Add Poll
Options: Text Color Split Pie
days and minutes. Leave it blank if you don't want to set it now.

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
Change Text Color
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align

Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx ics psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
Topic Summary - Displaying 6 post(s).
Posted by: John (Guest)
Posted on: May 29th, 2001 at 11:36pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
GINO - I was not asked countermeasures-related questions while "hooked up".  I was only asked CM questions before and after the exam.  He asked if I had heard of Williams, etc.  My retest consisted of the the same original questions from the 'drug series' with one new control Q asking if I had ever stolen anything of value as an adult.  I was stupid and failed to react to it the first two times he came to it.  The third time I did react.  I think it was clearly added by the headquarters people to see if my reaction to a new control Q would be as abnormally strong as my reactions to the original control questions.  My "non-reaction" and/or inconsistent reaction to this new control question was likely deemed a tacit admission of CM use.

However, the whole retest may have been a big BS session if they already knew I bought the manual.
Posted by: G Scalabr
Posted on: May 29th, 2001 at 9:50pm
  Mark & Quote
Although I doubt that Doug Williams is voluntarily sharing any information about his purchasers with the government, there is always a chance that the FBI or someone else is sureptitiously observing everything that goes through his website.

Even if this is not the case, there is a chance that the FBI could find out about a purcahse of "How to Sting the Polygraph" during a background investigation.  I know for a fact that when you apply for employment with the FBI, you sign waivers granting the bureau access to all of your credit card information (obviously this did not happen in your case, because those disqualified by the polygraph never reach the background investigation).

With all of this being said, Doug Williams manual is a resource worth having.  If you want the pamphlet, there are ways it can be obtained without performing a transaction in your name.   Using a money order is one way.  Having a friend or relative with a different last name purchase it by credit card is another.  Also, you may wish to have it sent to someone else and have them remail it on to you.   

Lastly, I am curious about one thing.  Did the polygrapher himself accuse you of using countermeasures during the "test?"  Or, were you notified later by phone/mail?

Posted by: John (Guest)
Posted on: May 29th, 2001 at 9:12pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
George - 

Administrative appeal failed as expected.  I just wonder if they know who buys that Williams manual.  I'm thinking they do.  If countermeasures are a threat to national security, why couldn't they get a warrant to do surveillance/investigate that guy?  Anyway, I wish I never saw that manual or learned anything about how the machine works - thats what ruined me.  Knowledge was not power in my case.  My advice here: if you insist on doing CM's and using the Williams manual, don't buy it online with your credit card.  Send a money order or something - he doesn't need your money on the spot.
Posted by: Nate
Posted on: May 17th, 2001 at 4:49pm
  Mark & Quote
"What can you do?  If you get another chance, are you supposed to just sit there and listen to the ridiculous control questions? "

NATE: you bring up a good point.  I always wondered after reading about the CQT format, how would my brain respond to these questions now that I am educated on the matter.  On my last exam the examiner and I went around and around in circles (before the exam) because I was afraid that I would not show a reaction on the control question because I knew I could not be disqualified for failing those, but when asked a relevant question I might physiologically respond knowing "S@*T, this a relevant question!"  In polygraph terms, I see the real "threat" question as being the relevant questions and the control question as not being a threat at all because I can't be disqualified for those, consequently making the exam not accurate.  I passed this exam and didn't understand how.  The examiner explained it that even though I "logically" see the relevant questions as a threat and the control question as not, my sub-conscience/cognitive thinking will respond regardless of what my logical brain thinks, if I was in fact telling the truth on the relevant questions.  I don't know if this was a bunch of BS or not but I passed so who knows.

PS: I didn't use counter measures on the control questions.
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: May 17th, 2001 at 8:38am
  Mark & Quote

The odds of anyone who has twice "failed" an FBI pre-employment polygraph interrogation being hired (without an accusation of countermeasures) are virtually zero. The odds for anyone who stands accused of having employed polygraph countermeasures are not likely to be any better.

Nonetheless, it is proper to exhaust your administrative appeals of the Bureau's action. I suggest that you also contact attorney Mark Zaid <>, who represents eleven plaintiffs who are currently suing the FBI, USSS, and DEA over their pre-employment polygraph practices.

I strongly recommend that you promptly request all information about your FBI polygraph interrogations (including charts, the polygraphers' reports, and "quality control" reviews) under the Freedom of Information/Privacy Act. See Chapter 5 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector for more on this.

You wrote, "What an absolute dream killer this unethical machine is." It is important to bear in mind that it is not the polygraph instrument that is unethical: it is the public employees who are arbitrarily and capriciously branding others as liars based on this junk science.

Ultimately, polygraph abuse must be ended through legislation. I invite you to join us in working to abolish employment-related polygraph "testing" through enactment of a Comprehensive Polygraph Protection Act eliminating the governmental and other exemptions to the 1988 Employee Polygraph Protection Act. This won't happen unless our representatives and senators in Congress hear from us. I suggest you write to your congressman and senators urging them to sponsor such legislation. It would also be helpful to call each of their local offices to schedule a face-to-face meeting to explain the need for polygraph reform the next time the congressman/senator is in town.

(Also feel free to e-mail me privately in this regard at <>.)
Posted by: John (Guest)
Posted on: May 17th, 2001 at 2:47am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Can anyone advise:

I have taken two pre-employment FBI polygraph examinations and my conditional offer of employment has been rescinded as a result.  I "passed" the first test but was called back (by headquarters) to take another due to suspicion of countermeasures.  Of course I "failed" the second for the same reason.   

I am following the proper channels to appeal this decision.  Does anyone have experience in this situation, ie, what are the odds of being granted another test, and more importantly, what are the odds of headquarters ever accepting the results of someone that they have already branded as a cheat?

What an absolute dream killer this unethical machine is.  What can you do?  If you get another chance, are you supposed to just sit there and listen to the ridiculous control questions?