Batman,

Clarification is my middle name . . .

Batman wrote on Mar 6^th, 2003 at 8:58am:

If Steincj is correct that, "Federal Agencies could care less about a Security Clearance." then you have nothing to worry about, because if one is required for the job you want, and you don't have or can't get one, then you won't get the job.  No problem.

Or the agency you are applying for will process you for clearance as part of their application process . . .

Quote:

Stein has an issue with the polygraph because he supposedly failed a pre-employment exam with the FBI.  He believes this has impacted him in some negative way, however he is still employed, as I understand it, with the DoD.

1.  Not supposedly, I did fail.  If you want proof I will gladly send you a scanned copy of my letter rescinding my offer of emplyment because of the polygraph.
2.  You know what happens when you make assumptions, Batman.  I am not "employed" by the DoD.  I once was on Active Duty, but now am a member of the Individual Ready Reserve, basically on Inactive Reserve status.  The DoD has control of me, but I do absolutely nothing (and receive no pay or benefits).  Recall of the IRR is the last step before a draft.
3.  The failure of my polygraph HAS affected my ability to apply for other government postions.  See my personal statement for details.

Quote:

You asked me, "Hey Batman, is it standard procedure for federal polygraphers to sensitize their subjects to the nature of the test PRIOR to hooking them up?  Shouldn't this alone make the test invalid?"   You then stated, "A member of your beloved APA and former Federal Polygrapher told me it does." It appears you already have your answer.  Do you not believe him?  Is that why you are seeking my opinion or input?

Oh, I believe him.  I just want your reaction to the possibility that the polygraph test is widely abused and mishandled around the nation.  I want you to know that there are many, many reasons why people are being bounced by the polygraph, and not all of them are based on pure machine readings.

Quote:

You also stated and then asked, "If the machine itself TRULY works, then the outcome of the "test" shouldn't be affected by the subject having prior knowledge of the polygrapher's mind tricks. Don't you agree, Batman?" Well that's a pretty loaded question Stein.

You're damn right it is.  The PL CQT is based solely on a unknowing subject falling for all the tricks employed on them.   Why can't a screening or pre-employment test be based solely on the machine readings?  Because the machine readings don't tell you squat unless you compare them to other questions to which you ASSUME the subject is lying.  Tha is BOGUS!!!

Quote:

What "mind tricks" are you referring to?  I am not aware of any "mind tricks" that are utilized during the course of a polygraph examination.   Maybe you could elaborate.

"Let me explain to you the imprtance of honesty and integrity" -- a phrase used when administering a Probable Lie Control Question test.  Emphasize honesty but assume that the subject will lie.  If that isn't the most ass backward thing . . .

"Please write a number from 1 to 7 on a card.  I'm going to run a test to calibrate the machine."  HA!

"This test is about to begin" -- don't you mean "This test began the moment I hooked you up"

Must I go on?  Read TLBTLD for more details.  Better yet, go back to your DoDPI handbook.  It's all in there.

Quote:

You advised Smirky, "...don't be scared with Batman's words about countermeasures.  My opinion, don't use them if you don't need to." Why would you advise Smirky not to use countermeasures?  If they can not be detected then why shouldn't Smirky, or anyone for that matter, utilize countermeasures?

In my opinion, I believe that countermeasures that are used on a first polygraph are undetectable.  However, if an individual tried to use countermeasures on a second polygraph, after not using them on the first, well, a comparison of the charts wouls CLEARLY indicate an improvement in test results.  The marked improvement could only be attributed to 2 things - substantially less anxiety as to the polygraph experience or use of countermeasures.   Countermeasure-paranoia among polygraphers will always lead them to the second conclusion.

Quote:

Lastly, you told Smirky, "If you truly have nothing to hide, then I believe you have nothing to worry about." Based on your alleged experience with polygraph, and that of several others who post on this site, I would think Smirky would have a whole hell of a lot to worry about, wouldn't you agree?

My case is very different than others.  You assume (again, Batman, assumptions mare bad) that I am just someone who claims a false positive but really had some issues during my test.  I had nothing to hide during my poly, but a PAPERWORK error by the agency created misleading information which swayed the polygrapher into calling me deceptive.  Remember, my polygraph took TWO days, and at the end of day one, I was deemed "inconclusive."  But at the end of day two, I was a "definitely conclusive, a conclusive failure."  The polygrapher was looking for information from me that he believed, from a PAPERWORK error, to be true, and when he didn't find it, he failed me.

Without that paperwork error, I'm sure I would have passed.  The PL CQT relies on too many outside factors to judge results on, rather than using straight polygraph readings, like CKT (event specific).  The PL CQT is straight up fishing.  My polygrapher was told where the fish were, went there, didn't get a bite, and chose to believe that there were fish in the water, rather than refute what he was told.  It is crazy.

Quote:

Now I know you will undoubtedly respond to my question about the "mind tricks".  That's fair, but if you do, please answer the other questions I have posed to you.

Come on, Batman.  You know I am a man of my word, despite what your silly PL CQT says about me.  I don't skate around or ignore arguments.  Hell, I'll even include a point from your second post:

Quote:

It someone firmly believes the polygraph does not work, that it is based on a pseudo-science, then how can that same person tell someone not to worry and not to use countermeasures?

Ahh, see, I believe that the polygraph MACHINE does work.  It can measure the physiological responses of the human body.  What does NOT work is the person sitting behind the machine, trying to interperet another human's autonomic nervous system measurements down to a 50/50, truth or lie result.  
Now in the CKT, the measurements are overwhelming, and the questions are specific.  But I would never believe guilt or innocence based on the test result; it is only another piece to the comlete investigation pie.
Of course the PL CQT is nothing like the CKT.  Truth or lie is determined by answers to a question in which the polygraph examiner ASSUMES (there's that word again) that a previos answer given by a subject is a lie.  How crazy is that?  And to boot, some agencies use these test results as the final authority on an individual.  It's the whole pie, not even a piece of it!

The system itself SUCKS.  And countermeasures are living proof that the system is totally unreliable.  Using countermeasures corrupts the system even more.  Well, if a system is corrupt, we ought to get rid of it!!
 
Why do I tell people not to use countermeasures?  If good people, those with nothing to hide, use countermeasures to ensure they pass a polygraph, years later, when they are a asset to the agency they work for, everyone will assume that the polygraph worked well, and let in a real winner.  
When that happens, NOBODY wins, becasue the broken, corrupt system perpetuates.

Chris