Hey folks

I just underwent the latest in a series of polys with a national security agency.  I am a job seeker.

I thought you might be interested in the fact that when I told the examiner and SO that I had visited this site they were very unhappy and sternly reminded me of countermeasures and their consequences (which, by the way, I wouldn't have had the stones to do with THAT agency and despite their threats they couldn't do anything but DQ me anyway).  Then they regained their composure and went on with it.

I actually felt I was treated fairly, had a good examiner, and think I made it despite the fact that I was as nervous as s***t like always.  I never did anything they were interested in anyway but I have a latently guilty conscience (raised jewish?) and have been involved in some messy drug, criminal and national security stuff in my present law enforcement position, which I have been in for almost 15 years.  I found the following unusual though so maybe you can tell me if I have a MISTAKEN impression that I made it this time - which will be the last no matter what happens.

First off - this was more than my second poly (I don't want to say how many I have had in case the examiner reads this and makes me).  Does this indicate a true desire to take me on board or are they fishing on something I said before.  Mind you, I copped to nothing unusual beyond the sort of things you encounter in my kind of work on a regular basis. No dope, a couple minor security violations, and (as you can see here) too much web surfing at work on the slow days.

Second - Toward the end they began to ask me what sounded suspiciously like the sort of questions your site reports are used to validate results.  For example

"We have a diverse office so have you ever discriminated against anyone? (Answer- yes of course, then came requests for acutal incidents which I gave (who cared?) )"
"Have you ever broken a reg at your job for convenience (Answer - no , but I admitted to the fact that in the interest of what is right I have engaged in specific minor breaches - who hasn't out in the street)"
"Do guilty feelings impair your ability to function (answer - no, otherwise I would not have sat through these exams)

Do these questions indicate a that they are just sewing up loose ends prior to a DQ?  Or did I pass and they are just asking more questions.  I did not think that these questions were part of the deal, no examiner ever asked me these before, and had nothing to do with the task at hand as far as I could see.


Third - They said that some questions were settled at earlier polygraphs and that I was fine.  They promised they would not ask about those and they did not.  Is this unusual?

Despite the fact that this was an uncomfortable experience for me I can truly say that I was not mistreated.  In fact each examiner, in my opinion, really went out of their way to help me pass and explained to me what was going on every step of the way.  While I continue to doubt anything but an incidental connection between guilt and metabolic functions, the process is a deterrent that seems designed to weed out people who will be non-conformist or basically a pain in the ass.  These examiners were good people who would probably do well in other jobs, which I would recommend.

Thanks to all - Gadget

Dear Skeptic

Thanks for taking the time to respond to my questions.  It is much appreciated on this end.  As far as this
particular opportunity goes, if it dosn't work out, it's their loss.  I am pretty content in my present job and
I am a highly skilled individual in certain aspects of enforcement work that are desirable at this point in 
time.  Unlike a lot of people, I was actually sought out by this particular agency through contacts I had 
in my area of expertise.

I also understand the need for security processing.  It is not the goal I object to - it is the means used 
to achieve it. 

That said, I too found a lot of the experience to be demeaning and upsetting to a large extent.  I also think that the entire process, particularly polygraph, is discriminatory to people who have hardcore real-life experience.If I were the typical 22 year old kid (which I was at one time) that is dragged in for this stuff I would haveaced it in no time becuase I had no life experience.  I am a lot more jaundiced, having seen some foul s***t but I also place a lot more value on things like truth, other people, and my good name, than a green kid can be expected to.  It certainly works against certain ethnicities, particularly blacks.  Having visited this agency a LOT over the years I will say that most of minorities, blacks in particular,  I have seen appear to be tokens or people hired for language ability or some other hard-to-obtain skill, or working at the food concession.  This is not a reflection of any group's abilities - it is, however,  a reflection of the hurdles that many people with "unusual" (e.g.,  non christian, urban, non-white, foreign, etc.) backgrounds need to overcome to fit into the round hole of security processing.  Bias of this sort should not be tolerated and the maxim that the "polygraph is color-blind", while true in the sense that the machine works the same on all people, does not dispell the bias and prejudice that characterizes much of the process, which is highly reenforced by the punishment and humilation factor inherent in polygraph exam.  I recently read a magazine article about polygraphy.  The next month there appeared a letter to the editor in response to that article by a police officer.  In the most telling commentary I have ever seen on polygraphy, the officer said something like this:

"In my entire career I never beat a confession out of anyone and I will not beat one out of someone with a machine..."

I might add that the human resources involved in this process were articulate, concerned, hard-working, and helpful insofar as I could determine.  This represents a waste of the first order.  These people are skilled 
interrogators (way better than me...) and could probably manage better without the prop of the box serving 
as a limit to their insight.

Again, Best Wishes - Gadget