Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Attachments: (Clear attachments)
Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB
Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached
Click or drag files here to attach them.
(Clear attachments)
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
What is 10 minus 4? (numeral):
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by T.M. Cullen
 - Aug 24, 2010, 10:45 PM
He probably was subjected to polygraph screening.  If so, maybe he just had an inexperienced polygraph operator.  False  negatives do occur, but are EXTREMELY rare!   ;D

TC, back from the dead
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Jul 28, 2010, 08:53 AM
I expect that there will be a push from polygraph proponents within the Department of Defense for expanded polygraph screening. Especially if PFC Bradley Manning, the intelligence analyst suspected of providing the documents to WikiLeaks, was not subject to periodic polygraph screening.
Posted by Why_Try
 - Jul 28, 2010, 08:03 AM
Do you think there will be a knee jerk reaction for the world of polygraph from the recent leaked documents?