As I said earlier, I will be taking the polygraph in a couple months.  I will have to lie in order to not be disqualified and I will have to use countermeasures in order to get away with these lies.  I was no angel growing up and I made stupid decisions, however, I will not get the job if I tell the truth; I might get the job if I lie.  I would rather take my chances with the "might get the job" then to throw in the towel and tell the truth.  If countermeasures work, I will post it here.  If they do not work, I will post it here.  But, for those of you how say countermeasures do not work, if I pass the test, then your arguement will be proven wrong.  If I fail the test, then you were right or I did the countermeasures wrong.  As for me, I will keep reading about the polygraph and let time run its course.

Batman,

Kids are not dumb.  If Americas best scientists say that the polygraph is BS, then why should anyone believe you when you say that it is not?

Is all science wrong now?

Is smoking good for you? Is the world flat?  

The real message is quite clear:

No, the polygraph is not scientifically sound, but LE likes to use it anyway.

What a great lesson to teach the kids-  

Lie on cue (control question)-      your a good citizen.

Lie when we dont want you to-    your a bad citizen.

Chris:

While I agree that Treetop is incredibly erroneous in attempting to gain employement through fraud and deceit, I find it difficult to swallow most of your other assertions.

You state that use of countermeasures alone is the main reason to discontinue the use of the polygraph.  I tend to believe that the main reasons that polygraph use should be terminated are because, first, it is scientifically invalid.  Second, it has a horrific rate of accuracy.  Third, the very real threat to our national security based upon such fallible results alone demands immediate halt of this voodoo.  Fourth,  we are a nation who prides itself on justice, and this silliness is unjust.  Fifth, in being the greatest nation globally, I prefer to have the best and brightest, and most beneficial members of my society in law enforcement/intelligence agencies.  To that end, when some toy with the accuracy of Batboy's tea leaves and dysfuncional Magic 8 Ball determined who these cherished individuals will be, something is incredibly WRONG.  Countermeasure use is just so low-raking as cause for polygraph banishment in my humble opinion.

I cannot ever suggest that a person use countermeasures to conceal deceit.  However, I do not live in a bubble either, and I know that for every good tool or technology here, someone will develop a way to turn its purpose and utility against itself for the gain of negative results.  My difficulty comes in finding there to be enough utility in the use of the polygraph to even constitute it as a good tool.  I still have suspect feelings about the Brain Wave technology, and wonder if ever there comes a chance for things like countermeasures, administrator error, or other malfunction.  Where there exists human input, a margin of error surely must exist.

I also would never condemn or advise against a person using countermeasures when that person is indeed truthful in their answers.  This seems like a paradox, but it isn't.  When you go to take the SATs or other standardized tests that measure your ability, do you not, if you are wise, practice, take sample tests, improve your TEST TAKING skills?  Are you being dishonest then if you do in fact do these preparatory steps?  I see the polygraph no differently.  It is a "test" used to measure your fitness for a job, your level of character, your trustworthyness.  Now, just as the SAT cannot possibly measure your true academic ability, neither can the polygraph measure your veracity.

I would have to believe that use of countermeasures would be the norm from intelligent, dilligent and devoted applicants.

Regards,
Seeker

Batman wrote on May 20^th, 2003 at 7:41pm:


This from a professional liar. I guess it takes one to know one.

Chris
Your right to make the point about CM use not being part and parcel of an applicants bag of pre employment tricks.  To some, this is an archaic concept-  personal ethics are more important than possibly prevailing while committing an ethical violation.
We have disagreed in our view of the plygraphs utility.  I have seen it work many times when the facts would not have been discovered any other way, and you have had a bad result during an applicant process.
Your message on ethics is still intact, and it sets you apart from the average poster here.

All,

There are times on this site when I feel like an island.  I feel like my views are just so different from everyone else's.  But one thing I do know is that my views are my views, and they are not going to change on anyone's behalf.  So if you don't like what I say, ignore me.

Breeze,

Good to see you back into the discussion!  As you know, I do believe that there is good that can be done with the poly.  The GKT is a proven test, and it should be used as part of the complete investigative process.  Having said that, the PLCQT is an utter joke of a "test," which is completely susceptible to corruption due to countermeasures.

So my views on the polygraph may not be as biased as you think.  I will have you know that if given the chance to sit for another polygraph, I would NOT use countermeasures.  I had and continue to have nothing to hide.  However, I would feel guilty as all hell during the test, because of my knowledge of the secrets behind the PLCQT.  After having read the pro-polygraph propoganda posted by some here, I am forced to feeling guilt for my knowledge, like I know secrets that I shouldn't know, and that these secrets are just as damaging as countermeasures themselves.  Knowing these secrets is a mental countermeasure, and that is enough to change the outcome of the test.  As crazy as it sounds, I would feel guilty sitting for another polygraph because my knowledge would be a countermeasure in itself -- no puckering needed.  But I thank you for your kind words regarding my ethics.  I know I am not alone in my view about pre-polygraph research -- I felt no need to prepare for the polygraph.

