- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Fair Chance
- Aug 18, 2004, 10:48 AMDear Pixie1276,
Do not mistake your "security interview" and the preliminary NCICs (computer checks for criminal records in states and cities where you have worked and lived) with the full fledge background checks.
The only way that they finished your background checks in one month would be if you had very little history to research and no foreign military service (recent college graduate with few jobs or residential moves). The FBI has tried to significantly improve its hiring practices and if you are right, it would be great to see someone moved through the system like you are.
I would like to know in the future how your application is going (without providing details of course) to see if the system has changed for the better.
I do know that of three conditional letters sent, only one normally survives the polygraph, physical, and final background adjudication and is given a final job offer. Do not tell anyone about conditional letters because they are "very conditional."
Regards
Do not mistake your "security interview" and the preliminary NCICs (computer checks for criminal records in states and cities where you have worked and lived) with the full fledge background checks.
The only way that they finished your background checks in one month would be if you had very little history to research and no foreign military service (recent college graduate with few jobs or residential moves). The FBI has tried to significantly improve its hiring practices and if you are right, it would be great to see someone moved through the system like you are.
I would like to know in the future how your application is going (without providing details of course) to see if the system has changed for the better.
I do know that of three conditional letters sent, only one normally survives the polygraph, physical, and final background adjudication and is given a final job offer. Do not tell anyone about conditional letters because they are "very conditional."
Regards
Posted by pixie1276
- Aug 17, 2004, 06:48 PMI started the background process with the fbi in mid-july and am already through the background investigation and personnel security interview. The poly and urinalysis is coming soon, and I will likely begin in either Sept. or Oct....so, the process is not always a long, tedious one.
Posted by FollowMeHome
- Jul 10, 2004, 11:11 PMAs someome who is an ex-NSA employee, and waiting
on adjudication, for reinstatement, it is taking up to a
year to get through the process. Time between each
poly is taking about three months, and once you get
through the poly, it is taking DoD/DSS up to a year, to
process the TS clearance.
on adjudication, for reinstatement, it is taking up to a
year to get through the process. Time between each
poly is taking about three months, and once you get
through the poly, it is taking DoD/DSS up to a year, to
process the TS clearance.
Posted by Nobody
- Jul 08, 2004, 07:49 PMCOINTELPRO was an FBI program.
Posted by anti-poly
- May 25, 2004, 10:24 PMWhat gets me are all the guys that enable and justify the work of these pseudo-scientist polygraphers by claiming "national security" demands absolute honesty. To all you CIA chart-gazers that troll this website: Where are all those Iraqi WMDs your boys told Dubya that Saddam had stockpiled?? Where was all your so-called "absolute honesty" then? Tell us about COINTELPRO, the family jewels, LSD experimentation on unknowing subjects, the Bay of Pigs, and all of those honest fuck-ups you saviours of America the beautiful are so honestly responsible for? And day after day you keep dumping the dishonest dope-smoking chaff in the name of national security. RIGHT! I don't know about the rest of America, but I sure do sleep better at night knowing you spooks are performing your heroic deeds! [/sarcasm off]
Posted by Delta Golf
- Mar 06, 2004, 09:59 PMAPGodSpy, I think you missed the point George was making. He wasn't blasting the intelligence community as a whole, but merely pointing out that the hiring process relies upon junk science and calls the data that is entirely subjective "impirical."
That's unacceptable. Several members of my family have been in multiple agencies that require poly's, and I have plans to be as well when my current obligation is satisfied. I have never done any drugs or illegal substances in my life, nor comitted any crimes against anyone else, personal, corporate or civil, yet I will be using CM's instead of relying on brutal honesty because I will be screened subjectively by some quack who will be manipulating and lying to try and force me into making false admissions - that is what he is paid for.
That too is unacceptable. I want nothing more than to be part of, and I quote:
a system that does nothing but protect you.
The fact that I have to manipulate their little hoops they make us jump through to guarantee my position to help this nation is beyond lame. A proper and standardized background investigation reveals far more appropriate and accurate information than a polygraph ever will, and the false positives that have eliminated patriots with all the skills necesary to serve our national defense community is also unacceptable.
That's unacceptable. Several members of my family have been in multiple agencies that require poly's, and I have plans to be as well when my current obligation is satisfied. I have never done any drugs or illegal substances in my life, nor comitted any crimes against anyone else, personal, corporate or civil, yet I will be using CM's instead of relying on brutal honesty because I will be screened subjectively by some quack who will be manipulating and lying to try and force me into making false admissions - that is what he is paid for.
