Hot Topic (More than 15 Replies) Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship (Read 25994 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5899
Location: Seattle, Washington
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Nov 14th, 2007 at 9:59am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  


Nada Nadim Prouty


On Tuesday, 13 November 2007, the U.S. Department of Justice announced, "Nada Nadim Prouty, a 37-year-old Lebanese national and resident of Vienna, Va., pleaded guilty today in the Eastern District of Michigan to charges of fraudulently obtaining U.S. citizenship, which she later used to gain employment at the FBI and CIA; accessing a federal computer system to unlawfully query information about her relatives and the terrorist organization Hizballah; and conspiracy to defraud the United States."

Prouty's plea agreement states, among other things (at p.3):

Quote:
3) Defendant PROUTY defrauded the Federal Bureau of Investigation into hiring her on or about April 21, 1997 by, among other things, utilizing her fraudulently procured naturalization certificate, continuing to assert that her marriage to [Chris Michael] Deladurantaye was legitimate, and denying or failing to disclose any criminal or other compromising activity in her background.


All FBI and CIA employees must pass a pre-employment polygraph screening examination. One of the questions on Prouty's FBI pre-employment polygraph examination would have been something similar to, "Have you deliberately withheld any important information from your application?"

For more background on the Prouty case, see "Ex-FBI Employee's Case Raises New Security Concerns" by Washington Post staff writers Joby Warrick and Dan Eggen.
  

prouty-plea-agreement.pdf ( 707 KB | Downloads )

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com
Wire: @ap_org
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box polyfool
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 311
Joined: Feb 23rd, 2005
Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #1 - Nov 15th, 2007 at 3:38am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box 1904
Ex Member


Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #2 - Nov 15th, 2007 at 9:19am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Just a bit of slightly off-topic chat:

Someone posted the contents of George's post iro Nada Prouty on the PolygraphPlace board for comment - surprise surprise - it was deleted entirely in minutes.

The pro poly crowd are absolute hypocritical cowards. They come to this site in an organised blitzkrieg & sprout their pseudo science babble.

But God forbid one should post anything at all that threatens the image of polygraph on their own asinine site. No matter how factual the post is, it will be deleted.

On their site they are gentlemanly. On AP site they vent like maniacs
and are pointedly rude, patronising & insulting.


It is impossible to engage them on their own turf. They are evidently terrified that the public may see polygraph exposed for what it is.
« Last Edit: Nov 15th, 2007 at 9:58am by »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nopolycop
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 383
Joined: Oct 20th, 2007
Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #3 - Nov 15th, 2007 at 2:38pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
1904...

Your summation certainly has a solid foundation in the truth.  I wonder if she used countermeasures, or did what Gary Ridgway did, (according to him) that being just relax and lie.  I would suspect countermeasures, as a spy isn't likely the same psychological  make-up as a serial killer.
  

"Although the degree of reliability of polygraph evidence may depend upon a variety of identifiable factors, there is simply no way to know in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's Conclusion is accurate, because certain doubts and uncertainties plague even the best polygraph exams."  (Justice Clarence Thomas writing in United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, 118 S.Ct. 1261, 140 L.Ed.2d 413, 1998.)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5899
Location: Seattle, Washington
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #4 - Nov 15th, 2007 at 2:56pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
nopolycop wrote on Nov 15th, 2007 at 2:38pm:
1904...

Your summation certainly has a solid foundation in the truth.  I wonder if she used countermeasures, or did what Gary Ridgway did, (according to him) that being just relax and lie.  I would suspect countermeasures, as a spy isn't likely the same psychological  make-up as a serial killer.


At this point, despite some sensationalist press accounts (such as the New York Post's titling of an article on the case "Feds' Jihad Jane Shame"), there is no evidence that Nada Nadim Prouty has committed espionage against the United States.

Nonetheless, I think even polygraphy's staunchest defenders would be hard pressed to argue that Prouty didn't deliberately withhold important information from her FBI application. The Prouty case is clearly a polygraph screening failure.
  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com
Wire: @ap_org
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nopolycop
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 383
Joined: Oct 20th, 2007
Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #5 - Nov 15th, 2007 at 4:06pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
George W. Maschke wrote on Nov 15th, 2007 at 2:56pm:
nopolycop wrote on Nov 15th, 2007 at 2:38pm:
1904...