I was just leaving the Army, a government job, looking to go to the FBI.  In the Army, it doesn't take long before you realize how the system is set up.  Basically, men can make all the mistakes they want, because there are 47,000 regulations and codes to govern and correct any problems that they may make.  It is good, in a way, because there is a sense of security, because even though you feel like some people might be out to harm you, somewhere, buried deep in codes and regulations, is protection.  It gave each worker a comforting sense of security in their government and the Army (and on a bad note, made it nearly impossible to discharge a bad apple).  But having this sense of security in the Army, I thought that I might find the same in another government agency, the FBI.  When I was told that all I had to do for my polygraph was sit down and tell the truth, I believed it.  And if something went wrong, I felt I would have 29,000 methods of recourse.  Never once did I think the FBI would betray me, blacklist me, and hang me out to dry.  But the safety and security that I felt with the Army wasn't there with the FBI.  Not only did I have no recourse, but I also was admonished for my post-test words of displeasure.  

Today, I no longer have the faith in the government that I once had.  Had I lost that faith prior to my polygraph, I might have researched the poly and learned about it's flaws.  But would I have felt guilty for having known the polygraph's dirty little secret prior to taking one?  Who knows . . . .

And to you, El Guano,

Friends?  You thought we were freinds?  I wouldn't say that we are drinking buddies.  Too much beer makes me puke on my own, with you there, I'd have permanent peristalsis.

I think we gained a mutual respect for each other.  True, we don't see eye to eye, but we are not as diametrically opposed as you are with ohters on this site (see my above response to The Breeze on how I feel the poly should be used).

Having said all that, I did give you, El Guano, fair warning, that your comments were unappreciated.  I have a distaste for all things polygraph, even though I do believe there may be a use for it.  My personal experience with the polygraph has made me distrust its operators.  I certainly know I was lied to by my polygrapher during my "test."  

So I attacked you because your comments were, in my eyes, hypocritical.  I would hope that, if you do have more respect or view me differently than others on this site, you might take my words to heart.

Chris     

PS -- And El Guano, I don't think you ever changed your screen name, but I know your good buddy Torpedo has done it on occasion.  Haven't heard from Torpedo of late, who is he now?   
 

Dear Seeker,

Ouch!  A couple of those OO shotgun ball bearings nipped me in the rear-end (and I hope it was friendly fire and they were made of stainless steel, even game cannot be shot with lead anymore!).  I cannot speak for Chris but after reading many of his postings, I think he would go through ten more exams if given the chance to win against this flawed system.

You know I do not like the polygraph but I do understand Chris's intent and motivation.

I have withstood almost twelve hours of polygraph exams over three exams.  I am not a crazy person, just determined to not allow a flawed system to claim me as a victim. 

I type very quickly and do not sweat my grammer on this website but I consider myself fairly educated after taking over 240 college credit hours in biology, physics, chemistry, electronics, and electrical courses over my lifetime so far (with more to come).

Not only did I not use countermeasures during any of my exams, I specifically discussed the NAS report with my examiner before the third exam.

I will answer all applicant questions truthfully to the best of my ability and then I will hold the agency to the fire and insist that they do their best to ensure that I am treated fairly.  If I feel I am being wronged, I will appeal it until I get a satisfactory answer (even if it takes years).  I am not rich but this method has worked well for me over my life-time.

I have found that the best way to try and change a flawed system is to exert constant pressure over a long period of time.  I have rarely changed the course more than a few degrees but the larger the ship, the longer it takes.

The best military and law enforcement officers are unwaivering in there perception of right and wrong.  Any deviation from these personal beliefs normally leads to the path of the "Dark Side of the Force".  I believe that Chris's perception of "the right thing to do" agrees with mine.  Are we "smart"? Maybe not as far as passing a polygraph pre-screening test, but it is a value system we have lived by and most probably will die by.

Regards

The_Breeze wrote on May 22^nd, 2003 at 5:29pm:


Breeze,

Be careful here.  I have come to learn that the typical response of these people to your statement above, is, "Okay show us your 'dozens of applicants.'  We want names, dates, times, and places of exams," etc.  Of course you cannot ethically or legally provide that information and they know it.  So therefore from their self supported point of view, you MUST be lying and therefore their position is further reinforced.

Breeze, you will never will here.  After all, that is why they call it, "Anti-polygraph.org."

Poly-Cop