- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Skeptic
- Aug 13, 2003, 03:33 AMQuote from: Saidme on Aug 12, 2003, 11:41 PMI would disagree with your assessment on your polygraph examination. I would imagine you were no opinion (inconclusive). If you're a good applicant, they're not going to give up on you that easy.
Thank you. But now you've made me curious. Why would you assume the results were inconclusive after the third poly?
Per NSA polygraph regs, they would have needed Director of Security approval for a fourth, but it stands to reason they would have scheduled a fourth poly (or issued a rejection letter) inside of two months.
Skeptic
Posted by Saidme
- Aug 12, 2003, 11:41 PMSorry for not reading more closely. I'm familiar with the NSA polygraph process and as I've stated before I have some acquaintances who administer polygraph examinations there. They do a good job and they're good examiners. I don't know what they're results are on every exam but I believe they get a high number of confessions/admissions. I would disagree with your assessment on your polygraph examination. I would imagine you were no opinion (inconclusive). If you're a good applicant, they're not going to give up on you that easy.
Posted by Skeptic
- Aug 12, 2003, 11:08 PMQuote from: Saidme on Aug 12, 2003, 10:52 PMSkeptic
I'm unclear on your polygraph. Did you pass it or fail it. You talked about passing it then you talked about it ruining your career. Which is it? Regarding compassion. I always have compassion for my fellow man. Particularly the misguided souls taking our polygraph examinations. Compassion is what get's those confessions.
YMWC-5 Stars
Saidme,
If you re-read my statement, I think you'll find I said it didn't ruin my career. I was referring to those for whom the polygraph was arguably a career-ender.
The NSA doesn't approach polygraphs as determining "truth" or "falsehood". Rather, they use it as an interrogation prop for gaining confessions. Thus, I went through three polygraph interrogations. From contact with other NSA job-seekers, I believe this is not unusual for their process.
I voluntarily withdrew my candidacy for a variety of reasons, but given the length of time after my last polygraph with no "rejection" notice, and given the "please apply again with us in the future" letter I received after withdrawing, I have every reason to believe I passed.
Skeptic
Posted by Saidme
- Aug 12, 2003, 10:52 PMSkeptic
I'm unclear on your polygraph. Did you pass it or fail it. You talked about passing it then you talked about it ruining your career. Which is it? Regarding compassion. I always have compassion for my fellow man. Particularly the misguided souls taking our polygraph examinations. Compassion is what get's those confessions.
YMWC-5 Stars
I'm unclear on your polygraph. Did you pass it or fail it. You talked about passing it then you talked about it ruining your career. Which is it? Regarding compassion. I always have compassion for my fellow man. Particularly the misguided souls taking our polygraph examinations. Compassion is what get's those confessions.
YMWC-5 Stars
Posted by Skeptic
- Aug 12, 2003, 10:42 PMQuote from: Saidme on Aug 12, 2003, 10:21 PMSkeptic
Much of my "uncorroborated boast" as you put it, is no more or no less valid than the garbage everyone else puts on this website. To set the record straight, I'm just putting out the facts.
Since you won't back up most of your assertions of "facts", they are (pretty much by definition) "uncorroborated". And claiming to be able to do what no one has demonstrated the ability to do (namely, detect countermeasures reliably) is, again by definition, a "boast".
QuoteIf you wish to view them as "boasts" then have at it. I get no pleasure in having to respond to crime scenes involving serious injury, death, or sexual assault of a child. I do however get great pleasure insuring these criminals go to jail for those crimes.
It seems to me, Saidme, that (given your passion for crime-fighting and your ability to carry on extended confrontations without allowing yourself to be baited) your skills as an interrogator are wasted on the polygraph. Just my humble opinion, though.
QuoteYou anti folks forget the primary purpose of polygraph is to assist law enforcement in resolving these crimes. You get caught up in your own little self-important world and whine to everyone about how you were wronged by the polygraph in your pre-employment interviews. Whaaaa! I get sick and tired of listening to your crap. Okay, I feel better, I'm off the soap box.
