Quote:


EXACTLY!   The same is also true if one has "failed" the BI, no matter how incompetently or unfairly it was conducted.  The recruiters have no knowledge of, much less play any role in whatever the Office of Security ultimately decides.

I was, on more than one occasion, told by Agency recruiters that I was a likely candidate for an offer of employment, based on my qualifications and interests. On one occasion, I was even approached by the Agency (and not the other way around!), with respect to employment.  Unfortunately those prospects were f*cked up by the results of a previous BI still on file at the Office of Security from an old application made to their summer college "intern" program.

Thank you, Snowdens I and II,  for your valiant efforts to expose the hiring scams run by Langley and Ft. Meade.  I only wish that I'd been smart enough to think of trying to re-apply with a new SSN!  LOL   

I sincerely hope to have fulfilled the wishes of the polygraph examiner I dealt with at Langley, who once asked if my intent in applying to work there was to cause the Agency "harm".  In those naive days, I had absolutely no idea as to what he meant, nor why an applicant for employment would want to even consider performing such a nefarious deed.  

Now, countless years older and infinitely wiser, I propose to spend every one of my remaining days to fulfill the worthy expectation that this charlatan/polygrapher so nobly instilled in me so many years ago. 

George W. Maschke wrote on May 10^th, 2017 at 3:38pm:


I'd be interested in knowing too.  Irrespective of its source, the information mirrors my experiences completely! 

Quote:



No, it's now been changed to the 100-year reapplying rule! 
In any case, the Office of Security acts independently of the recruiters and/or other Agency staff, as I can personally attest.

Yes, Lynnae's site and her story are both absolutely fascinating.

It's really awful when all that someone has worked so hard for is so quickly and ruthlessly swept away by a vengeful organization.

Since anything released by the IC agencies through the FOIA/PA are already so heavily redacted, I strongly doubt that their disclosure or publication to others would ever be considered a security issue.

Annette,

Thank you for sharing your experience with the CIA polygraph. I would be interested to know, if you don't mind sharing, approximately how long ago this was? For example, was it this year, last year, about five years ago?

quickfix wrote on May 19^th, 2018 at 1:12pm:


I would very much like that to be true. But when I applied for a graduate internship with the CIA in the early 1990s, an applicant for CIA employment staying in the same Tyson's Corner motel as I was told me she was asked similar questions during her polygraph interrogation. She had no reason to lie to me about that.

I haven't heard stories like that in recent years. Hence my question for Annette regarding the time frame during which her polygraph experience took place.

Evan S wrote on May 19^th, 2018 at 6:19pm:


I haven't heard about CIA polygraphers asking questions about sex with a farm animal. Have you? The one agency that I know has allegedly asked this question is the U.S. Secret Service.

I would like to hear more from Annette. Whatever else is true, we know that the CIA is an agency that, within the past 20 years, has engaged in kidnapping, torture (including torture to death), and assassination. The asking of the kind of questions that Annette recounts are tame by comparison.

Quote:


Annette, is this personal information true?  And did you use your real first name in this post?  Annette Ashley XXX who is 26 years old, wears glasses, with a mother named Stephanie.  Yeah, bye bye anonymity.

Quote:

Well, you are boring as crappity smack.  No wonder you did not get into the CIA.  You aren't slutty enough.  Yeesh.