- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by sackett
- Mar 30, 2008, 12:00 PMOK! Then "sniper" can post it here and I'll still follow it up. I was simply offering to follow it up privately then post the findings. Didn't want "sniper" to have to identify himself, but I guess we don't mind.
I am simply offering to help him become the first ever, verifiable user of CM's.
Sackett
I am simply offering to help him become the first ever, verifiable user of CM's.
Sackett
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Mar 28, 2008, 02:17 PMQuotethen simply inform me privately who you are and where you tested and with whom
Why privately?
Posted by sackett
- Mar 28, 2008, 10:45 AMQuote from: sniper5252 on Mar 27, 2008, 07:52 PMHey guys....thanks for the well wishes!!! I DO have a conditional job offer and only have two steps left. Hopefully I will sucessfully complete those steps and then in my eyes "be living the dream!!!"
I did use CM's but to be honest I really didn't need to. The didn't even question me on my past drug use and that was the only worry I had. Not that I am a drug attict but I have experimented. The polygrapher did the whole card trick and was 98% sure I lied....yeah whatever. I thank everyone for their tips and support and wish you the best on your future.
-sniper
Well Congrats!
Eat Crow, for what? You said you didn't need CM's becasue they didn't even ask you about the topic that most concerned you. For that reason alone the use of CM's would have been a moot point.
However, if you'd like to make history and be first test subject to claim CM's worked for them, then simply inform me privately who you are and where you tested and with whom, then I would be more than happy to go there, verify your claim (BTW a positive act which is verifiable, not a negative), then I would report back here your success.
Sackett
P.S. What type of government job does not require you to be tested concerning illegal drugs use?
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Mar 27, 2008, 09:07 PMQuoteThe polygrapher did the whole card trick and was 98% sure I lied....yeah whatever.
Funny, some of the polygraphers on this board have questioned whether this 95-98% accuracy claim is made to any large extent in the polygraph community. But it is, ALL THE TIME. And it's always 95 or 98%.
They make bold claims to the gullible public, then play down this bogus claim on this board, knowing the claim will be seriously questioned. On my last test, a Mr. Lingenfelter made the same claim. I politely asked him where he got that number, and he quickly played it down. Freaking liar!
They obviously pull this 98% figure out of their rectums!
TC
Posted by yankeedog
- Mar 27, 2008, 08:35 PMQuote from: sniper5252 on Mar 27, 2008, 07:52 PM The didn't even question me on my past drug use and that was the only worry I had.
They didn't even ask you about past drug use? And this was for a law enforcement/police position? Or was it for some other type of work?
Posted by sniper5252
- Mar 27, 2008, 07:52 PMHey guys....thanks for the well wishes!!! I DO have a conditional job offer and only have two steps left. Hopefully I will sucessfully complete those steps and then in my eyes "be living the dream!!!"
I did use CM's but to be honest I really didn't need to. The didn't even question me on my past drug use and that was the only worry I had. Not that I am a drug attict but I have experimented. The polygrapher did the whole card trick and was 98% sure I lied....yeah whatever. I thank everyone for their tips and support and wish you the best on your future.
-sniper
I did use CM's but to be honest I really didn't need to. The didn't even question me on my past drug use and that was the only worry I had. Not that I am a drug attict but I have experimented. The polygrapher did the whole card trick and was 98% sure I lied....yeah whatever. I thank everyone for their tips and support and wish you the best on your future.
-sniper
Posted by Twoblock
- Mar 27, 2008, 05:05 PMNLG
I'll relent and answer your lip flapping one more time.
1. How did I show fear saying he didn't owe an explanation to any
one? I fear God only.
2. I don't worry about anyone being a better man than Me. Those
words you ment for yourself. Don't lay them off on me.
3. I never suffer loss of face. That's your department with all of
your unfounded and unproven accusations. If one of your
accusations is true then you are a traitor. Funny, you never
seem to be able to answer those questions.
4. I don't give a damn whether he used CMs or not, but it seems to
concern you a whole heep. I don't need a poster boy. I am timid
like a bengal tiger.
5. I have full faith in my statement. I can back up all of them. On
the other hand, You don't back up doodly sh%*#. All you want to
do is badmouth everyone with untruths. That's why you posts
carries no credibility.
6. Me re-applying !? You know this for a fact, do you? I have
always had more ambition than wanting to work for Gov.
7. My real life not competative?? That must be self application. For
you information, I'm a self-made millionaire gold miner. Am I
bragging? Hell yes because it took more hard, dirty work than
people like you, (whos only ambition is to work for the Gov.
looking at squigly lines, falsely calling people liars and turncoats)
could ever think about.
So babel on. I've got to get busy for a hard summers day making another million.
I'll relent and answer your lip flapping one more time.
1. How did I show fear saying he didn't owe an explanation to any
one? I fear God only.
2. I don't worry about anyone being a better man than Me. Those
words you ment for yourself. Don't lay them off on me.
3. I never suffer loss of face. That's your department with all of
your unfounded and unproven accusations. If one of your
accusations is true then you are a traitor. Funny, you never
seem to be able to answer those questions.
4. I don't give a damn whether he used CMs or not, but it seems to
concern you a whole heep. I don't need a poster boy. I am timid
like a bengal tiger.
5. I have full faith in my statement. I can back up all of them. On
the other hand, You don't back up doodly sh%*#. All you want to
do is badmouth everyone with untruths. That's why you posts
carries no credibility.
6. Me re-applying !? You know this for a fact, do you? I have
always had more ambition than wanting to work for Gov.
7. My real life not competative?? That must be self application. For
you information, I'm a self-made millionaire gold miner. Am I
bragging? Hell yes because it took more hard, dirty work than
people like you, (whos only ambition is to work for the Gov.
looking at squigly lines, falsely calling people liars and turncoats)
could ever think about.
