Hi everyone, I am in the process of applying for employment where a Poly will be given. What if I were to be honest about past history. What are most organizations policy on such past occurrences? Would this disqualify me even though I was not being dishonest? Would countermeasures be a better way to go about it?
Thanks ???
TIMMY:
YOUR QUESTION NEEDS TO BE MUCH MORE SPECIFIC. WHAT PART OF YOUR HISTORY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? SOME THINGS ARE CONSIDERED FORGIVEABLE BY SOME DEPARTMENTS DEPENDING ON HOW LONG AGO, HOW MANY TIMES, ETC. OTHER DEPARTMENTS HAVE A ZERO TOLERANCE POLICY FOR CERTAIN CONDUCT. BUT AGAIN YOUR QUESTION IS TOO VAGUE TO ADEQUATELY RESPOND TO BY ANYONE ON THIS MESSAGE BOARD, IMHO.
Sorry for being so vague! Lets say drug use was pretty heavy as a teenager up to 19 including many types of drugs and the extent of use too great to count. Also the organization in question is the CIA. I am now 25 and was in the military, completely drug free for over 5 years however, I do know that the FBI for example has a 15 time use limit on Marijuana. Do all agencies have a cut off to which you are disqualified?
Thanks
If you are a recent or frequent user of illegal drugs, including marijuana, you need to know that CIA is a drug-free workplace.
Drug abuse is one of the common reasons a security clearance is denied to applicants.The Agency
uses the polygraph to check the veracity of information which bears upon the areas listed above. CIA's polygraph examiners are highly trained security professionals, among the world's best in their field. They work closely and carefully with applicants to ensure that the information upon which clearance decisions are based is as accurate as it can be and is guarded with the strictest confidence.
Make no mistake about it;
clearance processing can be lengthy. Depending on your specific circumstances, the process may take as little as two months or over a year. Since the Agency actively recruits people who have expert knowledge of foreign languages and cultures, it is not unusual for our applicants to have numerous foreign contacts. In these cases the investigation must cover more ground, which usually takes more time. Candor is critical to the timely completion of this process.
QuoteSorry for being so vague! Lets say drug use was pretty heavy as a teenager up to 19 including many types of drugs and the extent of use too great to count. Also the organization in question is the CIA. I am now 25 and was in the military, completely drug free for over 5 years however, I do know that the FBI for example has a 15 time use limit on Marijuana. Do all agencies have a cut off to which you are disqualified?
QuoteCIA's polygraph examiners are highly trained security professionals, among the world's best in their field.
The pseudoscientific field of polygraphy has not proven its ability to determine truth from deception with better than chance accuracy through peer-reviewed scientific research conducted under field conditions. CIA polygraphers may or may not be among the world's best in their field. Nonetheless, the field as a whole has failed to prove its competence when it comes to determining truth from deception.
Quote from: You have no chance on Mar 20, 2002, 12:02 AMIf you are a recent or frequent user of illegal drugs, including marijuana, you need to know that CIA is a drug-free workplace. Drug abuse is one of the common reasons a security clearance is denied to applicants.
This person is writing that while they have a checkered drug usage history, they have not taken drugs for 6 years.
QuoteThe Agency uses the polygraph to check the veracity of information which bears upon the areas listed above. CIA's polygraph examiners are highly trained security professionals, among the world's best in their field. They work closely and carefully with applicants to ensure that the information upon which clearance decisions are based is as accurate as it can be and is guarded with the strictest confidence.
'They work closely and carefully with applicants' is a gross mischaracterization of the polygraph interrogation process, in my opinion.
Being the world's best polygrapher is akin to being the world's best refuse collector. At the end of the day, no matter how well you did, it's still just garbage in, garbage out.
QuoteMake no mistake about it; clearance processing can be lengthy. Depending on your specific circumstances, the process may take as little as two months or over a year. Since the Agency actively recruits people who have expert knowledge of foreign languages and cultures, it is not unusual for our applicants to have numerous foreign contacts. In these cases the investigation must cover more ground, which usually takes more time. Candor is critical to the timely completion of this process.
