- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by sweatyhands
- Nov 10, 2007, 10:05 AMThanks George ... I have printed the forms and will be sending them off on Monday.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Nov 10, 2007, 02:03 AMInformation on how to file a Privacy Act request is available on the FBI website here:
http://foia.fbi.gov/privacy_instruc.htm
There is also an independent website that you may use to generate an FBI Privacy Act request:
http://www.getyourfbifile.com/
While I don't know of any formal process for challenging inaccurate information in one's FBI file, one can write a letter to the FBI correcting any inaccuracies, and the letter should be added to your file.
http://foia.fbi.gov/privacy_instruc.htm
There is also an independent website that you may use to generate an FBI Privacy Act request:
http://www.getyourfbifile.com/
While I don't know of any formal process for challenging inaccurate information in one's FBI file, one can write a letter to the FBI correcting any inaccuracies, and the letter should be added to your file.
Posted by sweatyhands
- Nov 09, 2007, 03:15 PMJust when I think my post is getting off topic ... <BAM> .... someone completely hijacks it 
I would like to continue the conversation that was beginning though
I would like to continue the conversation that was beginning though
Posted by 1904
- Nov 09, 2007, 10:46 AMQuote from: Barry_C on Nov 09, 2007, 10:09 AM
That is your opinion based on a skewed view of the research.
Why skewed? It (NAS Report) is what it is.
Quote There is plenty of research out there to support the opposite conclusion.
Circular. The NAS debunked the bulk of research that you constantly refer to
QuoteIn 2002, the National Academy of Sciences completed a thorough review of the scientific evidence on the polygraph, concluding that "[polygraph testing's] accuracy in distinguishing actual or potential security violators from innocent test takers is insufficient to justify reliance on its use in employee security screening in federal agencies."
Reply:
That was in 2002, and as you see, it's a policy decision. Moreover, they were wrong about CMs, so how do we know they weren't wrong in their other conclusions? Also, did they review the current means of polygraph testing in those situations? Answer: No. We've changed things (many of us, anyhow) in the past five years.
How can you simply dismiss the NAS as being "wrong". Please provide proof that NAS ever agreed to being 'wrong' about any of their report.
Quote
I never said the NAS report wasn't valid. It's really not a new "study." It was more a of meta-analysis of what was out there already. They pointed out that research in screening situations was lacking, and I agree. They also stated some opinions that have since turned out to be wrong, so to blindly accept it in totality is an error.
Please provide proof that NAS was 'wrong' and admitted to being 'wrong'
Posted by sweatyhands
- Nov 09, 2007, 10:30 AMOK ... somehow I think this got a little off topic for my specific situation.
I have no benefit to lie or not lie on this forum as it has no consequence.
I can tell you my drug use was limited to mild experimentation, which I did not count the times but estimate at around 8-10 times over several years. I told the guy who interviewd me from the FBI and the polygrapher as well. The polygrapher felt that I was lieing about it and that I had a more addictive problem to drugs which is not true.
It seems wierd to me that they send this background investigator to interview all these people from the past and if not one person mentions drugs wouldnt that seem like a pretty good testament of whether someone had a drug addiction at some point in their life.
I can tell you he was clearly frustrated with the sweat coming from my hands as it was constant and not possible to cease.
I do have some specific questions to the both of you and I thank you for your posts as well.
Where do I get a privaqcy act request form and who do I send it to? Who and how do I challenge inaccuracies?
How can it matter if the number of times is 10 or 11? The last time I touched marijuana was 9 years ago and it was a sporadic experimental issue never one of regular use by any sense of the word. I never gave the examiner an exact figure because it happened a while ago and frankly I cannot truthfuly recall specifics.
Without a specialized degree such as Master of Strategic Intelligence I feel I would lose the asset that comes with it. It would seem to me that a person with a masters degree such as that would be a high commodity. I have a strong resume filled with exceptional accomplishments. Furthermore, I am in the process of becoming fluent in Russian.
Also, I am currently a GS-09 in the federal government with the Dept. VA. The position I have I can easily get to GS-12 and still live where I am now in a low cost area. I am taking the masters to improved my marketability to the IC. It is in the IC where I feel my job satisfaction truly exists.
