Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Attachments: (Clear attachments)
Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB
Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached
Click or drag files here to attach them.
(Clear attachments)
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
What is the last name of the first U.S. president?:
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Jun 08, 2013, 04:24 AM



Polygraph proponents often rhetorically ask, "If you would do away with polygraph screening, what would you replace it with?"

Well, here's a suggestion. Top secret documents recently reported by Glenn Greenwald in the Guardian and documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras in the Washington Post confirm that the NSA is engaged in blanket surveillance of the electronic communications of all Americans.

Under a top secret program known by the code word PRISM, Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, YouTube, Skype, AOL, and Apple are providing users' communications to the NSA. Dropbox is reportedly going to join the PRISM club, too. Under other collection programs, our phone conversations and banking information is also being gathered and stored.

So why rely on the unreliable and easily countermeasured polygraph to vet applicants for positions of public trust? Why not authorize security clearance adjudicators to look at individuals through the prism of Total Information Awareness?