The only liar and fool here is you;  your two polygraph failures are proof;  and of course you can't admit now that you attempted to use countermeasures since that would destroy your credibility with your minions after 15+ years of denial.

I can't speak for the CIA specifically, but I can say that in the hands of a trained, competent examiner, it is a very useful tool.  Furthermore, in the military, attempting to engage in countermeasures is a court-martial offense under Article 92.  Of the last three fools who attempted to do so, one was court-martialed (commissioned officer), and the other two were issued general officer letters of reprimand and forced to retire/separate from the service.

As the NAS found, polygraph "screening" is grossly unreliable. 

Why is the accuracy so low?

IMHO... Because a lot of people have misplaced guilt feelings, and the polygraph "test" can be easily beaten -- or at least confounded -- by following simple instructions freely available on the internet..

But what do I know... I'm only a lowly polygraph operator.

quickfix wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2016 at 7:38pm:


The polygraph may at times be useful for getting admissions from naive and gullible persons, but it has no scientific basis and is vulnerable to simple countermeasures that polygraph operators cannot detect.

As countermeasure case files leaked to AntiPolygraph.org reveal, the sorts of polygraph countermeasures being "detected" by federal polygraph operators are crude manipulations that anyone who understands polygraph procedure wouldn't do.

I always find hilarious all the grandiose, exotic, euphemistic, and deceitful titles the Agency gives to all its "directorates" and managers!

This NYT article is so vile that I think it deserves another pass!

The BI process for employment at the Agency is just as, or even possibly more, onerous than the polygraph "interview".

Part of what this Agency liar and/or fool says is quite accurate, except grossly understated.

Getting through the Agency's BI is so difficult that "surviving" it is a matter of pure luck.

Obviously, having a Russian lover will largely block any application process.  Here are some other, unstated requisites for getting through a BI for Langley:

1.  Come from a family with an upper-middle or upper class background.  This will be most helpful in avoiding any adverse police contact, as well as avoiding the danger of unfavorable credit/financial complications.  It will also make it more likely that the applicant will not have an extensive employment history, thus reducing the possibility of adverse comments and recommendations from supervisors and coworkers.

Coming from a home with a large lot will reduce the chance for adverse comments/recommendations from the applicant's neighbors.

Having a background of  attendance at a private school or academy, or in an affluent public school district will help in avoiding the possibility of any derogatory comments/recommendations by high school faculty.  (Yes, the BI actually digs for dirt that far back in an applicant's history!).

Be a good enough "chameleon" so as to be able to avoid the likelihood of derogatory remarks from peers.

Then all that the successful applicant need do is just to remember to tighten the anal sphincter for the duration of the polygraph intimidation.

ETC. AD INFINITUM

Having met all the above-suggested (but never specified) criteria will almost assure the applicant  a place in the exalted halls of Langley, and the successful applicant will be automatically elevated to the status of a super patriot who will "risk" life and limb for the country while under hostile enemy fire at Langley, or at any US Embassy or Consulate the world over!