Lastly, there are prescriptions I can use that only a doctor can prescribe which are supposed to cut off all sweat to the hands. I have to treat my hands 3 days a week then as needed but once the treatment is underway it cuts all sweat. I am not much of a prescription medicene user and have never done it. Would that be considered unethical or a (CM?) if I were to be using that prescription while taking the polygraph? I can tell you when I finish my degree in 2 years and start applying, I wont go into that room for the polygraph and not have taken care of my hands in some manner. Whether its a medical report from my doctor or a prescription that kills the sweat glands.
I have spoken to some people about my experience and they basically say 2 things. I got a knee jerk of a polygrapher for my examination AND the FBI by far is the most difficult to deal with in regards of passing a polygraph because they remain more narrowly focused. I believe as well as others that their is more tolerance to real life pasts in other agencies then the FBI. I will be seeking employment from the other IC community agencies, more particular, DoN intel, DIA, NSA, possible CIA. In hind sight I wish I would have appealed their decision and went before an adjuticator.
For instance, with the Department of the Navy, NCIS does their polygraphs if needed for their intelligence screenings. If an unfavorable decision is returned by the navy, their appeals seems very open and straightforward. It is displayed in SECNAV M5510.30.
Your continued help with this would be appreciated!
Thanks
I have no benefit to lie or not lie on this forum as it has no consequence.
I can tell you my drug use was limited to mild experimentation, which I did not count the times but estimate at around 8-10 times over several years. I told the guy who interviewd me from the FBI and the polygrapher as well. The polygrapher felt that I was lieing about it and that I had a more addictive problem to drugs which is not true.
It seems wierd to me that they send this background investigator to interview all these people from the past and if not one person mentions drugs wouldnt that seem like a pretty good testament of whether someone had a drug addiction at some point in their life.
I can tell you he was clearly frustrated with the sweat coming from my hands as it was constant and not possible to cease.
I do have some specific questions to the both of you and I thank you for your posts as well.
QuoteOne thing that I recommend you do is to file a Privacy Act request for your entire FBI file. It's a permanent record, and it (along with your polygraph results) will be reviewed by adjudicators if you ever again apply for a position that requires a security clearance (whether or not a polygraph is required). It's important that you be aware of what is in the file so that you can challenge any inaccuracies.
Where do I get a privaqcy act request form and who do I send it to? Who and how do I challenge inaccuracies?
QuoteI can read that a few ways, but anyhow, did you define "minor experimental drug use"? If so, were you absolutely certain of your answer? If you said you used it 10 times, but it's possible it was 11, then you can't be sure of your answer. Unless you kept notes or only tried it once or twice, it's not always easy to get the number dead on. If you're uncertain, you've got to work through that with the examiner so you can get to a point at which you know that you know that you're truthful.
How can it matter if the number of times is 10 or 11? The last time I touched marijuana was 9 years ago and it was a sporadic experimental issue never one of regular use by any sense of the word. I never gave the examiner an exact figure because it happened a while ago and frankly I cannot truthfuly recall specifics.
QuoteIf you pursue graduate studies, you might want to consider a less specialized major in order to enhance your options for employment outside the intelligence community.
Without a specialized degree such as Master of Strategic Intelligence I feel I would lose the asset that comes with it. It would seem to me that a person with a masters degree such as that would be a high commodity. I have a strong resume filled with exceptional accomplishments. Furthermore, I am in the process of becoming fluent in Russian.
Also, I am currently a GS-09 in the federal government with the Dept. VA. The position I have I can easily get to GS-12 and still live where I am now in a low cost area. I am taking the masters to improved my marketability to the IC. It is in the IC where I feel my job satisfaction truly exists.
Lastly, there are prescriptions I can use that only a doctor can prescribe which are supposed to cut off all sweat to the hands. I have to treat my hands 3 days a week then as needed but once the treatment is underway it cuts all sweat. I am not much of a prescription medicene user and have never done it. Would that be considered unethical or a (CM?) if I were to be using that prescription while taking the polygraph? I can tell you when I finish my degree in 2 years and start applying, I wont go into that room for the polygraph and not have taken care of my hands in some manner. Whether its a medical report from my doctor or a prescription that kills the sweat glands.
