- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Aug 12, 2009, 05:26 AMThe jihadi article, "The Myth of the Lie Detector" (أسطورة جهاز كشف الكذب), is still available on www.tawhed.ws, though it now has a new URL:
http://www.tawhed.ws/r?i=7t40y4fs
As of 12 August 2009, it has been viewed 15,930 times and downloaded 3,703 times. A banner advertising the article has also been added to www.tawhed.ws. (See attached graphics.)
http://www.tawhed.ws/r?i=7t40y4fs
As of 12 August 2009, it has been viewed 15,930 times and downloaded 3,703 times. A banner advertising the article has also been added to www.tawhed.ws. (See attached graphics.)
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Oct 19, 2008, 05:46 AMQuote from: George_Maschke on Jan 10, 2006, 09:37 AMThe index page on the website www.tawhed.ws where the HTML version of the article, "Usturah jahaz kashf al-kidhb" (The Myth of the Lie Detector) is listed, which provides links to this and other articles on intelligence and security matters, indicates that the article on the lie detector has been viewed more than 4,200 times:
http://www.tawhed.ws/c?i=44
The same page also indicates that the article has been downloaded (it's available as a zipped Microsoft Word document here) some 740 times.
Note that this article is still on-line and has now been viewed some 13,851 times and downloaded some 2,750 times.
Posted by nopolycop
- Mar 23, 2008, 11:07 AMQuote from: Twoblock on Mar 22, 2008, 11:56 PM"n.p.c.",
why woud you answer the very question you are asking us, examiners?
Sackett
Let me answer your question directly and honestly.
It is because by doing so, I lend credibility to this site, by exposing the unwillingness for polygraphers like you to answer direct questions directly. NOTE: This is an example of a direct answer.
You see, my dear friend Sackett, my questioning is not done so I personally can find out the answers. If that was so, I would PM you. No, the questions I ask are asked to help educate the "guest" readers of this site, (of which there are 20 or more at any given time). Educate enough people about the fallacy of polygraphy, and eventually polygraph is debunked to the extent all it is good for is a game show prop.
The unfortunate issue is that it does have some merit, but because of polygraphers being unwilling to act honestly in their profession, they are killing their own goose. NOTE: This is an example of an explanation.
Posted by notguilty1
- Mar 23, 2008, 12:36 AMQuote from: Twoblock on Mar 22, 2008, 11:56 PM"n.p.c.",
why woud you answer the very question you are asking us, examiners?
It seems rather rude to support your assertions that we don't answer your question when you simply ask, then answer the very questions you ask with your own rhetoric, then accuse us examiners of not answering your questions...
Sackett
Cause he know the answer and can't get a straight one from you.
You think??
Posted by sackett
- Mar 22, 2008, 11:56 PM"n.p.c.",
why woud you answer the very question you are asking us, examiners?
It seems rather rude to support your assertions that we don't answer your question when you simply ask, then answer the very questions you ask with your own rhetoric, then accuse us examiners of not answering your questions...
Sackett
why woud you answer the very question you are asking us, examiners?
It seems rather rude to support your assertions that we don't answer your question when you simply ask, then answer the very questions you ask with your own rhetoric, then accuse us examiners of not answering your questions...
Sackett
Posted by nopolycop
- Mar 22, 2008, 10:03 AMQuote from: Twoblock on Mar 22, 2008, 12:29 AM NoPolyCop,
Okay, let's try a couple more direct questions.Do you believe counter-measures CAN work in a Control Question Test?
Do you believe that counter-measures are effectively discovered the vast majority of the time?
Now, was that covering what you have asked thorough enough ?
No. Because an honest polygrapher would have answered the questions like this.
1) They CAN work if the examinee can either produce physiological reactions during the control questions, or minimize reactions during the relevant questions.
2) Actually, we don't have a clue, because logic would dictate that if countermeasures are successful, we would not be detecting them.
See, NLG, that wasn't so tough, was it?