So babel on. I've got to get busy for a hard summers day making another million.
Posted by TheNoLieGuy4U
- Mar 27, 2008, 03:23 PM Hi TwoBlock,
sniper5252
I think you can consider yourself employed because I read that agencies are so short handed that they lowered the hiring criteria.
Congratulations whether you used CMs or not and you do NOT owe an explanation to anyone.
Go make us a good cop.
I wonder what your fear is about Sniper5252 speaking to us all about how he got hired. He has anonimity, we don't know which agency, and all would benefit from knowing his experience. Maybe you considered that if he did it the honest way that he is a better man than many of the posters here (like maybe you too), and You and others like you would suffer a loss of face. However, if he claims countermeasures, then he would be a success story poster boy for you. So why the timidness ? Don't you have full faith in the advice you give here ? Also, why arnen't you yourself re-applying and using those wonderful CM's as the opportunities abound. Any new agency ou apply for only cares about their own Examiner's professional opinion, or maybe it is that you have faced that your real life story makes you not as competative as others, in which case some earlier examiner was right all along. Do Tell !!!
sniper5252
I think you can consider yourself employed because I read that agencies are so short handed that they lowered the hiring criteria.
Congratulations whether you used CMs or not and you do NOT owe an explanation to anyone.
Go make us a good cop.
I wonder what your fear is about Sniper5252 speaking to us all about how he got hired. He has anonimity, we don't know which agency, and all would benefit from knowing his experience. Maybe you considered that if he did it the honest way that he is a better man than many of the posters here (like maybe you too), and You and others like you would suffer a loss of face. However, if he claims countermeasures, then he would be a success story poster boy for you. So why the timidness ? Don't you have full faith in the advice you give here ? Also, why arnen't you yourself re-applying and using those wonderful CM's as the opportunities abound. Any new agency ou apply for only cares about their own Examiner's professional opinion, or maybe it is that you have faced that your real life story makes you not as competative as others, in which case some earlier examiner was right all along. Do Tell !!!
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Mar 27, 2008, 04:13 AMQuoteI fully understand what you're saying. I just repeated what I read (more than once) here on these boards. I didn't say that I believed it. At the time it was written, there was no mention of "conditional funding", just that there was such a shortage the hiring standards had been lowered indicating if you passed through you had the job.
It will be interesting to see what happens to funding if Obama or Billary get into the WH. If you remember, Bill cut the defense and intelligence budgets quite badly.
Posted by Twoblock
- Mar 27, 2008, 02:16 AMTC
I fully understand what you're saying. I just repeated what I read (more than once) here on these boards. I didn't say that I believed it. At the time it was written, there was no mention of "conditional funding", just that there was such a shortage the hiring standards had been lowered indicating if you passed through you had the job.
I fully understand what you're saying. I just repeated what I read (more than once) here on these boards. I didn't say that I believed it. At the time it was written, there was no mention of "conditional funding", just that there was such a shortage the hiring standards had been lowered indicating if you passed through you had the job.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Mar 26, 2008, 11:47 PMQuoteI think you can consider yourself employed because I read that agencies are so short handed that they lowered the hiring criteria.
Twoblock,
At the intelligence agencies, it doesn't matter how badly the "Ops" folks on the hiring committee want you, or how short they with people in the critical skills (arabic language...etc.). If you fail the poly, or the psych eval, you ain't gonna get hired.
And the poly folks don't generally give a hoot if you are hired. There have been many a "pissing contest" between ops and security over hiring. Trust me!
And if you disparage the test, and rip the chest straps off in frustration (like I did), they (poly types) will not want you hired. Such action is an insult to their pride and is like putting a "bullseye" on ones back. They'd probably take less offense if you insulted their mothers.
Just look at the high and mighty, and vindictive attitude exhibited by many of the polygophers on this BBS.
TC
Posted by Twoblock
- Mar 26, 2008, 08:20 PMSorry for the double post. Don't know how that happened since I clicked post only one time.
Posted by Twoblock
- Mar 26, 2008, 08:15 PMsniper5252
I think you can consider yourself employed because I read that agencies are so short handed that they lowered the hiring criteria.
Congratulations whether you used CMs or not and you do NOT owe an explanation to anyone.
Go make us a good cop.
I think you can consider yourself employed because I read that agencies are so short handed that they lowered the hiring criteria.
Congratulations whether you used CMs or not and you do NOT owe an explanation to anyone.
Go make us a good cop.
Posted by TheNoLieGuy4U
- Mar 26, 2008, 07:02 PM Hi Sniper5252,
You Passed !!! Good !!! Does this mean that you employed CM's or not to achieve that status ? Do you have a hiring date, or are you still in backgrounds ? What do you think was your most significant admission which needed the most consideration ?
I say all of the above because passing your test does not always equate to a new job. There are many who complete the process in a non-conditional offer of hire for which funding does not come through to actually hire them. OR were you on a Conditional Officer of hire wherein if you complete successfully all of the steps, you then have a seat in the academy (for Police Officers). ?
Please inform the readers of this messege board of the above.
THANKS !!!
You Passed !!! Good !!! Does this mean that you employed CM's or not to achieve that status ? Do you have a hiring date, or are you still in backgrounds ? What do you think was your most significant admission which needed the most consideration ?
I say all of the above because passing your test does not always equate to a new job. There are many who complete the process in a non-conditional offer of hire for which funding does not come through to actually hire them. OR were you on a Conditional Officer of hire wherein if you complete successfully all of the steps, you then have a seat in the academy (for Police Officers). ?
Please inform the readers of this messege board of the above.
THANKS !!!
Posted by notguilty1
- Mar 25, 2008, 07:25 PMPlease remind us what the story was. Congrats man!