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:
Type the last letter of the word, "America.":
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by ohgreat
 - Oct 20, 2003, 04:16 AM
Thanks for the input.  You information corresponds to what I've heard also, again from limited sources.  I do know for certain that most people have at least 2 sometimes 3 polys.  I think the whole thing is BS and I already have the job this is just a possiblity in the future.  However we have people that quite often can only be cleared to a certain level for what every reason and they simply put them on another project with less security requirements.  So I doubt I would lose my job, I dont think legally they can fire you for not getting cleared, perhaps lay you off if they cant find a project for you.  Certainly if you made some damning admission they could get you with that.

As you noted though if your denied a clearance you have to state it on you SF-86 which is bad news.  The whole thing is a lot of stress even though thanks to this site I know the test is bogus (thats what worries me).  I've considered telling them I dont want a clearance that requires a fullscope poly.  But it is in my contract that I might have to take a polygraph even though they do not specify wether it would be a CI or full scope.

Either way I will keep you all informed as to what happens.

Posted by Skeptic
 - Oct 17, 2003, 11:17 PM
Quote from: ohgreat on Oct 17, 2003, 02:46 AMhello,

I just found out at some point I might have to take a polygraph for the NSA.  I work for a contractor.  I've been reading the horror stories on this board about such experiences, as well as some of my friends experiences.

So I'm worried about the whole process, I don't like possibly betting my job on a flawed process.   I was honest on my PSQ and admitted to smoking pot once.  It was a one time event and is very embarrassing to me, so I fear any time I'm asked a question about drugs I will exhibit a response due to felling very uncomfortable with the subject.  

Should I just relax and take the test?  I have nothing damning to admit, but I'm worried about false positive.  I get the feeling that the NSA is more interested in getting confessions out of people than the actual results.  Should I just endure the interrogation and hope for the best?  I'm not interested in using CM's.

Any insight would be appreciated.

I think your perceptions are pretty much right.

The NSA uses the Relevant/Irrelevant technique.  It's a technique practically tailor-made to produce lots of false positives, which is likely just fine with them, since they appear to approach the polygraph as an interrogation prop, anyway.  Count on multiple polygraphs, along with post-test interrogations.  All the NSA applicants I know of went through these, though I admit my knowledge is limited to 5-6 people.  This includes a person working there as we speak.

I can't say as of yet whether how the NSA polygraph process goes for you will have repercussions beyond not getting the position with the NSA or the contractor to them, but it's something to consider.  Remember, if you apply for a clearance in the future, you will likely be asked whether you've ever been investigated for a clearance before (the SF-86 asks this explicitly), so how the NSA polygraph goes may stick with you.  Unfortunately, despite the consensus of the scientific community and the assurances of some pro-polygraph types on this board, too many agencies still appear to put unwarranted faith in polygraph results.

Personally, after my experiences I will never again apply for any position that requires a polygraph -- it's just not worth the stress, regardless of whether I would "pass".  But that's me -- you, of course, have to make the decision for yourself.  If (as you seem to indicate) a job is on the line, you are indeed facing a tough choice.

Skeptic
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Oct 17, 2003, 03:41 AM
At this point, I think it would be wise to further educate yourself about polygraphy. The "test" is actually an interrogation, but the polygraph operators seem to truly believe that they can divine truth or deception by gazing into the polygraph charts. Some useful resources that you'll find on this website include:
Posted by ohgreat
 - Oct 17, 2003, 02:46 AM
hello,

I just found out at some point I might have to take a polygraph for the NSA.  I work for a contractor.  I've been reading the horror stories on this board about such experiences, as well as some of my friends experiences.

So I'm worried about the whole process, I don't like possibly betting my job on a flawed process.   I was honest on my PSQ and admitted to smoking pot once.  It was a one time event and is very embarrassing to me, so I fear any time I'm asked a question about drugs I will exhibit a response due to felling very uncomfortable with the subject.  

Should I just relax and take the test?  I have nothing damning to admit, but I'm worried about false positive.  I get the feeling that the NSA is more interested in getting confessions out of people than the actual results.  Should I just endure the interrogation and hope for the best?  I'm not interested in using CM's.

Any insight would be appreciated.