The statements by others on this board would indicate candor has little if anything to do with how quickly one is accepted or rejected, and has little to do with whether or not one is deemed non-deceptive. Please note I am NOT advising people to be less than candid, I am merely making an observation as to what I have read about the application process and the uses & abuses of the polygraph in that process.
Rather than entrusting a candidate's career to the scribblings of a box, why not interview an applicant's peer group to help determine if said applicant is being forthright about his current drug usage? A urine and hair sample would also check the veracity of an applicant's assertion he hasn't recently used drugs to a point at least 3 years in the past.
The United States would not be in the HUMINT deficit in which it now wallows if the CIA did not rely on the pseudo-science of polygraphy.
Quote from: You have no chance on Mar 20, 2002, 12:02 AM
If you are a recent or frequent user of illegal drugs, including marijuana, you need to know that CIA is a drug-free workplace. Drug abuse is one of the common reasons a security clearance is denied to applicants.
...
The language of the message posted by "You have no chance" is borrowed directly from the CIA website:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/employment/before2.htm
If the CIA does have a cut-off limit for past drug use, it seems that it has chosen not to publicly disclose that limit.
I fully agree with beech trees that the CIA's public representation that its polygraphers "work closely and carefully with applicants" is a gross mischaracterization of the polygraph interrogation process. See my earlier post, CIA Hypocrisy (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=83.msg277#msg277) for related commentary, and see the accounts on the AntiPolygraph.org Personal Statements (http://antipolygraph.org/statements.shtml) page for examples of how CIA polygraph interrogators may "work closely and carefully with applicants."
QuoteA urine and hair sample would also check the veracity of an applicant's assertion he hasn't recently used drugs to a point at least 3 years in the past.
You're smokin' crack dude. 3 years in the past based on urine or hair. First off, the urine drug screening can be passed through some off the shelf masking agents bought at your local GNC.
Two, the hair sample would give you a reading from 3 years in the past if you hadn't had a haircut in nearly that long. If you have a military type haircut (about 2-3 inches in length), they can only test for a few months.
It doesn't really matter, the CIA will never accept someone that has used hard drugs for numerous years, even if it's been years since his last use. As soon as they find out about his past, they'll find a way to get rid of him.
Quote from: you have no chance on Mar 20, 2002, 06:51 AM
You're smokin' crack dude.
How pleasant. Welcome to the boards.
Quote3 years in the past based on urine or hair. First off, the urine drug screening can be passed through some off the shelf masking agents bought at your local GNC.
Masking agents are easily detected. While masking agents can ruin a urine sample and make the detection of drug metabolites impossible, the presence of the masking agents in and of themselves will cause a failure.
QuoteTwo, the hair sample would give you a reading from 3 years in the past if you hadn't had a haircut in nearly that long. If you have a military type haircut (about 2-3 inches in length), they can only test for a few months.
My understanding is a lot depends upon the rate of growth of one's hair. I'll be the first to admit I have no firsthand knowledge in this area.
QuoteIt doesn't really matter, the CIA will never accept someone that has used hard drugs for numerous years, even if it's been years since his last use. As soon as they find out about his past, they'll find a way to get rid of him.
Their perogative, I suppose.
Thanks for all the replies! Even you dont have a chance. I was just curious as to whether or not I should decline the COE since I was planning on being honest. It looks like I should.
For those of you not only interested in passing the polygraph, but also the drug test:
Passing a uring test is rather easy, even on short notice.
Drug byproducts are stored in various components of the body, and break down day by
day until all byproducts have been eliminated through wastes.
While a person may have smoked a joint the day before a test, it is still easy to beat the
drug test...here is how:
Firstly, go to the nutrition store and buy a small container of creatine. Take the creatine
starting a day or two before the test...a big spoonfull with each meal.
Start really loading the creatine the last 4 to 5 hours before the test.
Drug tests check for creatine levels in your urine to make sure it is not too diluted to be a
good sample, and by saturating yourself with creatine, you can assure yourself that you
will be realeasing creatinine, the chemical they are looking for, even with diluted urine.
Second, before the test (roughly three to four hours or more) eat a large meal which
contains a lot of fiber. Oatmeal is a great choice. The fiber will help redirect a lot of the
broken down metabolites into your stool, rather than going to your bladder.