Posted by TheNoLieGuy4U
- Mar 22, 2008, 12:29 AM NoPolyCop,
Okay, let's try a couple more direct questions.Do you believe counter-measures CAN work in a Control Question Test?
MY ANSWER: In regard to PHYSICAL countermeasure attempts, probably not. I say this based on the Examiner having modern computerized equipment with motion sensors. The failure of the test subject to cooperate would simply cause at best an inconclusive outcome, or perhaps have such efforts be regarded as deceptive in their own right, which--- not surprisingly, would result in that person being interrogated. Therefore, I don't believe such a test subject would create a pure 180 degree outcome as you are dreaming / hoping for.
In regard to mental countermeasures, you assume the variable that the "Performer" / test subject is using just the right amount vs. too little or too much, and that they could do so consistently. If such an ability were true, then why would we test intel sources who may have been trained in same. The simple truth is, no government has been able to train their personnel to "Beat" a polygraph test should the other side have had them in a position to test them. Rather, they know at best they could cause an Inconclusive; again given the variables of modern day equipment and a properly trained examiner.
Do you believe that counter-measures are effectively discovered the vast majority of the time?
Your question presumes the level of training and equipment are consistent with each Examiner for a consistant answer to this. What I believe is true is that based on gutter rats like Doug Williams, and turn coats who assembled this site; that the polygraph community has never been better. You folks gave them the very attention they needed for funding and improvements. Further, that most of the techniques discussed here are / were oriented toward the analog instrument without motion sensors. Most of those cold war era examiners are now retired, and a younger generation of computer examiners quite dedicated have the best tools and training we all pay for. You know what, they just can't get enough of such professionals. Don't believe that ? DACA is backed up over a year's wait, and agencies are begging for talent. That sort of goes against the grain of what you see here, but this place is a fantasy of the failed, a dream of the would be deceptive. You may not like them, but don't blame the Centurion for standing their post with their given general orders.
NoPolyCop, it is too bad that you had the experiences you did, but don't blame the inadimate instrument as it is merely a recording device. Rather, look to the human element as to where your objections are, as that is where Medicine, Aviation, Construction, Polygraph, and other human endeavors fall short. That we persue each of these is not a sin, as the persuit of greater truth / realization is inherant in all mankind. Not all mankind is inherantly Truthful.
Now, was that covering what you have asked thorough enough ?
Okay, let's try a couple more direct questions.Do you believe counter-measures CAN work in a Control Question Test?
MY ANSWER: In regard to PHYSICAL countermeasure attempts, probably not. I say this based on the Examiner having modern computerized equipment with motion sensors. The failure of the test subject to cooperate would simply cause at best an inconclusive outcome, or perhaps have such efforts be regarded as deceptive in their own right, which--- not surprisingly, would result in that person being interrogated. Therefore, I don't believe such a test subject would create a pure 180 degree outcome as you are dreaming / hoping for.
In regard to mental countermeasures, you assume the variable that the "Performer" / test subject is using just the right amount vs. too little or too much, and that they could do so consistently. If such an ability were true, then why would we test intel sources who may have been trained in same. The simple truth is, no government has been able to train their personnel to "Beat" a polygraph test should the other side have had them in a position to test them. Rather, they know at best they could cause an Inconclusive; again given the variables of modern day equipment and a properly trained examiner.
Do you believe that counter-measures are effectively discovered the vast majority of the time?
Your question presumes the level of training and equipment are consistent with each Examiner for a consistant answer to this. What I believe is true is that based on gutter rats like Doug Williams, and turn coats who assembled this site; that the polygraph community has never been better. You folks gave them the very attention they needed for funding and improvements. Further, that most of the techniques discussed here are / were oriented toward the analog instrument without motion sensors. Most of those cold war era examiners are now retired, and a younger generation of computer examiners quite dedicated have the best tools and training we all pay for. You know what, they just can't get enough of such professionals. Don't believe that ? DACA is backed up over a year's wait, and agencies are begging for talent. That sort of goes against the grain of what you see here, but this place is a fantasy of the failed, a dream of the would be deceptive. You may not like them, but don't blame the Centurion for standing their post with their given general orders.
