Yes. But in trying to justify polygraphy, they do end up providing solid advice:

Quote:

Wise readers should take note, remembering the #1 rule of anti polygraph: make no damaging admissions!

Quote:

Makes sense coming from an operator. Polygraph is based in fear, not science. Anyone who would consider advice like this needs to take a serious look inside as to who they are as a person.

Reminds me of video put out several years back by the Indiana State Police in which applicants were discouraged from researching polygraph. If any employer discourages you from researching anything about its organization, an ethical person sees this as a big red flag. I wouldn't want to work for any such organization. Nor would I want to work with anyone who would consider following this type of advice.

And yes, it appears to be a retread of an old article, with a new date designed to boost SEO.

AntiPolygraph.org's server now supports the latest transport level security (TLS) protocol, TLS 1.3.

The latest versions of the Firefox, Chrome, and Safari web browsers now use TLS 1.3 by default when connecting to this site.

Qualys SSL Labs continues to give AntiPolygraph.org's TLS configuration an A+ rating.

On August 25, 2020, the popular website for people with security clearances to look for a job, ClearanceJobs.com, published an article entitled How to Prepare for a Security Clearance Polygraph Examination.

I will comment on just a few things in the article.

Guideline 1: Don’t ask anyone who has taken a polygraph what theirs was like. Hmmm, why not?  What difference does it make?  Are they scared we will be more prepared to NOT make confessions and beat the polygraphers at their own game?

Guideline 2: Don’t spend time soul searching your life thinking of things that may be asked during the test.  They seem to not want us to know what questions will be asked because then we will be prepared for those questions and not crumble during the polygraph interrogation, which is what it is.  The polygraph is not an "exam."

Guideline 3: Don’t be influenced by any anti-polygraph websites.  Which websites are they talking about here?  Certainly not George Maschke's Antipolygraph.org site.

Guideline 4: Don’t anticipate what questions will be asked.  Again, why not?  It seems like they don't want us to be prepared.  What is wrong with being prepared?  Does that mean we will more likely pass and not make disqualifying confessions?

I find it interesting that the first four guidelines are against websites like this one and try to convince the public not to research the polygraph.  To me, this means the Antipolygraph.org message is being disseminated thoroughly and people are doing their research, meaning less disqualifying admissions are being made, and more people are passing.  Just look at the recent Chinese spy cases in the U.S. in the last decade or two since this website has been up.  Many Chinese spies worked for the U.S. government, passed polys, got clearances, before being arrested and/or convicted by the FBI for espionage.  There are also articles about other polygraph-cleared federal employees who were arrested and/or convicted of crimes they committed before their polygraphs and were therefore able to conceal these crimes during the poly and beat it.  The word is getting out.  The poly is going down!

One thing strange about the article though, the publication date is August 25, 2020, but the Disqus comments are up to nine years old!  I guess maybe the article was published first in 2011, then the publication date was change to "bump" the article into present day to revive its relevancy (or more like irrelevancy since the polygraph is garbage).

Join us to discuss polygraph matters and related topics on Sunday, September 20th, from 2-4 PM Eastern (11 AM-1 PM Pacific).

No sign-up or special software is required. You can participate by video, voice only, or text only by going to the following URL at the designated time:

https://jitsi.cyberian-nomad.site/AntiPolygraph

Guest posting has again been suspended. Please register to post.

      As informative as this site is, the posts will dissappear very quickly when others post. A good idea is to have page numbers at the bottom of each page with the previous pages of posts so the reader can quickly and easily see them.

I didn't lied (though I did employ cm and pass), though I know of at least half a dozen people that lied on their "test" and passed (anywhere from watching porn to hiring escorts to one guy doing hard drugs, though he was caught on the ua). They all brag about how easy it is to pass.

Your employer is mistaken about the EPPA rules saying you had to take the test. The Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 does indeed include an exemption for armored car companies, but that exemption only allows them to polygraph prospective employees. It doesn't allow them to order existing employees to submit to polygraph "testing" in the context of an internal investigation such as that you described.

Your employer violated the EPPA by compelling you and your colleagues to submit to polygraph "testing." I think it would be prudent to at least consult with a lawyer with experience in labor law regarding your situation.

Hello

Three of us took a polygraph for an armored car company.
We all came out as incomplete. This went on for hours.  We were told the EPPA rules said we had to take the test.  We signed the forms and came back for the test.

On Friday we were called and told we were on suspension for th next week pending further investigation.  All over $175.00 in missing coins.

Should the three of us get a lawyer or wait and see what happens.  We are only making $22.50 an hour which is not a lot as armored car people are attacked frequently at ATM machines.

First let me say it is a huge honor sir. I was watching a video on youtube not too long ago from the discovery channel I believe it was where a man was attempting to beat the test, just to see if he could. You instructed him "think about falling." In the video he claims to be "terrified" of heights, but he had to really concentrate to feel any different. I was wondering, does someone have to "feel any different" in order for a "reaction" to be visible? For example, broken bones protruding from the skin really gets my skin crawling with revulsion, but only if I witness it or see it in a photo/video, otherwise I do not really feel any different. If I were to take the test and think of broken bones protruding from the skin on the control questions (but again not feel any different) would that produce a visible reaction?