Your summation certainly has a solid foundation in the truth. †I wonder if she used countermeasures, or did what Gary Ridgway did, (according to him) that being just relax and lie. †I would suspect countermeasures, as a spy isn't likely the same psychological †make-up as a serial killer.


At this point, despite some sensationalist press accounts (such as the New York Post's titling of an article on the case "Feds' Jihad Jane Shame"), there is no evidence that Nada Nadim Prouty has committed espionage against the United States.

Nonetheless, I think even polygraphy's staunchest defenders would be hard pressed to argue that Prouty didn't deliberately withhold important information from her FBI application. The Prouty case is clearly a polygraph screening failure.


Would this be an example of acceptable collateral damage? †

Does the FBI/CIA conduct in-depth background investigations like I received 20 years ago when getting a DOE Q-clearance? †Heck one day I ran into an old girl friend, and she told me they had tracked her down and questioned her about me. †I felt pretty good about the thoroughness of that background check.
  

"Although the degree of reliability of polygraph evidence may depend upon a variety of identifiable factors, there is simply no way to know in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's Conclusion is accurate, because certain doubts and uncertainties plague even the best polygraph exams."  (Justice Clarence Thomas writing in United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, 118 S.Ct. 1261, 140 L.Ed.2d 413, 1998.)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5899
Location: Seattle, Washington
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #6 - Nov 15th, 2007 at 4:15pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Among those pointing out the failure of the polygraph are former counterterrorism official Richard A. Clarke, now an ABC News consultant, who has earlier come out against polygraph screening. ABC News quotes Clarke regarding the Prouty case:

Quote:
"This is a failure of three systems," Clarke said. "It's a failure of the FBI background system, including polygraphs. It's a failure of the CIA hiring system, including polygraphs. And it's a failure of the FBI's computer system security, because she was able to obtain information that she shouldn't have had access to about Hezbollah...


And former CIA agent Larry Johnson in commenting on the Prouty case notes among other things:

Quote:
Prouty passed a CIA polygraph. This should put to rest once and for all the nonsense that a polygraph is an effective counter-intelligence tool. It only works against uptight religious folks with guilty consciences. Folks like Aldrich Ames and Prouty can beat it.
  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com
Wire: @ap_org
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nopolycop
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 383
Joined: Oct 20th, 2007
Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #7 - Nov 16th, 2007 at 3:08am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
From CBS News:

Prouty passed a lie-detector test before she was hired by the FBI, which conducted numerous interviews with her relatives and other associates in Beirut and the United States as part of her security background check, Kodak said. But she was not subjected to the more rigorous security screening that the FBI adopted after its 2001 arrest of turncoat Robert Hanssen, who spied for the Soviet Union and Russia over a 20-year period.

"She had a complete, full investigation," Kodak said, referring to the FBI's background check on Prouty before she was hired.

The CIA largely relied on the FBI's security checks when they hired Prouty, according to a government official familiar with the case who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation.

"The CIA may have been a little too trusting of the FBI's ability to do a background check, as the bureau's own pre-employment investigation of Prouty would have covered her first years in country," the official said. "That won't happen again."

Full story here:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/13/terror/main3496101.shtml
  

"Although the degree of reliability of polygraph evidence may depend upon a variety of identifiable factors, there is simply no way to know in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's Conclusion is accurate, because certain doubts and uncertainties plague even the best polygraph exams."  (Justice Clarence Thomas writing in United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, 118 S.Ct. 1261, 140 L.Ed.2d 413, 1998.)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Fair Chance
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 551
Joined: Oct 10th, 2002
Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #8 - Nov 16th, 2007 at 3:34am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
One of the specific items identified by many congressmen and defense contractors is the inability to obtain a clearance in a "reasonable" time period.

The second one being a valid acceptable procedure to grant a security clearance between agencies.

Once again the "we do things better" will rear its ugly head as the CIA accuses the FBI background check as being inferior. †The FBI has its own arrogant attitude that no other agency meets their standards.

