- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Kona
- May 27, 2004, 12:07 AMQuote from: Got Fish? on May 26, 2004, 10:53 PM
Anybody want three guesses why this sorry piece of trash "Kona" feels such a kinship with scum-sucking polygraphers?
Anyone?
Anyone??
Bueller???
Hey, I'm all ears. Why??? Oh please, go easy on me with your rapier wit Mr. Fish. Thanks.
Kona
Posted by sweatin
- May 26, 2004, 11:23 PMQuote from: Anonymous on May 26, 2004, 11:06 PM
Here's what I'm trying to understand - the polygraph is used to verify the information you've disclosed to the agency to that point. So, during the pretest phase you pretty much confirmed that you lied somewhere on your application materials - the examiner didn't even really need the box for that. What is it that makes you believe you'll be processed further?
Like I said. There are maybe two dozen people in the United States (and the world for that matter) that have the qualifications and experience I have to do the particular job in question. Of those people, none of them are willing to work for less than $80k per year (most make more than $100k). Trust me, the recruiters jumped all over my employment application like white on rice. They probably shit their pants when I agreed to sign on for GS12/6 pay. Even the government knows better than to look a gift horse in the mouth.
Thanks for your curiosity though. I'll keep you informed of how it goes...
Posted by Anonymous
- May 26, 2004, 11:06 PMQuoteActually, on further thought, I don't think I'm going to rescind my application. Considering my qualifications and the fact that this really was a minor instance, I feel certain that the adjudicator is going to either approve me for further processing or want to re-poly me.
Yeah, that's probably a good idea. After all, you've got to be the first person I've ever run into that is OVER qualified for a government job. CIA will jump all over you.
Have you taken the time to read through any other threads on this board? The countless experiences of people who admitted to NOTHING and were disqualified anyway? If they aren't given a second chance, why would you expect one?
Here's what I'm trying to understand - the polygraph is used to verify the information you've disclosed to the agency to that point. So, during the pretest phase you pretty much confirmed that you lied somewhere on your application materials - the examiner didn't even really need the box for that. What is it that makes you believe you'll be processed further?
Posted by Got Fish?
- May 26, 2004, 10:53 PMQuote from: Kona on May 26, 2004, 09:44 PM
Let's see.......the polygrapher got you to admit that you LIED on your background package, and you think that you are going to be approved for further processing? Yeah.......they're going to process your application all right.....right into the shreding machine. Better ease up on the crack pipe, you're starting to hallucinate.
Who knows though......with your qualifications, integrity, and people skills, I'm sure you won't have any problems landing a quality job somewhere in the bowels of our government where you can really "break it off" into someone.
Best of luck in your quest for employment.
Kona
Anybody want three guesses why this sorry piece of trash "Kona" feels such a kinship with scum-sucking polygraphers?
Anyone?
Anyone??
Bueller???
Posted by Kona
- May 26, 2004, 09:44 PMQuote from: Sweatin on May 26, 2004, 07:55 PMActually, on further thought, I don't think I'm going to rescind my application. Considering my qualifications and the fact that this really was a minor instance, I feel certain that the adjudicator is going to either approve me for further processing or want to re-poly me. I rely am interested to see how this is going to play out. I'll wait until they make a move before I do. I'm not due for another BI for my current clearance for at least another 3-1/2 years, so I've got plenty of time on this.
I'll probably wait until they decide what to do and then break it off in their asses at that point...
Let's see.......the polygrapher got you to admit that you LIED on your background package, and you think that you are going to be approved for further processing? Yeah.......they're going to process your application all right.....right into the shreding machine. Better ease up on the crack pipe, you're starting to hallucinate.
Who knows though......with your qualifications, integrity, and people skills, I'm sure you won't have any problems landing a quality job somewhere in the bowels of our government where you can really "break it off" into someone.
Best of luck in your quest for employment.