I have spoken to some people about my experience and they basically say 2 things. I got a knee jerk of a polygrapher for my examination AND the FBI by far is the most difficult to deal with in regards of passing a polygraph because they remain more narrowly focused. I believe as well as others that their is more tolerance to real life pasts in other agencies then the FBI. I will be seeking employment from the other IC community agencies, more particular, DoN intel, DIA, NSA, possible CIA. In hind sight I wish I would have appealed their decision and went before an adjuticator.
For instance, with the Department of the Navy, NCIS does their polygraphs if needed for their intelligence screenings. If an unfavorable decision is returned by the navy, their appeals seems very open and straightforward. It is displayed in SECNAV M5510.30.
Your continued help with this would be appreciated!
Thanks
Posted by Barry_C
- Nov 09, 2007, 10:09 AMQuoteBear in mind that polygraph "testing" has not been demonstrated to reliably differentiate between liars and truth-tellers in people without conditions such as hyperhidrosis.
That is your opinion based on a skewed view of the research. There is plenty of research out there to support the opposite conclusion. We are seeing more examiners trained, more testing, and more courtroom testimony being accepted. Moreover, you have formerly anti-polygraph folks, testing polygraph and reporting on it favorably. It's odd that the NAS report disagrees with you here, but you leave that out.
QuoteIn 2002, the National Academy of Sciences completed a thorough review of the scientific evidence on the polygraph, concluding that "[polygraph testing's] accuracy in distinguishing actual or potential security violators from innocent test takers is insufficient to justify reliance on its use in employee security screening in federal agencies."
That was in 2002, and as you see, it's a policy decision. Moreover, they were wrong about CMs, so how do we know they weren't wrong in their other conclusions? Also, did they review the current means of polygraph testing in those situations? Answer: No. We've changed things (many of us, anyhow) in the past five years.
In any event, they did find that single-issue (specific incident) tests do work; although they pointed out the obvious: they're less than perfect. So, this issue could be resolved with a single-issue test, e.g., "Did you lie to me about your drug use?"
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Nov 09, 2007, 06:06 AMsweatyhands,
Bear in mind that polygraph "testing" has not been demonstrated to reliably differentiate between liars and truth-tellers in people without conditions such as hyperhidrosis. In 2002, the National Academy of Sciences completed a thorough review of the scientific evidence on the polygraph, concluding that "[polygraph testing's] accuracy in distinguishing actual or potential security violators from innocent test takers is insufficient to justify reliance on its use in employee security screening in federal agencies." Nonetheless, the FBI and numerous other federal agencies continue to rely on this junk science.
One thing that I recommend you do is to file a Privacy Act request for your entire FBI file. It's a permanent record, and it (along with your polygraph results) will be reviewed by adjudicators if you ever again apply for a position that requires a security clearance (whether or not a polygraph is required). It's important that you be aware of what is in the file so that you can challenge any inaccuracies.
If you pursue graduate studies, you might want to consider a less specialized major in order to enhance your options for employment outside the intelligence community.
Bear in mind that polygraph "testing" has not been demonstrated to reliably differentiate between liars and truth-tellers in people without conditions such as hyperhidrosis. In 2002, the National Academy of Sciences completed a thorough review of the scientific evidence on the polygraph, concluding that "[polygraph testing's] accuracy in distinguishing actual or potential security violators from innocent test takers is insufficient to justify reliance on its use in employee security screening in federal agencies." Nonetheless, the FBI and numerous other federal agencies continue to rely on this junk science.
One thing that I recommend you do is to file a Privacy Act request for your entire FBI file. It's a permanent record, and it (along with your polygraph results) will be reviewed by adjudicators if you ever again apply for a position that requires a security clearance (whether or not a polygraph is required). It's important that you be aware of what is in the file so that you can challenge any inaccuracies.
If you pursue graduate studies, you might want to consider a less specialized major in order to enhance your options for employment outside the intelligence community.
