just published (in its 24 Feb. edition) an article by Chitra Ragavan titled "Tracing terror's roots: How the first World Trade Center plot sowed the seeds for 9/11" that describes how the FBI severed its relationship with Emad Salem, a confidential informant whose information could have prevented the 26 February 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center in Lower Manhattan that killed six and injured thousands. The FBI's decision to terminate Salem seems to have been based in large part on his having had "inconclusive" outcomes in a several polygraph "tests." Ragavan reports:

Quote:


The FBI recently lost another confidential informant who refused to be polygraphed and who has made a public statement on this matter under the pseudonym "Informed Citizen":
 
http://antipolygraph.org/statements/statement-016.shtml 
 
It appears that the FBI learned nothing from its misplaced reliance on polygraphy in the case of Emad Salem.

Fed up Fed,


Is that really the best you can do?  George's post preceeding yours was thoughtful and articulate. 

George's post:

Quote:





It was yours that rang of nothing but the futile chirp of a cry baby...

Your post:

Quote:


Is there any question why you and your ilk have no credibility?  Do you further have no degree of self respect--most assuredly not apparent with such a pathetic post?

Quote:


Fed-Up,

Are you honestly saying you'd rather keep some "crybabies" out of law enforcement/intelligence services than potentially save thousands of American lives?

I hope you'll understand if I (and our gentle readers) conclude your priorities are a tad screwed up, sir.  Should we believe it's better to have the likes of you defending us?

Skeptic

Seeker,

You state, "However, when we find that not only the first WTC bombing, but the OK City bombing, as well as 9/11 could have been prevented if law enforcement actually used real investigative methods as opposed to some futile belief in the polygraph results, the public at large will rise up and demand that no more lives be sacrificed for belief in this lunacy.
It becomes a totally different issue to the public when brutally violent murders through acts of terrorism are allowed to occur because of misplaced belief in the polygraph."

I most certainly have missed something!  Exactly who was polygraphed in relation to the terrorist attacks of 11 Sep 01 that if "real investigative methods" were employed instead, would have prevented these attacks?  You are laying some pretty heavy shit at the feet of individuals like myself!  I would appreciate it if you would be a bit more specific as to exactly what use of polygraph, in relation to terrorist attacks, you are referencing.  What polygraph examinations were administered, prior to the attacks that could have prevented these attacks?  You seem so positive in your accusations that I'm sure you can provide this information.   Please include any information regarding how the over reliance on polygraph led up to the first bombing of the World Trade Center, and the Oklahoma City bombing.   

George's post simply details one informant, who was unreliable at best.  There is no doubt in my mind he was veted in more ways than just the polygraph.  To pop up now, with 20/20 hindsight, and allude to this single informant being the key to the first WTC bombing is, once again, a very lame attempt to place blame where it does not belong.  I would expect a little better from you George.  I find it hard to believe that someone with your background, and alleged intelligence would try to make the connection you are by quoting this article.  You may want to say that you were simply quoting an article by another author, however you know full well what you are implying.  Does your hatred of everthing polygraph run that deep?

Batman

Once again, a lame attempt to switch the topic back to how bad polygraph is in the pre-employment screening world.  I would still like to hear from Seeker, or anyone else, exactly how the over reliance on polygraph led to the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, or the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City.

Seeker stated, "However, when we find that not only the first WTC bombing, but the OK City bombing, as well as 9/11 could have been prevented if law enforcement actually used real investigative methods as opposed to some futile belief in the polygraph results, the public at large will rise up and demand that no more lives be sacrificed for belief in this lunacy.
It becomes a totally different issue to the public when brutally violent murders through acts of terrorism are allowed to occur because of misplaced belief in the polygraph."

Please provide information to support such a statement! 

Batman

Mr. Chance,

You stated:

"The FBI has a policy of not "vetting" polygraph results in their hiring practices.  A reasonable person could infer that they would use this same mindset in "vetting" informants.  The logic would follow that the informants are vetted similar to the applicants.  Belief in their "truthfulness" is only based on polygraph interpretation with no other factors considered."

Do you really think that sources of information are treated in the same manner as applicants when it comes to verifying information provided?  You may be using logic, but it's a bit fuzzy.

Batman

Fair Chance,

Your logic is not only fuzzy, it's cloudy and it's wrong.  The utilization of polygraph as it pertains to sources of information is totally different than how it is used in the employment application procedure.  When a source of information is administered a polygraph to verify information it is because there is no other way to verify the information.  It is simply a tool applied to an overall situation.  The results are weighed with, and against other factors such as what past information the source provided, and how accurate was it when verified through means other than polygraph.

You make it sound like a source comes in, provides information, and the first thing he submits to is a polygraph, end of story.  That may be how it's done on Law & Order and NYPD Blue, but not in the real world.

You are trying to compare apples and oranges.  They may both be fruit, but they are no where near the same.

I have to go, the Bat Mobile is low on gas (Been doing a lot of running around from thread to thread.  It's hell being popular.)

Batman

Fat Chance,

Come on now, that sounds like one of those 'ad hominominominom' attacks you guys are always fond of talking about.  What do you think Septic, does this qualify or is it only polygraph examiners who make such attacks?

Hey Chance, any real thoughts about what I said as it pertains to your logic or lack there of relating to the utilization of polygraph on sources as compared to job applicants?  No?  How about any thoughts at all?  No?  Well, that explains a lot!

Batman (the mobile is gassed and running)