Kona
Posted by Kona
- May 26, 2004, 09:27 PMQuote from: sweatin on May 26, 2004, 07:15 PM
How many times does the obvious have to be re-stated. As I have said numerous times in this thread, being DQ'ed is not my concern. It's really the very least of my concerns. What I want to know is how to get out of having this mark placed upon my record.
I figure a "first strike" approach might work well: I rescind my employment application before they get a chance to DQ me. Since it is in fact the CIA that I applied to, and I can't get my Poly/application info via FOIA, I can't be held responsible by any other agency doing a BI on me for why the CIA DQ'ed me. It's like having the right to face your accuser. And I can always claim that I didn't know I had been DQ'ed because I terminated my application process.
Does anyone understand what I'm talking about here?? It seems like I typing to the air...........
All right, don't go having a hissy fit here.
You might already be too late trying to pull your application package, because you may have already been DQ'ed. Maybe you should call them and use your superior people skills to try and acertain that fact.
Kona
Posted by Sweatin
- May 26, 2004, 07:55 PMActually, on further thought, I don't think I'm going to rescind my application. Considering my qualifications and the fact that this really was a minor instance, I feel certain that the adjudicator is going to either approve me for further processing or want to re-poly me. I rely am interested to see how this is going to play out. I'll wait until they make a move before I do. I'm not due for another BI for my current clearance for at least another 3-1/2 years, so I've got plenty of time on this.
I'll probably wait until they decide what to do and then break it off in their asses at that point...
I'll probably wait until they decide what to do and then break it off in their asses at that point...
Posted by Sweatin
- May 26, 2004, 07:32 PMQuote from: Anonymous on May 26, 2004, 07:23 PMVery well. Given your concern:
1. Yes, withdraw your application.
2. Yes, you probably could be in a world of trouble with your current employment for that stupid admission
There you go, no assumptions and I've only addressed your CONCERNS. Now, stop blaming the polygraph examiner and get over it - you lied.
Although you are not a particularly pleasant person and I will make the reasonable assumption that I would NOT want to work in the same office as you, I do wish you luck as I don't like to see anyone experience the hardship of losing employment. However, I reiterate that, regardless of your "tremendous qualifications," you need to work on heading back to Earth and getting over yourself. Obviously your qualifications didn't get you anywhere with that polygraph exam...
Gee, thanks for the advice and admonishment. Don't know as I should take it seriously considering it comes from someone with poor reading comprehension skills, bloviated opinions, and a presumptuous nature. But thanks anyway. Have a nice day.
Now, is there anyone out there with two or more synaptic gaps to rub together that has an opinion on this??
Posted by Anonymous
- May 26, 2004, 07:23 PMVery well. Given your concern:
1. Yes, withdraw your application.
2. Yes, you probably could be in a world of trouble with your current employment for that stupid admission
There you go, no assumptions and I've only addressed your CONCERNS. Now, stop blaming the polygraph examiner and get over it - you lied.
Although you are not a particularly pleasant person and I will make the reasonable assumption that I would NOT want to work in the same office as you, I do wish you luck as I don't like to see anyone experience the hardship of losing employment. However, I reiterate that, regardless of your "tremendous qualifications," you need to work on heading back to Earth and getting over yourself. Obviously your qualifications didn't get you anywhere with that polygraph exam...
1. Yes, withdraw your application.
2. Yes, you probably could be in a world of trouble with your current employment for that stupid admission
There you go, no assumptions and I've only addressed your CONCERNS. Now, stop blaming the polygraph examiner and get over it - you lied.
Although you are not a particularly pleasant person and I will make the reasonable assumption that I would NOT want to work in the same office as you, I do wish you luck as I don't like to see anyone experience the hardship of losing employment. However, I reiterate that, regardless of your "tremendous qualifications," you need to work on heading back to Earth and getting over yourself. Obviously your qualifications didn't get you anywhere with that polygraph exam...
Posted by sweatin
- May 26, 2004, 07:15 PMQuote from: Kona on May 26, 2004, 07:05 PM
You are absolutely correct. I suppose it is possible that you could lose your security clearance. Hopefully this won't happen.
