TwoBlock,
YOU SAID: "Are you trying to tell me that a failed FBI poly isn't a factor in the hiring process when the applicant is trying for other LE jobs? Do you think that the many, many posters here are lying when they say it was? "
I SAY: The fact is that in the law enforcement community TODAY in 2008, there has never been a greater demand for applicants from generation X, as generation Y is retiring out rapidly. Agencies which used to have policies of one having to reside in a certain area to even be an applicant, have loosened them, as they will take applicants practically from Mars if need be. They really don't care how an applicant performed at some earlier time on another examiner's polygraph test, as they are footing the bill for Their Examiner to test the applicant NOW, and only care that the person be fully truthful and passes + looking at their admissions as to if said admissions would keep them from fulfilling the credibility test on the witness stand later. As you may know, an Officer's testimony is the crown jewel which supports their reports, evidence collected, and observations made in the field. That really is the bottom line. Your example of the Sgt. here is proof alone of that.
In regard to your referencing the moderator's, or any other persons, prior FBI or other agency pre-employment screening, don't be confused about someone's failure to complete a process successfully (as opposed to those who did) with someone who instantly becomes a priority case or something. That the moderator, or any other person, simply applied with an agency, and failed to clear is not on par with someone who is regarded as an active threat in a specific case being developed. This is clearly the case as GM did in fact finish out his career as a Reserve Officer. It would be proper for the FBI doing due dillagence to forward any concern to the Dept. of the Army, and for any follow up they would do internally to satisfy themselves the the maintanence of a security clearance. That is not the same as testing an active known threat. You have to see the priority difference. One is a passive case vs. active cases you are thinking of. Save your dollar then, as a donut is a treat you'll enjoy later.
YOU SAID: "As I have said I know nothing about George's job. However, you are strongly accusing him of aiding the enemy. To have any credibility, you should tell us how you know this and show us proof of the accusations. If you can, then I doubt that many of us would stay with this website. Otherwise you are guilty of character assassination which is an actionable offence."
I SAY: Thank You for your honesty in wanting to evaluate the moderator and whether you and others would remain on this site if there were truth to what I have questioned here to him.
Last night I posed the question directly and plainly to GM the moderator as to whether or not he had ever translated any Anti-Polygraph materials into Arabic or Farsi. He denied having ever done so in a quick reply. Whey I further asked as a follow up question as to if he had "Verbally" had discussed (Trained, Informed, Etc.) Anti-Polygraph / countermeasures with any middle eastern foreign national his reply, rather than NO, was rather that it was none of my business !!! Since I can't take that as a NO, I will say it is more probably a YES ! Point Two; George is mentioned several times on the internet as working in the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal in some capacity in the Hague. I believe this to be a U.N. effort
www.iusct.org/ where he has almost daily contact with radical Iranian government officials which has it's allegience to the U.N., and not to the USA. The U.S. has not had formal diplomatic relations with Iran since 11/04/79 when our embassy was invaded in what is otherwise regarded as an act of war. Our hostages were later released on 1/20/81 on Reagan's first day in office. This body, in my limited understanding of it, exists to negotiate cross claims Iran and the U.S. have both for individuals and corporatons, and other concerns. GM is an assett to that effort, which, 27 plus years later has accomplished little in holding radical Iran accountable for its actions. They are a worse regime today than when they came to power. Further, that GM can not say he has never discussed or informed people of this background (Iranian or other radical middle eastern types) about anti-polygraph / countermeasure information, which clearly would have no less than inspired the articles he claims were written. I have simply connected the dots between who it is that is empassioned about this subject, who they are in contact with, and that he tells me itis none of my business that he has had at least some conversations about it with them; presumed so when he can not deny same. You and I as tax payers paid for his education in these languages at the Dept. of Defense schools, which he now uses as an assett against our nations best interests. It is not in question that Iran is the Mother of Hezballah and other terrorist groups, an Al Queda ally, as well as a medusa of other groups yet to surface. We both acknowlege he is an intelligent individual, and therefore had to know when these converstatons took place who would benefit, or who would suffer a loss. Maybe I'm alone, but I regard those acts as undermining U.S. Intelligence for whom he spoke and signed an oath. Remember, He believes these countermeasures work, and apparantly passed those along to the known enemies, or at least anti-U.S., personnel on foreign soil. I don't know if his position enjoys Diplomatic Immunity or not, but if so it would be from the Dutch, and not from the USA. Agan I say, such things are for Judges, Attorneys, and a Jury to figure out. I only ask the academic question about all of these variables. Don't even get me started on the open acceptance on this site of the alliance with self admitted child molesters in undermining a Judge's orders for their compliance and monitoring while on probation. That advice strikes me as being in comtempt of court. Maybe my mind is just that of an everyday family man, common sense kind of guy, and not a part of this new world order where anything goes without consequences at the end of the day. Just call me old fashioned.
It sounds like you have a very interesting hobby. I think that you would find that unlike what you have written, polygraph examiners do have to answer within their own system in QC, and to where they could justify a fellow examiner would reach the same decision if they were challenged on a call / charts.
In regard to the twin towers, place that punch on the chin of radical Islam where it belongs. There are 26 armed world conflicts going on at this moment in the world, 24 of which involve radical Islam not being able to live peaceably with their neighbors. The core of the funding for much of this is Iran and Syria as derived from petro dollars, and so maybe now you understand if little old me can understand all of that, I expect same from the moderator who looks into their eyes and talks with them as a job.
In regard to the paragraph about "assasination", I did not wish to attack you in any way, and only wanted it clear that the first noun used associated with violence did not come from me, and that it was from a poster who assumed the lowest common denominator, rather than a broader spectrum of possibilities. Nobody I know advocates the "assasination" of an unarmed person / non-combatent. Rather, only due process of law in a civilized setting. Punishments are handed out by those in power to do so.