A good background investigation takes time and money. †The pre-screening polygraph was created as an illusion that "the highest standards and precautions" are being used to vet the information on a background check. †A top secret clearance should be fully acceptable in between agencies and the procedures to obtain one should be nearly identical and repeatable.

Once again, do we want security, speed, acceptability, or cost effectiveness to be the priority in processing applicants?

The Federal government has not producing the amount of "mass" retirements predicted which would cause a strain on the current system.

The polygraph is strictly another illusional band-aid covering up a festering security infection that needs a completely new treatment.

Regards.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5899
Location: Seattle, Washington
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #9 - Nov 16th, 2007 at 4:38pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Senators Charles Grassley (R-IA) and Kit Bond (R-MO) have sent newly sworn-in Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey a letter with questions regarding the Prouty case, including one about the polygraph:

Quote:
4.  According to press reports, Prouty passed a polygraph examination. Are those reports accurate? If so, knowing what we know now, which questions, if any, should have indicated deception if the polygraph were accurately measuring Prouty's truthfulness?


As I mentioned in the first post of this message thread, Prouty would have been asked a question similar to: "Have you deliberately withheld any important information from your application?" (This is the precise language of one of the relevant questions I was asked on my 1995 FBI pre-employment polygraph.)
  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com
Wire: @ap_org
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nopolycop
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 383
Joined: Oct 20th, 2007
Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #10 - Nov 16th, 2007 at 6:38pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Since she has not been sentenced yet, she should cut a deal to discuss how she passed the poly, in exchange for a lighter sentence.

Of course, she would need to take another poly to confirm she was telling the truth.   Shocked
  

"Although the degree of reliability of polygraph evidence may depend upon a variety of identifiable factors, there is simply no way to know in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's Conclusion is accurate, because certain doubts and uncertainties plague even the best polygraph exams."  (Justice Clarence Thomas writing in United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, 118 S.Ct. 1261, 140 L.Ed.2d 413, 1998.)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Barry_C
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 114
Joined: Oct 17th, 2007
Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #11 - Nov 20th, 2007 at 2:05am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Have you missed the fact that polygraph isn't perfect? You're going to have errors on both sides.  The question is how many "errors" (BI) do you catch with polygraph?  It is well-documented that polygraph results in admissions or info the background process didn't or couldn't get.

When one believes that polygraph, the background investigation, or psychological eval, etc, is going to catch all those who are not qualified, then there's a problem.

This is just one data point.  When the feds catch spies (and they do), nobody here jumps to argue for polygraph.  Why then the reverse?

We in polygraph know we will catch some and we will miss some.  We need to work on ways to catch more, and miss fewer.  Remember, there is nothing after the polygraph in most situations, and, as I've posted elsewhere, if polygraph is even slightly better than chance (and it is), then we'll catch more than we miss.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5899
Location: Seattle, Washington
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #12 - Nov 20th, 2007 at 4:47am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Barry_C wrote on Nov 20th, 2007 at 2:05am:
Have you missed the fact that polygraph isn't perfect? You're going to have errors on both sides.  The question is how many "errors" (BI) do you catch with polygraph?  It is well-documented that polygraph results in admissions or info the background process didn't or couldn't get.


The value of those admissions must also be weighed against the harm done to the many individuals who will inevitably be falsely accused of deception when reliance is wrongly placed on an invalid test:

https://antipolygraph.org/statements.shtml

Quote:
When one believes that polygraph, the background investigation, or psychological eval, etc, is going to catch all those who are not qualified, then there's a problem.


Agreed. No vetting system will be perfect.

Quote:
This is just one data point.  When the feds catch spies (and they do), nobody here jumps to argue for polygraph.  Why then the reverse?


The Prouty case is one of many data points. While no evidence that Prouty committed espionage against the United States has been made public, spies who have fooled the polygraph include:

Would you care to name any American turncoats caught by the polygraph? I can only think of one who is credibly alleged to have been so caught: Sharon Scranage, a CIA secretary who admitted to passing the identities of CIA employees to her Ghanaian boyfriend, who was an intelligence officer.