You can call it anything you want, "duped," "tricked," "coerced," "bamboozled," "intimidated," or "pressured," the end result is still the same......the polygrapher got you to admit to an ommision of drug useage on your background package, and that was all he needed to DQ you.
Good luck.
Kona
How many times does the obvious have to be re-stated. As I have said numerous times in this thread, being DQ'ed is not my concern. It's really the very least of my concerns. What I want to know is how to get out of having this mark placed upon my record.
I figure a "first strike" approach might work well: I rescind my employment application before they get a chance to DQ me. Since it is in fact the CIA that I applied to, and I can't get my Poly/application info via FOIA, I can't be held responsible by any other agency doing a BI on me for why the CIA DQ'ed me. It's like having the right to face your accuser. And I can always claim that I didn't know I had been DQ'ed because I terminated my application process.
Does anyone understand what I'm talking about here?? It seems like I typing to the air...........
Posted by Kona
- May 26, 2004, 07:05 PMQuote from: Sweatin on May 26, 2004, 06:38 PM"Probably the worst thing about this was that I already have a security clearance required by my present job, and had it when I had my lapse in judgement. My concern is not so much being considered further for employment with the organization as it is that I could potentially lose my security clearance for this admission that the polygrapher duped out of me because of my ignorance."
You are absolutely correct. I suppose it is possible that you could lose your security clearance. Hopefully this won't happen.
You can call it anything you want, "duped," "tricked," "coerced," "bamboozled," "intimidated," or "pressured," the end result is still the same......the polygrapher got you to admit to an ommision of drug useage on your background package, and that was all he needed to DQ you.
Good luck.
Kona
Posted by Kona
- May 26, 2004, 06:52 PMQuote from: sweatin on May 26, 2004, 11:28 AM
I was duped because lie detectors can NOT detect lies, and had I known this, I would have NEVER admitted to anything. In short, they were forced to repeatedly lie to me in order to get me to admit to anything. Why is it unacceptable for me to conceal anything from them, but yet they should get a pass when lying to me?
I don't get it.
Sweatin,
Here, let me explain it to you. It's called Interrogation 101. The polygrapher can say anything and do anything in order to elicit a confession, an admission, or a contradiction to anything already listed in your background package. If he is successful, then he has accomplished his mission. He has exposed one more person that has either lied about or ommited something from their background package. We all know that the polygraph can't detect lies......that's not the point. It is however, an excellent intimidation device to get examinees talking, and to confess to things not previously exposed.
When pillpopper talks about you being the posterboy for the polygraph community, he is right on the money. All they have to do is point to you as a prime example of someone that lied on their background package, and the polygraph "process" (read: pre-test interrogation) surfaced the truth.
Are you starting to see the big picture here?
Good luck.
Kona
Posted by Sweatin
- May 26, 2004, 06:38 PMJesus H. Christ, Spookster, you sure do seem to have reading comprehension problems! More and more unsolicitied and unfounded ASSUMPTIONS. Please show me where in this thread I have denied lying? or where I've implied that no one meets any agency's drug standards? One bogus pitch after another ... you're about as laughable as that inane polygrapher ... I wonder why?
And stupid too. Apparently you don't understand that first post that I made very well. You know, the one where I expressed that "concern"... Here read it again:
"Probably the worst thing about this was that I already have a security clearance required by my present job, and had it when I had my lapse in judgement. My concern is not so much being considered further for employment with the organization as it is that I could potentially lose my security clearance for this admission that the polygrapher duped out of me because of my ignorance."
Go ahead and re-read it again until you understand it. Try sounding out the tough words. When you're done, go back and re-read the questions that immediately followed in the post. Let me know if you need help with those too. I'll wait here until you figure what this is all about...
