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:
Type the last letter of the word, "America.":
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by triple x
 - Apr 29, 2003, 10:03 PM
Chris,

I completely agree with your position on this issue 100%.

However; unlike yourself, I cannot openly acknowledge my personal interest, support and afflation with Antipolygraph.org in similar fashion due to the significant risk of adverse consequences. Within my line of work with the Defense Dept; {DoD} we provide diverse levels of classified mission support to various federal agencies to include various branches of the US Military.

Openly identifying myself publicly on this website, and/or any other for that matter, would result unfavorably [at best] with respect to my career.

I feel confidant that the same concern is shared by other registered members on this board to include a number of Federal/State/County polygraphers; whom so eloquently enlighten and entertain us.



Respectfully,
triple x



Posted by steincj
 - Apr 29, 2003, 01:32 AM
Quote from: Fed1 on Apr 27, 2003, 01:12 AMMore advice from annonymous idiots - all citing George's grade school report on polys.   Well, at least it's free!!! ::)

I love when we are all blamed for trying to help others with information we "know" will only hurt them, and then hide with our anonymity.  When will you guys give up this pathetic argument?

I bet my username of "steincj" will throw Fed1 for a loop.  If he puts 2 and 2 together, he would see that I am the same person as "CPT Christopher J. Stein" on the Personal Statements page.

That level of inference might be a little much for Fed1 to handle, so, Fed1, I'm still posting with anonymity, so continue your little tantrum.  

And of course, I can call you a hypocrite as well, because you aren't even registered, let alone using your own name.  Unless your mom was really mean and DID name you "Fed1."  Too bad she didn't have the foresight to name you FedZero.

Chris

a.k.a

CPT Christopher J. Stein

a.ka.

steincj

PS -- posting without anonymity has caused me grief with the FBI.  I guess they aren't aware of this thing known as the "First Amendment."  But hell, to them I am a spy, so they just expect me to give out information that I'm not supposed to.  
Posted by triple x
 - Apr 27, 2003, 01:18 PM
Fed1,    
    
You wrote:    
QuoteMore advice from annonymous idiots - all citing George's grade school report on polys.   Well, at least it's free!!!
 
1) Anonymous is spelled with one "n", not two.    
2) George's "grade school report" is accurate, ethical, and not misleading, unlike polygraph testing. Please point out any error's you may have noted.    
3) "TLBTLD" is free. Unlike most things this day and age; and your point is...??    
    
With respect to your remark about "advise from anonymous idiots"... it appears that you Fed1, are too an anonymous idiot; and seemingly, the biggest idiot of them all...
    
Perhaps a name change would be the appropriate thing for you to do at this juncture.
    
I suggest: Fed1, "Lord of all Idiots"    
    
    
triple x    
Posted by orolan
 - Apr 27, 2003, 12:14 PM
Fed1,
Anonymous?? We are all registered, with valid e-mail addresses. And guess what! We can SPELL.
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Apr 27, 2003, 01:43 AM
Fed1,

Could you explain why any of the advice given above should be disregarded? As for The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, if there is anything in it that you believe to be untrue or misleading, why not explain?
Posted by Fed1
 - Apr 27, 2003, 01:12 AM
More advice from annonymous idiots - all citing George's grade school report on polys.   Well, at least it's free!!! ::)
Posted by Fred F.
 - Apr 25, 2003, 11:05 PM
Quote from: Ally on Apr 25, 2003, 03:43 AMI have taken a poly for LAPD and past. Just completed one at LVMPD and failed. I have never ever taken any drugs in my life. Not even tried smoking. They failed me because they believed I was lying about my drug use.  

Ally,

Congratulations on passing your LAPD polygraph. You are in an elite group of people.

The biggest issue that I see coming out of this is LAPD finding out that the LVMPD poly found you deceptive. I am assuming that you disclosed this information on your PHQ with each dept. If you didn't and LAPD discovers you failed the LV poly, you may get DQ'ed from LAPD processing for not disclosing information on your processing with LVMPD.

You should download and read The Lie Behind The Lie Detector. The wealth of information that the book provides will be invaluable to you if the worst case scenario does occur and you are found "deceptive". It will also give you insight to the pseudoscience of polygraphy and how you can better prepare yourself by knowing how polygraphy works.

Good Luck and GET EDUCATED......KNOWLEDGE IS POWER!!


Fred F. ;)
Posted by orolan
 - Apr 25, 2003, 12:19 PM
Ally,
Welcome to the world of polygraph victims. I think you should let the background investigator know you believe you are the victim of a "false-positive" regarding drug usage and challenge him/her to find any evidence to the contrary.