About one and a half to two hours before the test, start drinking ANY type of beverage in
mass quantities. Water is fine, but natural cranberry juice does the trick greatly.
Also take a Multi-vitamin and a VITAMIN B. It is important to take the B vitamin to add
color to the urine. They look to see if the urine is too clear.
Keep drinking water or cranberry juice until you are really full of fluid.
Then start pissing.
Piss a lot...like you have never pissed before.
Make sure you go atleast four or five times, monitoring the shade of yellow your urine is
from the vitamin B.
Make sure you are still pissing yellow when you go to take the urine test.
Make sure you need to go your fourth or fifth time by the time you get to the test, and
then hold it.By this time, all the metabolites that your blood was carrying will be flushed, and what
little--if any--is left will be undetectable because it will be undetectable by their cutoff
standards...regardless of what their cutoff is.
In simple terms, there will be NO WAY IN HELL that there will be detectable amounts in
your urine (assuming you did the above, and made sure you went 5 or so times soon
before the test).
Now when they have you piss in the cup, start by pissing in the toilette for a few seconds,
then piss in the cup after already having pissed a while in the toilette, then make sure you
have filled the cup up enough, and finish your piss in the toilette. Trust me on
this....midstream piss is the cleanest.
What you will give them is a urine sample that is on one hand flushed and diluted beyond
drug metabolite detectablitity, and on the other, yellow enough to look undiluted,
containing creatine levels that are acceptable, and all the vitamins and minerals normally
found in piss due to the multivitamin and good meal you ate earlier in the day.
Trust me on this one...Im going to write a new book titled "The Piss behind the Drug
Detector"
Netnin ...
Why are you teaching people how to pass a drug test? Do many false positives occur in that area??? Exactly what type of people are you helping get into law enforcement? Past drug use is one thing, each agency has a cutoff for what you could have experimented with ... but if you can't pass a drug test now, that means you are still a user ... do you want someone like that protecting you? I don't.
"While a person may have smoked a joint the day before a test, it is still easy to beat the
drug test...here is how:..."
While most drugs are water soluble, pot is fat soluble and chronic users can keep it in their systems for over 30 days. Your "flushing" technique is also suspect. I have studied (all coutermeasures) and administered many drug screens. The only 100% method of passing drug screens is substitution (for drug users). Dilution will cause concern and lets face it, most of the people in this forum are pre-employment L.E. and do we really want our finest saving our lives on dope?
For "you have no chance", you are smoking crack if you think any potion from GNC or anywhere else will enable you to pass a drug screen. I have personally busted people that used these flush drinks. Get your facts right. If you are a CIA employee, then I fear the safety of our nation based on your statements.
Nope, I don't work for the CIA, but I have a friend that works at a GNC and she tells me that at the first of the month, she gets a lot of people that come in for the flush drink or gel or whatever it is. She also tells me that crack and cocaine users buy a product there that's used to mix in with the coke.
Needless to say, I'd have to say the flush drinks must work, because she says the same people come in every month to get the stuff for their mandatory pee tests.
Quote from: BEAR on Apr 06, 2002, 02:42 AM
"While a person may have smoked a joint the day before a test, it is still easy to beat the
drug test...here is how:..."
While most drugs are water soluble, pot is fat soluble and chronic users can keep it in their systems for over 30 days. Your "flushing" technique is also suspect. I have studied (all coutermeasures) and administered many drug screens. The only 100% method of passing drug screens is substitution (for drug users). Dilution will cause concern and lets face it, most of the people in this forum are pre-employment L.E. and do we really want our finest saving our lives on dope?
For "you have no chance", you are smoking crack if you think any potion from GNC or anywhere else will enable you to pass a drug screen. I have personally busted people that used these flush drinks. Get your facts right. If you are a CIA employee, then I fear the safety of our nation based on your statements.
BEAR:
I'm not sure if you have read my post thoroughly (about how to pass a drug test)....
If you did, you would have realized that I gave people directions on how to present a flushed (metabolite) urine sample that appears to be absolutely acceptable.
