Quote:


"A bombastic boob such as yourself can see the analaogy."

Boy, you sure can turn a phrase - have you considered a career in literature? 

Though this isn't about me or you (it's about Onesimus and his current predicament- I suggest we get back on topic), I will humor you this one last time. 

I'm not at all fixated on the 5th Am. issue. I brought it up once, you continued mentioning it in all subsequent posts addressed to me. That said, I understand your layman's rationale vis-a-vis the Fifth Amendment - it's just wrong. You can compare what he did to invoking the Fifth, but to describe not disclosing everything in detail as "essentially" invoking the 5th is absurd. You finally coming around and calling it an "analaogy [sic]" shows there's hope yet for you, grasshopper.

I'm not trying to teach constitutional law here - just explain that many people erroneously say "HE PLEADED THE FIFTH" or whatever in completely incorrect contexts. Lots of people also think anyone arrested needs to have his/her rights read to them - this is also untrue.

As for punching a polygrapher, perhaps I was a bit rash. I can be hot-tempered at times, but fortunately for all parties involved, the polygraphers I've interacted with have been relatively upstanding folks. 

As for melodrama, I apologize if my writing style is too much for you. I will hereafter infuse it with ad hominem attacks, grammatical and spelling errors, and strip it of any unique style. Excessively long paragraphs for everyone!

Pentafed,

How does refusing to answer the questions that Onesismus refused to answer qualify as lack of candor or serve as a mark for him not being trustworthy?  On the contrary, his refusal is a mark of character to not engage the polygrapher in his grotesque machinations designed to elicit some admissions of a horrendous crime so he can put another star in his confession box.  

There must be some limits vis a vis attempts to extract information from applicants WHO OTHERWISE are morally sound human beings.  Asking a man to forward guesses on the things that Onesismus was asked is patently absurd--but also sick.  If he were being asked, did you ever snort cocaine or did you ever steal something, etc and he refused to answer then his candor and trustworthiness might be called into question.  

So please answer my question without rambling off into digressions about the essences of candor and trustworthiness and the fifth amendment.  It's simple really:

"How does refusing to answer the questions that Onesismus refused to answer qualify as lack of candor or serve as a mark for him not being trustworthy?" 

Quote:



Well, I've read "the above."  Basically what I can find is that you say that Onesismus "refused to answer details about his personal life."

How does Onesismus' refusal to posit guesses concerning girls that he works with constitute "refusing to answer details about his personal life?" 

Answer please.

EosJupiter wrote on Mar 28^th, 2006 at 12:52am:

You've just written a speech that is not reflective of what I've written. The only issue I've commented on here is the applicant's bad decision to take his ball and go home when he didn't feel like answering some questions. There are proper and improper ways of doing things. He didd't do it the proper way, in my opinion. You're right, he has to live with the consequences of his choice. And that has been my position all along. Nowhere have I said or implied anything differently. Nowhere have I implied he didn't have a right to stop the process. But don't bellyache about not getting the clearance if you chose to withdraw from the process. What should happen here is 1) the polygrapher who asked the inappropriate questions should be disciplined, up to and including termination, depending on how egregious his conduct was (I only know what the applicant claims because the letter didn't detail the conduct) and 2) the applicant doesn't get his clearance because he withdrew from the process in a less than professional way during the last clearance investigation. As a sidenote, please don't purport to know what is in my mind bwecause I'm not a "polygrapher at the Federal level." I'm not a polygrapher nor do I support polygraphy as a means to an end.  However, at this stage of the game certain agencies have decided to use them as a supplement to other background data gathering processess. As such, applicants requesting these types of jobs and clearances have a process to go through. If you don't go through the process, you don't get the job. No series of questions are so offensive that they cannot be answered first, and then disputed and complained about after. That is the proper way of doing things. If a Police agent approaches you with a warrant for your arrest, signed by a Judge and based upon probable cause, and you, knowing you're innocent, decide to resist that arrest and assault the agent, what do you think is going to happen to you? What will happen is this: you'll be arrested for the original charge, and then charged with resisting arrest and assault on a law enf officer. In the end, you might be aquitted of the original charge but you'll probably pick up a conviction for assault on the officer. Why? Because you made the wrong decision and decided to do things your way, instead of the proper way. Oh, and as for your "countermeasures" they are a form of DISHONESTY, in my opinon, and any use of them would indicate that you're a DISHONEST person, whether you beat the machine or not. I'd rather walk away knowing I did things on the up and up, and by telling the truth (even if I don't get the job) than to use a form of DISHONESTY in the process. But that's a difference between your character and mine.

antrella wrote on Mar 27^th, 2006 at 8:28pm:


I find it odd that Antrella speaks about ad hominem attacks when his first repsone to me was filled with them. But of course, s/he's so damned confident of what s/he posts that s/he finds the need to remove all past posts. Could it be so we can't continue to refer back to what s/he previously asserted, after s/he is dispatched as being a total self-contradicting hypocritcal lunatic every time s/he makes another appearance? One recent example is his claim that he would have stood up and popped the questioner if he posed those simply dreadful questions to him. But when confronted with the reality that a person who gets so upset so as to strike someone because of what he said is not being a good example of someone who is "trustworthy", he then backpeddled.

Quote:


PentaFed,

Must be a nice place to live in a such a perfect world. This website wouldn't even exist,  it hadn't been for the gorilla tactics of polygraphers on innocent folks. Go through the gut wrenching ordeal of getting a false positive and know that you were 100% honest, yet still failed. 
You come on this website in less than 20 posts and proclaim how high and righteous you are and never once produce anything other than criticism and distain for the ordeal that started this thread. 
As far as being DISHONEST, countermeasures in defense of ones self and veracity is never DISHONEST. Thats like saying everyone who owns a radar dectector must me an habitual speeder. They are mechanisms of self defense against an oppressive and worthless process that will be shown for useless as time progresses. And lets not forget something, researching polygraphy, disbelief in polygraphy, and knowing countermeasures is not illegal, nor is it corrupt, or DISHONEST. Another fallacy you are trying to push. Oh thats right I forgot, you work for the government and your here to help.  Open your eyes and look beyond your bureacratic dogma, unless your so institutionalized that you can't see the need for dissent and open debate. When I hung my uniform up, it was the last day I ever said without thought, YES SIR. Get a clue, people don't like being screwed with, and will resort to mitigating anything that is oppressive and wrong.  Bottom line is Onesimus did nothing wrong ... contrary to your beliefs. His honesty and candor just by being here proves what ever adjudication authority was neither.  I would trust him further than a whole lot of civilians I had the misfortune of working with, most being there only to collect a paycheck and not much more. And don't you have something else to be doing other than wasting my tax dollars on bulletin board posts ? Now lets talk DISHONEST.

EOS:

Come on lighten up.  We all know that deep down you want to be a polygraph examiner.