That too is unacceptable. I want nothing more than to be part of, and I quote:
a system that does nothing but protect you.
The fact that I have to manipulate their little hoops they make us jump through to guarantee my position to help this nation is beyond lame. A proper and standardized background investigation reveals far more appropriate and accurate information than a polygraph ever will, and the false positives that have eliminated patriots with all the skills necesary to serve our national defense community is also unacceptable.
Posted by APGodSpy
- Feb 04, 2004, 07:39 AMAlso absolute honesty has to be trusted and is expected. Their jobs come with special responsibilities and you have to find honest people who have to be dishonest in their jobs. you have to lie about your empolyment unless it is admin or a position that does not put you at risk for coercion, blackmail or being a target.
Wouldn't you want to know if someone is honest if they were entrusted with unusual technologies, accounts, worldwide contacts, and working position that are sensitive in nature.
Wouldn't you want to know if someone is honest if they were entrusted with unusual technologies, accounts, worldwide contacts, and working position that are sensitive in nature.
Posted by APGodSpy
- Feb 04, 2004, 07:34 AMGeorge, I am sorry to hear your ill feelings towards nothing but a system that does nothing but protect you. How would you do the polygraph process if they have been doing it wrong?
They do not hint at ever having any special gifts and abilities as to spot liars. It's simply based on reading the mannerisms, body language, nervous ticks, where the eyes go, and stress in the voice. By asking someone a series of truth questions and closely watching their mannerisms and where there eyes go you can attain which directions they will look when telling the truth. Then you proceed to ask questions about what you are looking for. This time, watch the eyes if they look in the same location. What does it mean when they look to the lower left, middle left, or upper left. Same with the right. It all means something. Go do some research on it and get back to me on it. The same with nervouse ticks. I happen to rub my nose, some pull their ears, and possibly others figet or twitch eyes.
After the Poly they will try to trip you up with questions in front of a panel and review board. And the reason they have to lie and cover things up is for national security. What would you do if you had sensitive information? You certainly wouldn't plaster it onto website like this one. And when do they lie to applicants? i was never lied too, in fact I was told about some of the embarrassing history it had and the community as a whole. And everyone in intelligence makes mistakes and it is how you learn as in every job.
It's a shame that there really are hard working officers, analysts and adm personnel working hard to protect you, me and themselves and do it in a manner that is fitting of law. Then to have people like you who do nothng but give negative comments about everything they do, which is nothing you know about and the activities they conduct. Does you employer lie to you, DO you have special abilities at the job you work? What makes you so special and what gives you the right to think you are so smart?
They do not hint at ever having any special gifts and abilities as to spot liars. It's simply based on reading the mannerisms, body language, nervous ticks, where the eyes go, and stress in the voice. By asking someone a series of truth questions and closely watching their mannerisms and where there eyes go you can attain which directions they will look when telling the truth. Then you proceed to ask questions about what you are looking for. This time, watch the eyes if they look in the same location. What does it mean when they look to the lower left, middle left, or upper left. Same with the right. It all means something. Go do some research on it and get back to me on it. The same with nervouse ticks. I happen to rub my nose, some pull their ears, and possibly others figet or twitch eyes.
After the Poly they will try to trip you up with questions in front of a panel and review board. And the reason they have to lie and cover things up is for national security. What would you do if you had sensitive information? You certainly wouldn't plaster it onto website like this one. And when do they lie to applicants? i was never lied too, in fact I was told about some of the embarrassing history it had and the community as a whole. And everyone in intelligence makes mistakes and it is how you learn as in every job.
It's a shame that there really are hard working officers, analysts and adm personnel working hard to protect you, me and themselves and do it in a manner that is fitting of law. Then to have people like you who do nothng but give negative comments about everything they do, which is nothing you know about and the activities they conduct. Does you employer lie to you, DO you have special abilities at the job you work? What makes you so special and what gives you the right to think you are so smart?
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Oct 07, 2003, 05:28 AMGray,
You write, among other things, "The polygraph is not %100 by itself, but the interviewer is also an expert in reading body lanquage, voice tone,etc."
The CIA's polygraphers have no special ability to detect deception: like other polygraphers, they are quacks pretending to abilities they do not possess.