NoPolyCop, it is too bad that you had the experiences you did, but don't blame the inadimate instrument as it is merely a recording device. Rather, look to the human element as to where your objections are, as that is where Medicine, Aviation, Construction, Polygraph, and other human endeavors fall short. That we persue each of these is not a sin, as the persuit of greater truth / realization is inherant in all mankind. Not all mankind is inherantly Truthful.
Now, was that covering what you have asked thorough enough ?
Posted by nopolycop
- Mar 17, 2008, 10:10 AMQuote from: nopoly4me on Mar 16, 2008, 11:33 AMNLG4U[/color]
Okay, let's try a couple more direct questions.
Do you believe counter-measures CAN work in a Control Question Test?
Do you believe that counter-measures are effectively discovered the vast majority of the time?
My answer to the utility of the CM countermeasure question attempts are best represented in my Three Musketeers submission.
Bull:
I don't want a reference to some stupid fairy tale, answer my questions directly, NLG4U.
Posted by Twoblock
- Mar 17, 2008, 09:11 AMNoLieGuy4U
You have seen proof of my efforts in the legislative arena on these boards and you still ask questions as to my efforts. Gee Whiz!! Polygraph is the very least of my efforts and yet you try to portray it as the major portion. My glass is clear. Yours seem to be clouded by your hatred of George and this website. I have showed you proof of my efforts outside of the polygraph. You have been challenged to show proof of your strong accusations against George and as yet you haven't/can't provided one iota of proof. Until you do your accusations will fall on deaf ears and you will be awarded no credibility here.
If I was told my scientist uncle was aiding Irainian intelligence with atomic secrets, I would say prove it beyound a shadow of a doubt and I will deal with him severally. If you can't, then our family will deal with you severally.
If you have knowledge of an ongoing investigation into George's activities, and you are making that knowledge available on a public website, then you are a traitor to the investigation. If, on the other hand, you can't prove your accusations, well --- you could be in trouble from either direction.
If you can't prove your accusations, then I predict that you will be ignored by the readers of this site from now on. It starts with me right now. I can better use my time trying to hold to the little standards we have left.
Polygraphers are intent on having the last word. So go ahead.
You have seen proof of my efforts in the legislative arena on these boards and you still ask questions as to my efforts. Gee Whiz!! Polygraph is the very least of my efforts and yet you try to portray it as the major portion. My glass is clear. Yours seem to be clouded by your hatred of George and this website. I have showed you proof of my efforts outside of the polygraph. You have been challenged to show proof of your strong accusations against George and as yet you haven't/can't provided one iota of proof. Until you do your accusations will fall on deaf ears and you will be awarded no credibility here.
If I was told my scientist uncle was aiding Irainian intelligence with atomic secrets, I would say prove it beyound a shadow of a doubt and I will deal with him severally. If you can't, then our family will deal with you severally.
If you have knowledge of an ongoing investigation into George's activities, and you are making that knowledge available on a public website, then you are a traitor to the investigation. If, on the other hand, you can't prove your accusations, well --- you could be in trouble from either direction.
If you can't prove your accusations, then I predict that you will be ignored by the readers of this site from now on. It starts with me right now. I can better use my time trying to hold to the little standards we have left.
Polygraphers are intent on having the last word. So go ahead.
Posted by TheNoLieGuy4U
- Mar 17, 2008, 02:17 AM TwoBlock,
We agree that it is unfortunate that standards should not be lowered. It is a mathamatical fact that since the pill came into effect that couples simply aren't having as many children in this generation from which we choose future employees now ie; the post Vietnam war era youth. My statements are that I have observed that few are available from which the agencies you mentioned can choose from, which answers your question about their hiring so few of the applicants that come through the door. AND Yes, many of the applicants can't even meet the lower standards as well. There is no burr under my saddle, as my horse is in a comfortable pasture.