Quote:
We in polygraph know we will catch some and we will miss some.  We need to work on ways to catch more, and miss fewer.  Remember, there is nothing after the polygraph in most situations, and, as I've posted elsewhere, if polygraph is even slightly better than chance (and it is), then we'll catch more than we miss.


It's not at all clear that polygraphy reliably works at better-than-chance levels of accuracy, especially when the person being "tested" understands that the "test" is a pseudoscientific sham and knows polygraph countermeasures. Comparing the list of spies who fooled the polygraph against the single spy who was arguably caught by it, it looks like you miss more than you catch.

It's high time that our government heeded the National Academy of Sciences' conclusion that "[polygraph testing's] accuracy in distinguishing actual or potential security violators from innocent test takers is insufficient to justify reliance on its use in employee security screening in federal agencies." The time to end our misplaced reliance on polygraph screening is now.
  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com
Wire: @ap_org
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Sergeant1107
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 730
Location: Connecticut, USA
Joined: May 21st, 2005
Gender: Male
Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #13 - Nov 20th, 2007 at 4:52am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Barry_C wrote on Nov 20th, 2007 at 2:05am:
Have you missed the fact that polygraph isn't perfect? You're going to have errors on both sides. †The question is how many "errors" (BI) do you catch with polygraph? †It is well-documented that polygraph results in admissions or info the background process didn't or couldn't get.

When one believes that polygraph, the background investigation, or psychological eval, etc, is going to catch all those who are not qualified, then there's a problem.

This is just one data point. †When the feds catch spies (and they do), nobody here jumps to argue for polygraph. †Why then the reverse?

We in polygraph know we will catch some and we will miss some. †We need to work on ways to catch more, and miss fewer. †Remember, there is nothing after the polygraph in most situations, and, as I've posted elsewhere, if polygraph is even slightly better than chance (and it is), then we'll catch more than we miss.

The problem isn't that you catch some and miss some.  It is that the polygraph has no scientific basis, and as such it is incapable of detecting truth or deception.

If you screen people by simply arbitrarily disqualifying every second or third person, you will also catch some and miss some.  But I don't think anyone would be arguing that such a process, though imperfect, is better than nothing.

The problem is that, barring a confession, you have no idea if the person you just polygraphed was telling the truth or lying. 

I know you believe that you will catch more than you will miss, but I don't see any evidence to indicate that is true.  In my own experience, the polygraph was inaccurate 75% of the time.  Out of all the government employees screened via the polygraph, the truth is that no one involved in the screening process has the slightest idea if any one of those people lied about matters of substance on their polygraph.  All they can say is that they believe X% of the polygraphs were probably accurate.
  

Lorsque vous utilisez un argumentum ad hominem, tout le monde sait que vous Ítes intellectuellement faillite.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nopolycop
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 383
Joined: Oct 20th, 2007
Re: Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
Reply #14 - Nov 20th, 2007 at 5:53am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Barry_C wrote on Nov 20th, 2007 at 2:05am:
Have you missed the fact that polygraph isn't perfect? You're going to have errors on both sides. †The question is how many "errors" (BI) do you catch with polygraph? †It is well-documented that polygraph results in admissions or info the background process didn't or couldn't get..


My quick comment simply implies that the polygraph apparently doesn't do a very good job of catching spies.  How many people are spying right now, who have passed polygraphs?  And, how did they pass?  From my reading, it appears there seems to be an unhealthy reliance upon the polygraph to weed out undesirables from government law enforcement or security service.  What other explanation could there be for Prouty?  Her whole life was a lie, but apparently no one checked.  But, they DID giver her a polygraph.
  

"Although the degree of reliability of polygraph evidence may depend upon a variety of identifiable factors, there is simply no way to know in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's Conclusion is accurate, because certain doubts and uncertainties plague even the best polygraph exams."  (Justice Clarence Thomas writing in United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, 118 S.Ct. 1261, 140 L.Ed.2d 413, 1998.)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ex-FBI Special Agent and CIA Officer Nada Nadim Prouty Passed Pre-Employment Polygraphs Despite Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
                       
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align
resize_wb
resize_hb







Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
X