You also write, "...if you are going to work for an Agency like the CIA, they DEMAND absolute honesty."
Actually, the CIA assumes that even applicants it would like to hire will be less than absolutely honest when answering the so-called "control" questions during a polygraph examination. And the CIA doesn't feel the need to treat applicants with the same candor it expects from them: through the pseudoscientific fraud we know as CQT polygraphy, the Agency lies to and attempts to deceive every single applicant.
You write, among other things, "The polygraph is not %100 by itself, but the interviewer is also an expert in reading body lanquage, voice tone,etc."
The CIA's polygraphers have no special ability to detect deception: like other polygraphers, they are quacks pretending to abilities they do not possess.
You also write, "...if you are going to work for an Agency like the CIA, they DEMAND absolute honesty."
Actually, the CIA assumes that even applicants it would like to hire will be less than absolutely honest when answering the so-called "control" questions during a polygraph examination. And the CIA doesn't feel the need to treat applicants with the same candor it expects from them: through the pseudoscientific fraud we know as CQT polygraphy, the Agency lies to and attempts to deceive every single applicant.
Posted by gray
- Oct 06, 2003, 11:16 PMIf you apply and are asked to come
in for processing; whatever you do,
DO NOT LIE about anything.
The polygraph is not %100 by itself,
but the interviewer is also an expert
in reading body lanquage, voice tone,etc.
Also, if you are going to work for an Agency
like the CIA, they DEMAND absolute honesty.
If you lie during the interview process, they
will NEVER feel that they can trust you
if you were hired; therefore,
you will NOT be hired; Period.
It is better to admit that you had sex with you
family cat at 15years old, once, then lie about
it; really.
If you smoked marijuana, in the past, and
admit it, and state that you currently are
not using it, they can still hire you;
if you lie about it; forget it.
If, on the other hand, you have used hard
drugs, like cocaine, heroin, LSD, etc
you probably will not be hired.
So, TELL THE TRUTH during the entire interview process;
they understand that people are human and
not angeles;
and if you are currently on the straight and narrow,
assuming you have qualities they are looking for,
you can still be hired if you have a few skeletons
in your closet.
BTW, the polygraph is not perfect, far from
it, but it does point the interviewer in a direction,
and they do use intimidation to some degree;
the key thing is; if you tell the truth, then there
is no where for him to go.
Good Luck.
in for processing; whatever you do,
DO NOT LIE about anything.
The polygraph is not %100 by itself,
but the interviewer is also an expert
in reading body lanquage, voice tone,etc.
Also, if you are going to work for an Agency
like the CIA, they DEMAND absolute honesty.
If you lie during the interview process, they
will NEVER feel that they can trust you
if you were hired; therefore,
you will NOT be hired; Period.
It is better to admit that you had sex with you
family cat at 15years old, once, then lie about
it; really.
If you smoked marijuana, in the past, and
admit it, and state that you currently are
not using it, they can still hire you;
if you lie about it; forget it.
If, on the other hand, you have used hard
drugs, like cocaine, heroin, LSD, etc
you probably will not be hired.
So, TELL THE TRUTH during the entire interview process;
they understand that people are human and
not angeles;
and if you are currently on the straight and narrow,
assuming you have qualities they are looking for,
you can still be hired if you have a few skeletons
in your closet.
BTW, the polygraph is not perfect, far from
it, but it does point the interviewer in a direction,
and they do use intimidation to some degree;
the key thing is; if you tell the truth, then there
is no where for him to go.
Good Luck.
Posted by Skeptic
- Aug 13, 2003, 03:55 AMQuote from: Ya Hoo on Aug 13, 2003, 02:16 AMAnyone out there who's gone through the clearance process with some intelligence agencies?
Is it true that it takes 9 to 11 months - from the date one takes the polygraph exam - to adjudicate a security clearance?
Thanks for your input.
It depends upon the agency. As I understand it, NSA is currently processing clearances within 4-5 months. OTOH, I've heard FBI is taking nearly two years.
Skeptic
Posted by Ya Hoo
- Aug 13, 2003, 02:16 AMAnyone out there who's gone through the clearance process with some intelligence agencies?
Is it true that it takes 9 to 11 months - from the date one takes the polygraph exam - to adjudicate a security clearance?
Thanks for your input.
Is it true that it takes 9 to 11 months - from the date one takes the polygraph exam - to adjudicate a security clearance?
Thanks for your input.