QuoteI have studied (all coutermeasures) and administered many drug screens. The only 100% method of passing drug screens is substitution (for drug users). Dilution will cause concern
Nonsense.
The key causes for concern (that would lead an examiner to believe that a person manipulated their specimen) are: Lack of color, low creatinine levels, and low vitamin/mineral concentrations.
Clearly, a person who hands over a specimen that looks like a glass of Polish Springs bottled water will be suspected of flushing their system, but I gave directions on how to give a specimen that is absolutely acceptable, passing in all of those areas.
BEAR...the fact is that drug screeners are (in most cases) dealing with a cup of someone's (a stranger) piss.
There are no rules that say,
"Don't drink excessive water in the morning before you come in for your urine sample"
"Don't take a multi-vitamin on the day of a urine test"
"Don't take any type of nutrition supplement on the day of a test"
The drug screeners accept this fact and realize that "all piss isn't created equal."
Unless a fool walks in there after drinking two gallons of straight water (and taking 13 bathroom breaks), there is slim to none chance of being accused of manipulating your urine sample.
[glb]End of Conversation[/glb] ;)
Netnin, I must begin by telling you I don't want to drag out a topic that shouldn't be addressed here and I don't want to get on your bad side ;), but I have personal experience with flushes. In the case of cocain, it can only stay in your body for 72 hours. Pot on the other hand is not that easy to mask or flush. I have a friend who is a pot head and he tried flush drinks three times and took a home test (which isn't as involved as the gas test used by spectrum labs and the like) and failed all three times. Additionally, I had a client who used cocain and tried the flush drink and failed, I was forced to take her children. There is no documented proof that flush drinks can alter, remove or otherwise "clean" your urine.
You are correct in producing an acceptable sample thru the use of creatine and B vitamins but once again creatine takes time for the body to absorb and one days notice will not suffice. I just want to make it clear that if someone's freedom (criminal matters) or job is at risk one should not follow flush techniques. One should not smoke at all. It's just not worth it. And for LE, I don't want any stoners serving and protecting me.
If this doesn't sit well with you lets just agree to disagree. :-/
BEAR
I have to admit that I like to talk as if I am an expert. I love being a smartass every now and then!
The fact is that I really don't know anything about beating a drug test other than what I learned from doing a small amount of research (when I thought I would be facing a drug test a couple years back).
I am now putting down my gun and throwing my hands up in the air...I believe you to be clearly the more knowledgeable in the area of drug tests.
And while I will have to agree with you that I wouldn't want a stoner or pot head protecting or serving me, I hope you would agree with me in the sense that I wouldn't care having someone protecting and serving me who takes a couple hits of weed once every so often on a day off...
Weed is a harmless drug when used in an unabusive fashion.
Netnintubooly,
Just one question to ponder......
Would you want police officers on your dept that smoked marijuana on a casual basis? Its bad enough that many of them are alcoholics, but pot heads and drunks....Just imagine a stoned police officer showing up to your house and they get paranoid.
Fred F. ;)
Fred:
I would have to reply with an "ABSOLUTELY NOT" in response to your following question:
QuoteWould you want police officers on your dept that smoked marijuana on a casual basis? Its bad enough that many of them are alcoholics, but pot heads and drunks....Just imagine a stoned police officer showing up to your house and they get paranoid.
What I believe to be absolutely acceptable, however, is the idea of police officers using marijuana on an
occassionalbasis. I expressed this exact opinion in my prior post:
QuoteI hope you would agree with me in the sense that I wouldn't care having someone protecting and serving me who takes a couple hits of weed once every so often [glb]on a day off...[/glb]
Not only did I suggest that occassional usage should be carried out on a day off--I even went as far as saying "a couple of hits," which is surely enough THC (without abusing) to produce a nice effect for the occassional user.
What does an "occassional basis" mean to me? Ohh...maybe once every two to three weeks. Anyone who has ever used marijuana on an occassional--or consistent--basis is clearly aware of how harmless occassional use is (and when I say harmless, I'm refering not only to one's physical health, but also one's mental health).
And just for argument's sake, let me leave you with the last figures I was presented with:
Alcohol is correlated with 60+% of all fatal car accidents, and with over 40% of violent crimes. Hundreds die each year from alcohol poisoning--a form of an overdose.