You say: I have been trying for many years to upgrade our standards or at least hold them to status quo. I get a lot of complainers but very little help. With your experience in government work, why don't you turn your energy toward raising the standards of this country instead of continually bashing George and this website with the same old rhetoric day in and day out with not a chance of changing anyone's mind.
I wonder in what way you have tried to upgrade standards, as your efforts in either trying to eliminate polygraph or if in league with those who encourage the use of CM's don't speak to that. It is only because I have held the standards high that I stand out here among the few. What you call the same old rhetoric is only a messege you can't absorb, fail to recognize, or won't submit to. Good Men and Women conduct polygraph tests everyday. They do so not as the oddballs of the forensic community, but rather having talents in both the right and left brain capacities. They derive great satisfaction in both being in the foundational efforts of helping those who come prepared to be truthful for an easy hiring decision on their part (and they need not be perfect), or screening out those who would hide those elements of their background (rationalization, outright withholding, false information, etc.). They are not in a popularity contest and don't care that you like them or don't like them, and only that the job get done right. Like any human being they have both good days and bad days. From what I read here you folks have tried to demonize them and their instrumentation as if they are not trying to help you actually get the job / meet their agencies needs.
When I speak of lower standards ask yourself this. If you had an Uncle who was a nuclear scientist who had weapons grade uranium knowledge. He was trusted in his community to keep that knowledge safe from those who would do this nation harm, but then was found to be assisting the Iranians now with their intelligence program to build weapons to either harm us or our allies; how would you feel about him then. Would you continue to claim him in your family ? Would you want his lowering of the standards of conduct of someone in his former position to be preserved and just glossed over. I don't think so. I am contructively trying to wipe clear the glass from which you look at this issue and this man who carries a torch of treachery. There is nothing destructive about my writings to you, as I only want to preserve standards as you do, and I simply want you to acknowledge that government is working with the best tools it has, and in this time frame we live in part of that process is with the polygraph. Logic dictates when that capability is surpassed, the newer tool would be used. We are not going backwards, and just rolling the dice because applicants say "trust me".
We agree that it is unfortunate that standards should not be lowered. It is a mathamatical fact that since the pill came into effect that couples simply aren't having as many children in this generation from which we choose future employees now ie; the post Vietnam war era youth. My statements are that I have observed that few are available from which the agencies you mentioned can choose from, which answers your question about their hiring so few of the applicants that come through the door. AND Yes, many of the applicants can't even meet the lower standards as well. There is no burr under my saddle, as my horse is in a comfortable pasture.
You say: I have been trying for many years to upgrade our standards or at least hold them to status quo. I get a lot of complainers but very little help. With your experience in government work, why don't you turn your energy toward raising the standards of this country instead of continually bashing George and this website with the same old rhetoric day in and day out with not a chance of changing anyone's mind.
I wonder in what way you have tried to upgrade standards, as your efforts in either trying to eliminate polygraph or if in league with those who encourage the use of CM's don't speak to that. It is only because I have held the standards high that I stand out here among the few. What you call the same old rhetoric is only a messege you can't absorb, fail to recognize, or won't submit to. Good Men and Women conduct polygraph tests everyday. They do so not as the oddballs of the forensic community, but rather having talents in both the right and left brain capacities. They derive great satisfaction in both being in the foundational efforts of helping those who come prepared to be truthful for an easy hiring decision on their part (and they need not be perfect), or screening out those who would hide those elements of their background (rationalization, outright withholding, false information, etc.). They are not in a popularity contest and don't care that you like them or don't like them, and only that the job get done right. Like any human being they have both good days and bad days. From what I read here you folks have tried to demonize them and their instrumentation as if they are not trying to help you actually get the job / meet their agencies needs.
