Wandersmann wrote on Jun 20^th, 2017 at 5:08pm:


Isn't SCI considered to be an increment above TS? The two designations are often paired together to form an access level known as TS/SCI.  Usually, the CIA requires "ability" to hold TS/SCI for most of its lackeys.  Hence, I'd imagine that losing an SCI designation would be fatal to any career in Langley.

Doug Williams wrote on Jun 16^th, 2017 at 5:40am:


Let us know when you have begun to actively seek out interested individuals for this purpose.   

Yet DIA is being allowed to circumvent DOD regulations and ones individual rights.

John M. wrote on Jun 20^th, 2017 at 6:11pm:


Of course this problem isn't limited to the DIA or elsewhere at DOD!   

John M. wrote on Jun 20^th, 2017 at 7:00pm:

They feign sympathy and disbelief when confronted with evidence of abuse and tell victims they will go to bat for them.  They ultimately send a letter to the perpetrators and ask for an explanation and the perpetrators assure them they have done nothing wrong.  It ends there.  It is like asking criminals to voluntarily testify against themselves.  It is ultimately Congress who is responsible for the entire mess.  Their palms are being greased by the polygraph community and they support the polygraph policies because there are way more dolts in the public who believe it works than there are polygraph victims.  Too many of our Congresspersons are whores and chameleons. 

I came to the realization that using the polygraph results as evidence of wrongdoing, is in fact, a human rights violation.

This inherently probabilistic and subjective evaluation must never be used to discriminate truth from lies. 

BLUF - False positives produce wrongful convictions.

Check this out - even the APA itself puts the accuracy of a relevant question test at 85% (confidence interval 77% - 93%) with an inconclusive rate of 13%.

http://www.polygraph.org/polygraph-validity-research

That's probably only accounting for the first "test" - wonder what the overall pass rates are for the next four interrogations.  Mine alternated between "No Opinion" and "Significant Response".  I don't care what they say, no matter what you do, you can't un-ring that bell, or get the toothpaste back in the tube.  You are screwed.

Welcome to abuse by polygraph.

John M. wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2017 at 2:38pm:


Examining this wrongdoing provides a wonderful opportunity to understand why our Founding Fathers practiced dueling and gives me an opportunity to praise them now that they are constantly under attack and their customs and philosophies now considered anachronisms.  Human rights violations don't bother me half as much as the concept of taking away a man's honor without any proof.  Now I completely understand the dueling concept and if these spineless rats that falsely condemn innocent people were ever legally challenged on the field of honor the polygraph would go away overnight.  Only a coward would take advantage of a situation where he can be a sanctioned bully and profit thereby.  As a military college graduate who lived under a stringent honor code and former military officer the thought of impugning a man's hard earned reputation and honor through this witchcraft is unthinkable.  Through my polygraph experiences I've learned that the millennial narcissists who are running this country know as much about honor as I know about meringue dancing.  Okay Quickfix, I'm done blathering.  Maybe you can find someone who speaks English at a 2+ or 3 level who can explain to you what I just said. 

John M. wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2017 at 5:20pm:


Excellent post John M.  This is a perfect summary.  Not to sound cliche, but the polygraph truly is society's fault.   Again, I hearken back to our Founding Fathers. They knew that the masses and pure democracies throughout history have lead to tyranny of the masses.  That is why they emphasized people of high moral character to represent the people in a representative government.  These representatives were supposed to commit political suicide, if necessary, to do what was right.  As we've discussed earlier, we no longer have people of high moral character representing us.