I forget nothing, Saidme. All evidence says the polygraph doesn't do the job it is purported to do -- namely, discern truthfulness from falsehood with sufficent reliability to warrant faith in the device. That's why I oppose it, not because my life has been ruined (or indeed, significantly impacted) by the polygraph.
I'm the first to admit I didn't enjoy my pre-employment polygraph sessions, but to the best of my knowledge, I "passed" them. Not that being bitter about having one's career ruined by a bogus instrument is necessarily a bad thing, though.
Perhaps, in all of your time polygraphing suspects, you've forgotten how important a little compassion for your fellow man can be...
Skeptic
Posted by Saidme
- Aug 12, 2003, 10:21 PMSkeptic
Much of my "uncorroborated boast" as you put it, is no more or no less valid than the garbage everyone else puts on this website. To set the record straight, I'm just putting out the facts. If you wish to view them as "boasts" then have at it. I get no pleasure in having to respond to crime scenes involving serious injury, death, or sexual assault of a child. I do however get great pleasure insuring these criminals go to jail for those crimes. You anti folks forget the primary purpose of polygraph is to assist law enforcement in resolving these crimes. You get caught up in your own little self-important world and whine to everyone about how you were wronged by the polygraph in your pre-employment interviews. Whaaaa! I get sick and tired of listening to your crap. Okay, I feel better, I'm off the soap box.
Much of my "uncorroborated boast" as you put it, is no more or no less valid than the garbage everyone else puts on this website. To set the record straight, I'm just putting out the facts. If you wish to view them as "boasts" then have at it. I get no pleasure in having to respond to crime scenes involving serious injury, death, or sexual assault of a child. I do however get great pleasure insuring these criminals go to jail for those crimes. You anti folks forget the primary purpose of polygraph is to assist law enforcement in resolving these crimes. You get caught up in your own little self-important world and whine to everyone about how you were wronged by the polygraph in your pre-employment interviews. Whaaaa! I get sick and tired of listening to your crap. Okay, I feel better, I'm off the soap box.
Posted by Skeptic
- Aug 12, 2003, 06:14 PMQuote from: Saidme on Aug 12, 2003, 11:50 AMOrolan
Your ignorance knows no bounds. CIA, DIA, and NSA are not federal law enforcement agencies. They would be considered intelligence agencies.
Saidme's right regarding the above agencies, Orolan -- though I would imagine that might have been what you were driving at in the first place.
Of course, it's always possible he's merely exaggerating his own hand in "landing [name a criminal] in jail". As usual, most of what he says must be taken for the anonymous, uncorroborated boast it is.
QuoteHowever, I'm sure they would all be interested if their employees are child molesters. Although I'm not a customs agent, I would bet the kitchen sink they've ran a few murder investigations.
And I'd be surprised if they didn't turn such matters over to the appropriate law enforcement people in virtually all cases, since murder investigations really aren't their bailiwick.
Skeptic
Posted by Saidme
- Aug 12, 2003, 03:39 PMOrolan
Seems like I've touched a nerve on your lack of law enforcement experience. You're latest post continues to unmask your ignorance.
Seems like I've touched a nerve on your lack of law enforcement experience. You're latest post continues to unmask your ignorance.
Posted by orolan
- Aug 12, 2003, 03:12 PMSaidme,
Pretty much the response I expected from you. You're full of sh_t and you know it. There is NO Federal law enforcement agency that as a matter of day-to-day operations investigates EVERY type of crime you claim to have polygraphed and obtained confessions on. As I said, the FBI is the only one that even remotely might have a hand in all of them. But you say you don't work for the FBI, so we'll forget that one.
You choose not to answer because there is no such agency, and you know it. The alternative would be that you are lying about your alleged accomplishments.
So back up what you say. Name the agency, or admit that you're a liar.
You can give me all the "free rides" you want on my so-called bonehead comments. I really don't care. But don't expect me to reciprocate and give you a free ride on your unsubstantiated claims.