When I speak of lower standards ask yourself this. If you had an Uncle who was a nuclear scientist who had weapons grade uranium knowledge. He was trusted in his community to keep that knowledge safe from those who would do this nation harm, but then was found to be assisting the Iranians now with their intelligence program to build weapons to either harm us or our allies; how would you feel about him then. Would you continue to claim him in your family ? Would you want his lowering of the standards of conduct of someone in his former position to be preserved and just glossed over. I don't think so. I am contructively trying to wipe clear the glass from which you look at this issue and this man who carries a torch of treachery. There is nothing destructive about my writings to you, as I only want to preserve standards as you do, and I simply want you to acknowledge that government is working with the best tools it has, and in this time frame we live in part of that process is with the polygraph. Logic dictates when that capability is surpassed, the newer tool would be used. We are not going backwards, and just rolling the dice because applicants say "trust me".
Posted by Twoblock
- Mar 16, 2008, 11:11 PMTheNoLieGuy4U
It is an unfortunate fact that the standards of this country have been lowered, and still in a downward trend, in every arena i.e. academics, morality, legislative and all kinds of government agencies. It's abominable that any LE agency would lower their standard in order to put a body behind a badge. These lower standards in charge of protecting us!!!? Are you saying agencies like the FBI and CIA has lowered their standards? Then why are they not hiring but small percentages of their applicants? Is it due to the fact the applicants can't meet the lower standards or are you attributing it to this website? Actually it seems the latter which is pure fallacy. It appears that this website has put such a burr under your saddle that it has blinded you to the more serious problems facing our nation.
I have been trying for many years to upgrade our standards or at least hold them to status quo. I get a lot of complainers but very little help. With your experience in government work, why don't you turn your energy toward raising the standards of this country instead of continually bashing George and this website with the same old rhetoric day in and day out with not a chance of changing anyone's mind. This site, as you polygraphers say of the polygraph, is not going away any time soon no matter how hard you try. So come on. Turn your energies to useful endevors. As you say, be constructive and quit trying to be destructive.
It is an unfortunate fact that the standards of this country have been lowered, and still in a downward trend, in every arena i.e. academics, morality, legislative and all kinds of government agencies. It's abominable that any LE agency would lower their standard in order to put a body behind a badge. These lower standards in charge of protecting us!!!? Are you saying agencies like the FBI and CIA has lowered their standards? Then why are they not hiring but small percentages of their applicants? Is it due to the fact the applicants can't meet the lower standards or are you attributing it to this website? Actually it seems the latter which is pure fallacy. It appears that this website has put such a burr under your saddle that it has blinded you to the more serious problems facing our nation.
I have been trying for many years to upgrade our standards or at least hold them to status quo. I get a lot of complainers but very little help. With your experience in government work, why don't you turn your energy toward raising the standards of this country instead of continually bashing George and this website with the same old rhetoric day in and day out with not a chance of changing anyone's mind. This site, as you polygraphers say of the polygraph, is not going away any time soon no matter how hard you try. So come on. Turn your energies to useful endevors. As you say, be constructive and quit trying to be destructive.
Posted by TheNoLieGuy4U
- Mar 16, 2008, 09:42 PM Hi Folks,
There seems to be a recurring mantra given birth from some simpleton's mind that must be dealt with intellectually. Some Anti-Poly fans say if CM's don't work anyway, then what is the problem. Answer: ATTEMPTS COUNT !!! and so many otherwise deserving young folks who are in desperate short supply to enter law enforcement take the advice here, and the ATTEMPT to deceive can ONLY be perceived as a lie, and not rewarded.
So then, if CM's did work as the moderator suggested, why so many folks on this website who have not fulfilled their dreams via working for some agency or the other as those who have, as claimed, a clean background could easily reapply. Agencies are desperately short handed putting the numbers on your side as quite often standards have been lowered.
Therefore, how many of you, well intended, employed counter measures as a follower of the moderator, and were either passed over when not told your CM's were detected, or were confronted; and otherwise could have had a job. I would begin to wonder if a favor was done for you, or you took bad advice which got you nothing.
Your motivation was to come to this site for answers. They may not be the answers you wanted to hear, but you must seperate out someone's theories and feelings, or preferences about the way they would like the world to be from reality. Most governments are quite pragmatic in their approaches with ofcourse budget concerns. That some don't like the way things are done, is quite different from the way it must get done.
There seems to be a recurring mantra given birth from some simpleton's mind that must be dealt with intellectually. Some Anti-Poly fans say if CM's don't work anyway, then what is the problem. Answer: ATTEMPTS COUNT !!! and so many otherwise deserving young folks who are in desperate short supply to enter law enforcement take the advice here, and the ATTEMPT to deceive can ONLY be perceived as a lie, and not rewarded.
So then, if CM's did work as the moderator suggested, why so many folks on this website who have not fulfilled their dreams via working for some agency or the other as those who have, as claimed, a clean background could easily reapply. Agencies are desperately short handed putting the numbers on your side as quite often standards have been lowered.
Therefore, how many of you, well intended, employed counter measures as a follower of the moderator, and were either passed over when not told your CM's were detected, or were confronted; and otherwise could have had a job. I would begin to wonder if a favor was done for you, or you took bad advice which got you nothing.
Your motivation was to come to this site for answers. They may not be the answers you wanted to hear, but you must seperate out someone's theories and feelings, or preferences about the way they would like the world to be from reality. Most governments are quite pragmatic in their approaches with ofcourse budget concerns. That some don't like the way things are done, is quite different from the way it must get done.
Posted by TheNoLieGuy4U
- Mar 16, 2008, 11:52 AM NoPolyCop,
Your position would seem to be quite different from the moderator. Perhaps that is because you have seen a bit as an LEO of specific issue cases solved, but object to the use in the P.E. setting based on an examiner with a bad personality you met. It seems you allow for the reality that there are some good examiners (no different than good cops / and bad cops), and that there are those employed who want to provide your department with no less than the best applicant for the few jobs ie; the best use of the tax payers money.
The polygraph records what it says it records in each respective channel. It can not both work and not work at the same time. Such tests take place when properly done in an environment free of artificial stimulation (noises, disruptions). Your attempt to self stimulate to create a new reality simply causes an unknown variable which either is too weak when poorly done, too aggressive causing charts out of the norm and rejected. or even if done right does not have a way to be tracked as I have seen so very few posters here who claim this, rather I / we read about those who either failed a test, or are not reapplying (Quitters). Therefore your arguments REALLY traces back to the human element of all of this or testing environment, and not the device itself. By the way, I have a problem with my toaster. Sometimes despite my hunger being a constant every morning, sometimes the toast is a bit light, and on other days it is a bit dark. Rarely, it is perfect, but I live with it and move on with my day. I would not be so obsessed to start a website like Anti-Toaster.com
Your position would seem to be quite different from the moderator. Perhaps that is because you have seen a bit as an LEO of specific issue cases solved, but object to the use in the P.E. setting based on an examiner with a bad personality you met. It seems you allow for the reality that there are some good examiners (no different than good cops / and bad cops), and that there are those employed who want to provide your department with no less than the best applicant for the few jobs ie; the best use of the tax payers money.
The polygraph records what it says it records in each respective channel. It can not both work and not work at the same time. Such tests take place when properly done in an environment free of artificial stimulation (noises, disruptions). Your attempt to self stimulate to create a new reality simply causes an unknown variable which either is too weak when poorly done, too aggressive causing charts out of the norm and rejected. or even if done right does not have a way to be tracked as I have seen so very few posters here who claim this, rather I / we read about those who either failed a test, or are not reapplying (Quitters). Therefore your arguments REALLY traces back to the human element of all of this or testing environment, and not the device itself. By the way, I have a problem with my toaster. Sometimes despite my hunger being a constant every morning, sometimes the toast is a bit light, and on other days it is a bit dark. Rarely, it is perfect, but I live with it and move on with my day. I would not be so obsessed to start a website like Anti-Toaster.com
Posted by TheNoLieGuy4U
- Mar 16, 2008, 11:33 AMNLG4U
Okay, let's try a couple more direct questions.
