wrote on May 9^th, 2001 at 5:33pm:

There is no longer a real need for foreign intelligence services to spend their resources developing countermeasures, for the techniques are all available on the Internet for a nominal fee or free of charge.  The sad thing about this, in my view, is that it is American citizens who are advising sex offenders, murderers, spies, and rapists how to beat the test.

Gordon,

Earlier in this message thread, you wrote "If you don't mind, I'd like to focus in this thread on the risks of using countermeasures..." Now that you've chosen to venture into commentary on ethics, perhaps you'd care to respond to the following questions I posed in my initial reply, which you had earlier shrugged off. For convenience, I'll re-state them here:

Our discussion of the ethics of polygraph countermeasures [in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector] is short and simple:


Quote:

We believe that it is not unethical for truthful persons--faced with a government that routinely lies to and deceives its employees and prospective employees  through the polygraph screening process--to employ polygraph countermeasures to protect themselves against a false positive outcome.

Do you disagree? If so, why? Is it ethical for our government to lie to and deceive employees and applicants for employment through the polygraph process? If so, why? (The  deceptions involved are discussed in Chapter 3 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector).