- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Bill_Brown
- Jul 18, 2011, 09:29 PMQuote from: polybunk on Jul 18, 2011, 07:10 PMThen why is the poly not accepted in a single courtroom in the US, or any civilized country that I'm aware of?
May I correct one miss-statement,
Polygraph has been admitted in numerous jurisdictions across the nation. I have testified in several courts on polygraph and it was admissable.
Posted by polybunk
- Jul 18, 2011, 07:13 PMQuote from: lawrence griswold on Aug 14, 2008, 04:14 PMCould it just be that you didn't pass the test? I mean really here people, you guys make it sound like nobody passes these things. How can they have people working for them then? Get off your little whiny butts and tell the truth next time.
And come on George. You didn't pass. You've dedicated your life to this. What a waste. Were the drugs really worth it?
I did tell the truth, and so far, they haven't decided to pass me.
Given a very specific question; "Have you used any drugs in the past two years?" The answer is no. No hemming, no hawing, no kinda-sortas. Make it twenty years, and the answer is the same. Yet the tea leaves say that's a lie. The only way to "pass" is to cough up "facts" that aren't true. How exactly does one do that?
Posted by polybunk
- Jul 18, 2011, 07:10 PMQuote from: theliespy on Jul 29, 2008, 01:05 PMPolygraphers have come to this site in an attempt to educate. Seems not to have sunk in. Besides, we don't have to explain ourselves. We've won the political-bureaucratic fight. The test is here to stay.
I won't waste my time doing the same. Just stop whinning and get over it. Sackett and Coffey were right. Just one big "pity party" over here.
Then why is the poly not accepted in a single courtroom in the US, or any civilized country that I'm aware of?
Posted by polybunk
- Jul 18, 2011, 07:08 PMQuote from: theliespy on Jul 28, 2008, 05:21 PMI've been a polygrapher for a long time now. You're experience doesn't sound very typical. You must have had a bad examiner.
I guess I had a "bad examiner", too, as that isn't too off the mark from what happened to me... told repeatedly that I'm concealing drug use, when my entire experience with drugs was some pot 20 years ago. But, of course, once they decide that the tea leaves say "Lie", the only possibility to placate them is to "give them more"... but if there's no more to give, how do you do that? I told him I could make something up for him, except it would be a lie.
We spent hours on "drugs", even though my answer never changed, because it couldn't change.
Posted by Polygraphfail
- Jun 18, 2011, 12:20 AMHi Phlyfisher, I had a very similar experience going for an internship for this summer. My background investigation was nearly complete, but I still got the rejection letter because of the polygraph. Have you received your Privacy Act information from the FBI? I'm curious as to how long you waited and what kind of information you received.
Anyways, thanks for posting. I think as long as good and honest people have the courage to speak, the polygraph cannot be maintained. Our society has placed its trust in the hands of the FBI, but the FBI has chosen to defame some of its best applicants in order to protect themselves and their faulty system. I don't see how any lover of justice could stomach being part of that organization, knowing this. I know I certainly can't.
Anyways, thanks for posting. I think as long as good and honest people have the courage to speak, the polygraph cannot be maintained. Our society has placed its trust in the hands of the FBI, but the FBI has chosen to defame some of its best applicants in order to protect themselves and their faulty system. I don't see how any lover of justice could stomach being part of that organization, knowing this. I know I certainly can't.
Posted by polytek
- Aug 21, 2008, 09:28 AMQuote from: Phlyfisher on Aug 14, 2008, 05:28 PMQuoteCould it just be that you didn't pass the test? I mean really here people, you guys make it sound like nobody passes these things. How can they have people working for them then? Get off your little whiny butts and tell the truth next time.
About half of applicants at the FBI pass, the other half doesn't.
The question, however, is of the half that fails, what percentage were actually untruthful. It is hard to believe that anywhere near half of those applying for a job at the FBI (typically a straight-laced bunch) were untruthful answering questions concerning drug use, committing crimes, espionage...etc.
TC
The USA is a nanny state with draconian laws.
It is natural therefore that its agencies will rely on something as
draconian as polygraphy. When you dont have the talent to process
humans efficiently, bring out the old magic stick. What a shame.
Posted by Fair Chance
- Aug 15, 2008, 08:22 PMBack to the main event, the FBI expects two out of three intel analyst to fail the polygraph. Now when I say "fail" I mean "not within acceptable parameters". Guilty without evidence, job application shut down without evidence, all other Federal opportunities requiring a polygraph shut down without evidence. Guilt by assumption but without evidence. Typical of an Agency that prides itself on the the big three principles of justice but circumvents the law to accomplish its ends that justify the means.
The FBI is getting exactly what it wants, people who do not think out of the box, willing to support the status quo of the "good ole boys" network, and willing to look the other way when it benefits them or their careers.
Pre-screening polygraphs are a crutch for not doing proper throrough back ground checks. The FBI has existed for most of the century without needing the polygraph. It is a convenient crutch to go to Congress and say "the polygraph is the end all of security and what more do you expect of us?".
The FBI has paid a price for using the polygraph and the United States will continure to pay a price for the FBI's insane confidence that the polygraph can do no wrong.
Regards.
The FBI is getting exactly what it wants, people who do not think out of the box, willing to support the status quo of the "good ole boys" network, and willing to look the other way when it benefits them or their careers.
Pre-screening polygraphs are a crutch for not doing proper throrough back ground checks. The FBI has existed for most of the century without needing the polygraph. It is a convenient crutch to go to Congress and say "the polygraph is the end all of security and what more do you expect of us?".
The FBI has paid a price for using the polygraph and the United States will continure to pay a price for the FBI's insane confidence that the polygraph can do no wrong.
Regards.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Aug 14, 2008, 05:28 PMQuoteCould it just be that you didn't pass the test? I mean really here people, you guys make it sound like nobody passes these things. How can they have people working for them then? Get off your little whiny butts and tell the truth next time.
About half of applicants at the FBI pass, the other half doesn't.
The question, however, is of the half that fails, what percentage were actually untruthful. It is hard to believe that anywhere near half of those applying for a job at the FBI (typically a straight-laced bunch) were untruthful answering questions concerning drug use, committing crimes, espionage...etc.
TC
Posted by lawrence griswold
- Aug 14, 2008, 04:14 PMCould it just be that you didn't pass the test? I mean really here people, you guys make it sound like nobody passes these things. How can they have people working for them then? Get off your little whiny butts and tell the truth next time.
And come on George. You didn't pass. You've dedicated your life to this. What a waste. Were the drugs really worth it?
And come on George. You didn't pass. You've dedicated your life to this. What a waste. Were the drugs really worth it?
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Aug 03, 2008, 07:33 PMIf you received written notice of your polygraph results and/or the rejection of your internship application, then I would address the letter to the official who wrote that letter and cc the FBI Director and the Special Agent in Charge of the Salt Lake City Field Office. If you didn't receive anything in writing, you might just write to the latter two.
Posted by Phlyfisher
- Aug 03, 2008, 01:49 PMGeorge, thanks for the advice. If I write a letter, where should it be sent to? My local FBI office or to the bigwigs?
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Aug 02, 2008, 02:25 AMPhlyfisher,
Thank you for sharing your polygraph experience. Sadly, it is one that is all too common. As the FBI marks its 100th anniversary, it is a dark stain on its honor that it continues to pretend to judge the honesty and integrity of individuals based on the thoroughly discredited pseudoscience of polygraphy.
You'll want to write to the FBI contesting your polygrapher's false accusation of deception. Your letter should be added to your FBI file -- a permanent record -- and will document the fact that you do not, through silence, tacitly accept your polygrapher's accusations. In addition, you'll want to file a Privacy Act request for your entire FBI file, including, but not limited to, all information concerning your polygraph interrogation.
Thank you for sharing your polygraph experience. Sadly, it is one that is all too common. As the FBI marks its 100th anniversary, it is a dark stain on its honor that it continues to pretend to judge the honesty and integrity of individuals based on the thoroughly discredited pseudoscience of polygraphy.
You'll want to write to the FBI contesting your polygrapher's false accusation of deception. Your letter should be added to your FBI file -- a permanent record -- and will document the fact that you do not, through silence, tacitly accept your polygrapher's accusations. In addition, you'll want to file a Privacy Act request for your entire FBI file, including, but not limited to, all information concerning your polygraph interrogation.
Posted by polytechnic
- Jul 30, 2008, 03:34 AMQuote from: Phlyfisher on Jul 29, 2008, 01:05 PMPolygraphers have come to this site in an attempt to educate. Seems not to have sunk in.
Polygraphers come to this site to sprout nonsense. The gospel of the ten-week church. Get over yourself bud.
QuoteBesides, we don't have to explain ourselves. We've won the political-bureaucratic fight. The test is here to stay.
So why then is APA membership shrinking in real terms?
Start scanning the To Hire columns - get in first.
QuoteI won't waste my time doing the same. Just stop whinning and get over it. Sackett and Coffey were right. Just one big "pity party" over here.
Sackett invented the straw-man argument process.
Coffee is a loser of note.
What else you got ?
QuoteIf you want some straight answers about the process go to "The Polygraph Place". There you won't get the distorted "anti" hype.
Oh please, now your ass is showing. PP does not tolerate even 1 word of anything that whiffs of 'anti'. No place for open debate. Just Sackett et al pushing one-sided, bs advice. They get so bored over there, which is why they frequently come over here for a bout of sparring.
Posted by theliespy
- Jul 29, 2008, 01:05 PMPolygraphers have come to this site in an attempt to educate. Seems not to have sunk in. Besides, we don't have to explain ourselves. We've won the political-bureaucratic fight. The test is here to stay.
I won't waste my time doing the same. Just stop whinning and get over it. Sackett and Coffey were right. Just one big "pity party" over here.
If you want some straight answers about the process go to "The Polygraph Place". There you won't get the distorted "anti" hype.
TLS
I won't waste my time doing the same. Just stop whinning and get over it. Sackett and Coffey were right. Just one big "pity party" over here.
If you want some straight answers about the process go to "The Polygraph Place". There you won't get the distorted "anti" hype.
TLS
Posted by polytechnic
- Jul 29, 2008, 10:04 AMQuote from: Phlyfisher on Jul 28, 2008, 05:21 PMI've been a polygrapher for a long time now. You're experience doesn't sound very typical.
98% of the people that post here report similar stories.
sounds very typical to me.
Quote
You must have had a bad examiner.
Or a good one with bad technology. (tongue-in-cheek)
Face it LS, the system is a confession generator. Full Stop.
Quote
Years of experience have shown me that the polygraph is a very accurate process.
Thats what your instructor told you. Unless you carried out your own extensive research iro false positives vs false negatives vs Inconclusives then you're simply parrotting APA BS. If you did carry out such research then please publish it, I'm sure George will be happy to publish.
Quote
Somewhere around 98% accurate. You just have to cooperate with the examiner and be totally forthcoming.
Again, you're merely parroting the APA BS numbers. The next examiner that can PROVE he has achieved 98% accuracy, or even 75% accuracy will be the first - AND - it will NEVER happen.
Quote
Did you come to this site prior to the test. If so, it may have polluted you mind with lies and had an effect on your results.
If he had come to this site he would have learned all the BS that you I and a few thousand others paid top $ for.