Do you believe counter-measures CAN work in a Control Question Test?
Do you believe that counter-measures are effectively discovered the vast majority of the time?
My answer to the utility of the CM countermeasure question attempts are best represented in my Three Musketeers submission. To clarify, I would say that I believe you have no way of really tracking this successes you claim. Most of the posters here are from those who DID NOT get the job, or any successive job with a poly test. That group is talking, but only talking about what they DID NOT achieve. Second, those who used CM's, but perhaps too little, made no difference in the outcome. Those who used too much stood out as physical countermeasures are detectable, and mental countermeasures are being picked up via the measure of what is known as "Drift". Again, none of this is perfect, but we all agree technology only gets better with time.
You ask then, what about those who did CM's just right ? Well in regard to an applicant, they may not have passed their overall background, or may have been out competed by another applicant, or simply not worked out in the special cultures they would have to adapt to. There really is no way of tracking this for your benefit, as the agencies are not talking to you, and those caught do not report this on this site. What I believe is that if you go into a polygraph test with a deceptive practice in mind that this is then a contant variable, and will show in the overall micro question, or macro test, or otherwise in the greater background.
The mindset recommended here is not much different than the kid in grade school who was a smart kid with a flawed personality who tried to influence those not as sharp to cheat. When they were caught could the smart kid really expect not to be punished when he said to the school authority "I was only trying to help" ? Ofcourse not, he would be appropriately spanked. Same said for the others. All Brats.
Okay, let's try a couple more direct questions.
Do you believe counter-measures CAN work in a Control Question Test?
Do you believe that counter-measures are effectively discovered the vast majority of the time?
My answer to the utility of the CM countermeasure question attempts are best represented in my Three Musketeers submission. To clarify, I would say that I believe you have no way of really tracking this successes you claim. Most of the posters here are from those who DID NOT get the job, or any successive job with a poly test. That group is talking, but only talking about what they DID NOT achieve. Second, those who used CM's, but perhaps too little, made no difference in the outcome. Those who used too much stood out as physical countermeasures are detectable, and mental countermeasures are being picked up via the measure of what is known as "Drift". Again, none of this is perfect, but we all agree technology only gets better with time.
You ask then, what about those who did CM's just right ? Well in regard to an applicant, they may not have passed their overall background, or may have been out competed by another applicant, or simply not worked out in the special cultures they would have to adapt to. There really is no way of tracking this for your benefit, as the agencies are not talking to you, and those caught do not report this on this site. What I believe is that if you go into a polygraph test with a deceptive practice in mind that this is then a contant variable, and will show in the overall micro question, or macro test, or otherwise in the greater background.
The mindset recommended here is not much different than the kid in grade school who was a smart kid with a flawed personality who tried to influence those not as sharp to cheat. When they were caught could the smart kid really expect not to be punished when he said to the school authority "I was only trying to help" ? Ofcourse not, he would be appropriately spanked. Same said for the others. All Brats.
Posted by nopolycop
- Mar 16, 2008, 10:22 AMQuote from: nopoly4me on Mar 16, 2008, 12:58 AM Hi,
Al Queda will do what they will and they are not my concern directly; rather what WE do is of concern to me when there is a fifth collum effort to directly or indirectly assist them, and particulary by an American citizen; and most especially by a former Intel Officer.
NLG4U
Okay, let's try a couple more direct questions.
Do you believe counter-measures CAN work in a Control Question Test?
Do you believe that counter-measures are effectively discovered the vast majority of the time?