Pretty much the response I expected from you. You're full of sh_t and you know it. There is NO Federal law enforcement agency that as a matter of day-to-day operations investigates EVERY type of crime you claim to have polygraphed and obtained confessions on. As I said, the FBI is the only one that even remotely might have a hand in all of them. But you say you don't work for the FBI, so we'll forget that one.
You choose not to answer because there is no such agency, and you know it. The alternative would be that you are lying about your alleged accomplishments.
So back up what you say. Name the agency, or admit that you're a liar.
You can give me all the "free rides" you want on my so-called bonehead comments. I really don't care. But don't expect me to reciprocate and give you a free ride on your unsubstantiated claims.
Posted by Saidme
- Aug 12, 2003, 11:53 AMOrolan
No, I'm not and FBI examiner (thank god).
No, I'm not and FBI examiner (thank god).
Posted by Saidme
- Aug 12, 2003, 11:52 AMSEX
Even old time examiner's lose their confidence. Just changes with time. No different than an insurance guy who no longer can cut the mustard.
Even old time examiner's lose their confidence. Just changes with time. No different than an insurance guy who no longer can cut the mustard.
Posted by Saidme
- Aug 12, 2003, 11:51 AMSuethem
My comments were regarding polygraph examiners only. How you dragged the Supreme Court in is beyond me.
My comments were regarding polygraph examiners only. How you dragged the Supreme Court in is beyond me.
Posted by Saidme
- Aug 12, 2003, 11:50 AMOrolan
Your ignorance knows no bounds. CIA, DIA, and NSA are not federal law enforcement agencies. They would be considered intelligence agencies. However, I'm sure they would all be interested if their employees are child molesters. Although I'm not a customs agent, I would bet the kitchen sink they've ran a few murder investigations. Your knowledge of law enforcement concerns me. I thought I was corresponding with people that had at least a basic understanding. I'm going to have to discount anything you've said previously based on your ignorance. Which basically means I'm giving you a free ride on your bone head comments.
Your ignorance knows no bounds. CIA, DIA, and NSA are not federal law enforcement agencies. They would be considered intelligence agencies. However, I'm sure they would all be interested if their employees are child molesters. Although I'm not a customs agent, I would bet the kitchen sink they've ran a few murder investigations. Your knowledge of law enforcement concerns me. I thought I was corresponding with people that had at least a basic understanding. I'm going to have to discount anything you've said previously based on your ignorance. Which basically means I'm giving you a free ride on your bone head comments.
Posted by s-X-e
- Aug 12, 2003, 12:50 AMQuote from: Saidme on Aug 12, 2003, 12:17 AMI would place the majority in that catagory. I'm sure there are a few exceptions. I would place all former examiner's who oppose polygraph as those who've lost their own confidence in administering polygraph examinations. They beleive it is bogus because they don't have the capabilities to properly run an examination. And like I said before, it's certainly better for the examinees that those folks are no longer administering polygraphs. It's just as well their out there supporting you guys.
What about a polygrapher who has gotten many DI's to confess? By your logic, their technique works, so if they choose to later denounce polygraphy, it's obviously not because they weren't confident in their abilities.
Posted by suethem
- Aug 12, 2003, 12:50 AMSaidme,
So now all ex-polygraphers are either at 'trembling woods' due to a loss of confidence- "Doctor, I just can't take the pressure!"
or
The polygraphers, who no longer believe in what they did, never really had the abilities to be good polygrapher in the first place (eventhough they got hired and passed all their 'extensive' training).
Only the weak or stupid ( I guess that includes the Supreme Court and the NAS) don't believe in polygraphy!!!
So now all ex-polygraphers are either at 'trembling woods' due to a loss of confidence- "Doctor, I just can't take the pressure!"
or
The polygraphers, who no longer believe in what they did, never really had the abilities to be good polygrapher in the first place (eventhough they got hired and passed all their 'extensive' training).
Only the weak or stupid ( I guess that includes the Supreme Court and the NAS) don't believe in polygraphy!!!