And stupid too. Apparently you don't understand that first post that I made very well. You know, the one where I expressed that "concern"... Here read it again:
"Probably the worst thing about this was that I already have a security clearance required by my present job, and had it when I had my lapse in judgement. My concern is not so much being considered further for employment with the organization as it is that I could potentially lose my security clearance for this admission that the polygrapher duped out of me because of my ignorance."
Go ahead and re-read it again until you understand it. Try sounding out the tough words. When you're done, go back and re-read the questions that immediately followed in the post. Let me know if you need help with those too. I'll wait here until you figure what this is all about...
Posted by Anonymous
- May 26, 2004, 06:11 PMEven if just out of sheer boredom, you are quite involved with this thread wouldn't you say? I'm truly saddened that I don't live up to your expectations with regards to debating skills.
I guess I see why pillpopper has apparently given up. You don't seem to get the point here - you intentionally chose to not disclose information relevant to employment suitability prior to your polygraph examination. Regardless of the reason, you chose to admit to this failure to disclose during your examination. I don't think anyone has really indicated that you were not within policy (altough based on the timeframe you indicated I'd be inclined to say you are not) but why is it so difficult to see that you LIED? Many agencies will work with you on issues liked drugs, incidents in earlier years, etc. One issue they won't work with you on, however, is lying. And that's what you did. Regardless of what role you THINK you might play were you to gain employment, even as a career liar as you imply, do you really think the employer wants you to lie to THEM?
Anyway, I did give you the benefit of the doubt and reread your original post (see my prior post above, however, the one where I QUOTED a portion of your original post - see, I was paying attention!). After rereading, I find that you in fact do NOT have a legitimate concern. You lied during the process and you got caught. Although I don't agree with using the polygraph in pre-employment screening settings, it is currently used in that capacity and did just what its' advocates claim it can do - caught you in a lie.
Tough shit man, move on... you're obviously quite gainfully employed now so just get over it - get over yourself as well...
I guess I see why pillpopper has apparently given up. You don't seem to get the point here - you intentionally chose to not disclose information relevant to employment suitability prior to your polygraph examination. Regardless of the reason, you chose to admit to this failure to disclose during your examination. I don't think anyone has really indicated that you were not within policy (altough based on the timeframe you indicated I'd be inclined to say you are not) but why is it so difficult to see that you LIED? Many agencies will work with you on issues liked drugs, incidents in earlier years, etc. One issue they won't work with you on, however, is lying. And that's what you did. Regardless of what role you THINK you might play were you to gain employment, even as a career liar as you imply, do you really think the employer wants you to lie to THEM?
Anyway, I did give you the benefit of the doubt and reread your original post (see my prior post above, however, the one where I QUOTED a portion of your original post - see, I was paying attention!). After rereading, I find that you in fact do NOT have a legitimate concern. You lied during the process and you got caught. Although I don't agree with using the polygraph in pre-employment screening settings, it is currently used in that capacity and did just what its' advocates claim it can do - caught you in a lie.
Tough shit man, move on... you're obviously quite gainfully employed now so just get over it - get over yourself as well...
Posted by sweatin
- May 26, 2004, 05:20 PMAs an aside, it's interesting to note the assumptions that have been concluded about me by the detractors in this thread. For instance, it has been assumed that I was applying for work with the CIA, that I admitted to smoking weed more times than the respective agency in question allows, that I failed the polygraph test, etc. ad nauseam.
I almost feel like I'm getting boxed right here in this thread.
Let me guess: You losers are polygraphers? Whoda thunk it? Is that what the government pays you spooks to do all day? Sit on your fat assess detracting from an internet message board? Pathetic really...
Get your asses back to work! I ain't pay'n taxes for you to sit around gabbin' all day SPOOKS!
I almost feel like I'm getting boxed right here in this thread.
Let me guess: You losers are polygraphers? Whoda thunk it? Is that what the government pays you spooks to do all day? Sit on your fat assess detracting from an internet message board? Pathetic really...
Get your asses back to work! I ain't pay'n taxes for you to sit around gabbin' all day SPOOKS!