Mike,
I am in no way questioning if you did or did not  have the qualifications for the position nor am I questioning that your lies were indeed the truth and that is why you have passed.
What I am questioning is your little experiment and why you felt you had to do it in the first place. The only thing you direct this question to is that you had "nothing to loose". But yet you explained you were up till 2:00 am reading this book that you called a "bible".
Usually a good explanation would be explained as skepticism? Either way you're a really deep skeptic of poly graph exams then.
In the last paragraph you said that you have conquered your fear of polygraph exams perhaps this is your main reason for doing your experiment. But you said you had them before. If you never had anything to lie about why fear them? And how could "counter measuring" (which in fact is true deception) make you even more relaxed than telling the truth?
I am well aware of the procedures in security and law enforcement applicants.  You said you were applying for a position  in a private sector. They don't call it "private" for nothing.  Actually they take it very seriously and you go through a grulling process to obtain security clearances! Not just a regular job application and a polygraph exam.
I don't understand why you would have chose this position to do your experiment if what you want is to eventually get back into law enforcement. What if your experiment didn't work and you would have failed?
The DSS and the NSA would know this sometime down the line and suspect something. Not that you would need clearances for a law enforcement position if you would be a cop but anything beyond that it would be possible that you would have to obtain clearances since 9/11/01.  

And they don't put out money for polygraph examines if  they aren't serious about their security. Actually it's the last process in hiring someone. So it's just natural the first process would be to grill someone on the application along with any background checks required including past employers. And if it is a high security position, like you said they probably did checks you had NO clue about. They can find out if you ever had a speeding ticket.
My only point is that if a person like me, and average "joe" could find the inconsistencies in your statements, a qualified educated examiner should.
A false positive occurs when a truthful examinee is reported as being deceptive, a false negative when a deceptive examinee is reported as truthful. Some research indicates that false negatives occur more frequently than false positives, other research studies show the opposite conclusion.
Maybe you want to change your 2nd to last paragraph
or check your "bible" on that one.