retcopper wrote on Feb 13^th, 2006 at 9:55pm:

If you are aware of any scientific studies supporting polygraphy perhaps you could cite them occasionally in your posts.

Retcopper,

If you feel that you have the educational background to discuss any scientific foundation that you believe exists for polygraph screening, I'd be happy to engage in such a discussion.

Drew:

I have had much success using the polygraph to clear up discrepancies and lies in applicants and suspects. Polygraphy is certainly not 100% foolproof but it is very close and it  is a good tool for investigations and screening applicants.. Just as you present scientific studies debasing the accuracy of the polygrah, the polygrpah industry can present scientific studies  supporting polygraphy.

I'm sure the polygraph operator just failed to ask the right questions "Have you ever stolen 1000 pairs of women's underwear?", for instance.

He is said to be an Admin type -- The Office of Security is in the Directorate of Support.  Is HE a polygraph operator himself?

Retcopper,

You write:

Quote:


You are quite correct.  Polygraphy (in the various forms/formats in which it is typically utilized)  and those who employ it can not be held accountable for its not being able to predict the future--only for using a technique which has no diagnostic validity for elucidating the past.

A polygraph doesn't predict a person's future behavior.

Fair Chance,

My Pleasure ... 


Regards ....

EosJupiter,

Thank you for the exact link that I was searching for.  My intention for even mentioning this link is that even after polygraph examination and background checks, people can go bad or be bad and still slip through the cracks.

I will argue that the same amount of people go bad with or without the polygraph but the good applicants lost through false positives are costly in dollars and personal reputations.

Regards.

Quote:


Fair Chance, 

Although, I didn't see a broadcast of this story, I did read about it in the newspaper either yesterday or Tuesday--can't quite recall? I remember a quote in it about how surprised Fairfax County police were that this employee was able to carry out all this crime while working full-time for the CIA. If my memory serves me correctly, I think police were able to zero in on the suspect, after the woman and her child ran outside flagged down a car and were able to get his tag number--I think that's how it went? Quite a story, indeed. I wish I could remember which paper wrote the story or if it was distributed through a wire service, so I could post it because it has a little more info. than the WAVY-TV post, but I read it way too fast. Another shining example of pre-employment polygraph screening at work. 

i went through the CIAs psych screening many years ago. All you can be sure about CIA folks from their screening is not that they are thieves or not but that they dont mastubate in front of farm animals and they havent smoked pot in years.

Azman,

This post was not about America falling.  This post was yet another example that every agency can have a bad apple and the use of polygraph pre-screening does not prevent such bad apples from happening.  

Regards.

Cheer--Cheer---Cheer----America is falling?   NOT

Just wanted to add the link for the story:

I saw it earlier in the day, and knew someone would post it. 

http://www.wavy.com/Global/story.asp?S=4472773&nav=23ii

Missed another bad apple did we boys ??? Another great example of the polygraphs accuracy.   

Regards

Dear Readers,

I am surprised that no one has mentioned a mid-level CIA employee who was cornered by two women and a child after he just was caught in the act of robbing her house during the day near Washington, D.C..

This employee is currently under suspicion for over fifteen house break-ins.

The heck with spies, they are having a hard time just trying to  prevent petty stealing in the CIA.  Guess the pay is not enough to keep a guy honest.

It is amazing how the newstories just "disappeared" from publicity after yesterday's broadcast on local Virginia TV stations.

I think the CIA is a little sensitive about this one.  I know I would be a red faced about this if I was a supervisor touting how good my employment screening is.


Regards.