Posted by Barry_C
- Nov 08, 2007, 09:54 PMIf your problem is palmar, then the electrodes could be placed on another area where you have eccrine sweat glands, e.g., the feet.
I can read that a few ways, but anyhow, did you define "minor experimental drug use"? If so, were you absolutely certain of your answer? If you said you used it 10 times, but it's possible it was 11, then you can't be sure of your answer. Unless you kept notes or only tried it once or twice, it's not always easy to get the number dead on. If you're uncertain, you've got to work through that with the examiner so you can get to a point at which you know that you know that you're truthful.
QuoteI had told them that I had minor experimental drug use several years ago with marijuana but that was all.
I can read that a few ways, but anyhow, did you define "minor experimental drug use"? If so, were you absolutely certain of your answer? If you said you used it 10 times, but it's possible it was 11, then you can't be sure of your answer. Unless you kept notes or only tried it once or twice, it's not always easy to get the number dead on. If you're uncertain, you've got to work through that with the examiner so you can get to a point at which you know that you know that you're truthful.
Posted by sweatyhands
- Nov 07, 2007, 10:40 AMGreetings all,
I will start by saying I failed my only polygraph exam with the FBI in 2006. It was devestating for me and have not attempted since. I graduated with honors in 2005 from University of North Carolina and I am a navy veteran. I was excited about being selected as an Intelligence Analyst for the FBI Counter-Terrorism Unit. All that was crushed when some guy at the FBI said I was lieing about my prior drug use. I had told them that I had minor experimental drug use several years ago with marijuana but that was all.
The problem. I suffer from hyperhydrosis, diagnosed by my doctor. My hands sweat constantly, nothing I can do about it. The poly examiner was getting pissed because my hands would not stop sweating and he couldnt get an accurate read. He tried all morning then sent me to lunch to relax. I came back and he tried once more and by that time I was upset too. I was having problem asking the easy questions like "Are you married" because all I could think about was that I was going to fail. He finally said that the results are inconclusive and that HQ will determine. He asked if I want to say anything on paper and I wrote down that my drug use in no way violates the FBI policy and that I felt this was wrong.
Some time later I got a letter saying that I was denied my clearance.
I am considering starting a masters degree in intelligence this January. In the back of mind I am worried that because my hyperhidrosis my hands will never let me pass the exam. Their is a constant layer of sweat on my hands regardless of anything. So the finger tip reading will always be sweat.
Any advice would be appreciatted.
Thanks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperhidrosis
That link might shed insight on my condition. There is very little SAFE and proven ways to cure this condition. Technically I suffer from palmar hyperhidrosos.
I will start by saying I failed my only polygraph exam with the FBI in 2006. It was devestating for me and have not attempted since. I graduated with honors in 2005 from University of North Carolina and I am a navy veteran. I was excited about being selected as an Intelligence Analyst for the FBI Counter-Terrorism Unit. All that was crushed when some guy at the FBI said I was lieing about my prior drug use. I had told them that I had minor experimental drug use several years ago with marijuana but that was all.
The problem. I suffer from hyperhydrosis, diagnosed by my doctor. My hands sweat constantly, nothing I can do about it. The poly examiner was getting pissed because my hands would not stop sweating and he couldnt get an accurate read. He tried all morning then sent me to lunch to relax. I came back and he tried once more and by that time I was upset too. I was having problem asking the easy questions like "Are you married" because all I could think about was that I was going to fail. He finally said that the results are inconclusive and that HQ will determine. He asked if I want to say anything on paper and I wrote down that my drug use in no way violates the FBI policy and that I felt this was wrong.
Some time later I got a letter saying that I was denied my clearance.
I am considering starting a masters degree in intelligence this January. In the back of mind I am worried that because my hyperhidrosis my hands will never let me pass the exam. Their is a constant layer of sweat on my hands regardless of anything. So the finger tip reading will always be sweat.
Any advice would be appreciatted.
Thanks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperhidrosis
That link might shed insight on my condition. There is very little SAFE and proven ways to cure this condition. Technically I suffer from palmar hyperhidrosos.