Cigarettes are responsible for over 100,000 deaths per year for users, and 40,000 deaths per year for second-hand smoke victims.
Marijuana has never led to an acute death (overdose) because it is not possible to overdose on THC, and, while it is clearly possible that long-term chronic users may run a higher risk of attaining lung cancer, there are no studies that show that occassional/moderate use leads to lung cancer.
You be the judge. I've already based my opinions on personal experience, observation, statistics, and most importantly: LOGIC. This country would be a hell of a lot better off if most people would do the same and not be led around like a bunch of blind sheep who need to ask how to wipe their asses.
Ohh wait...sheep don't wipe their asses.
Quote
You be the judge. I've already based my opinions on personal experience,
observation, statistics, and most importantly: LOGIC.
Netnintubooly,
Your logic is plausible and your defense of even more so. There are probably many Police Officers that may very well smoke marijuana occasionally as a stress reduction measure.
My beliefs are simple, Your are in a postion of
PUBLIC TRUST AND AUTHORITY and you take an oath to enforce the law fairly and with sound judgement. You can't violate the oath you take by using a
CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE.
I will say that I do advocate the use of marijuana for proven
MEDICAL uses such as the treatment of glaucoma, for cancer patients as an appetite enhancer and pain reliever, and for the control of spasticity
in spinal cord injury patients. Also, you don't see statistics for people who crashed their cars while stoned, but I can only wonder what they are.
Then again I am only one person with one opinion
Fred F. ;)
Fred:
Yes you are correct in the sense that it is hipocritical and wrong for an officer who takes an oath to then go against it and indulge in the occassional use of a controlled substance.
However, let us look at the facts:
1. The US Government grows marijuana that is intended for medical purposes...yet they are CLEARLY aware of the fact that a very significant portion of their yields end up in the hands of those who are sick in no way, shape, or form.
2. Other countries allow the legal selling and usage of marijuana...people can literally go to a bar and buy a specified and limited amount of grams per day.
3. The claim that marijuana is a serious"gateway" drug is purely nonsense. Any type of drug that creates a high--refered to as a "buzz"--is a potential gateway drug. Those who are prone to abuse will move up the ladder from any starting point. One who obtains a buzz from alcohol, develops a tolerance, and craves a higher high (and then turns to marijuana, then cocaine, then heroin) has used alcohol as a gateway drug...a DRUG that is legal.
4. There is no possibility of an overdose on THC, yet hundreds of people die each year from alcohol poisoning...a legal DRUG.
5. Increaslingly large numbers of people are turning their heads away from old conservative viewpoints and accepting the reality of a drug that is proven to be safe when used in moderation--even relatively safe when used on a frequent basis (barring abuse).
6. Marijuana is not--I repeat, NOT--a physically addictive drug. While psychological addiction is possible with those who are prone to it, Marijuana is actually a great drug to be used by those experiencing withdrawal symptoms as a result of quiting harder drugs such as heroin.
7. Increasingly larger numbers of states (as well as other countries) are making serious attempts to legalize medical marijuana and decriminalize illegal use.
While marijuana is currently classified as a controlled substance, attitudes are rapidly changing. As the old conservatives (fortunately) are dying off and being burried in their graves (don't let the coffin doors hit them on their way down), the reality of today's world is finally starting to break through to the more intelligent peoples of the US.
After being hired, I believe that an officer should do all that he or she can to enforce laws that are only TRULY necessary.
A guy blows a red light or hits his wife--clearly causes for punishment. On the other hand, a guy gets pulled over and the officer finds a few grams of weed in his ashtray--give the guy a break.
I am trying to become an officer so that I can at least say that I am out there trying to make a difference, and let people live their lives in peace and harmony when they are truly good people (within reason, of course). It is time for a change, and an old quote says "BE THE CHANGE THAT YOU WANT TO SEE IN THE WORLD."
I intend on doing exactly that.
netnin,
I agree with your position on the severity of weed. You're preaching to the choir on that issue.
Fred--pot and alcohol is a faulty analogy, apples and baseballs. Just because something is illegal doesn't mean it should carry the weight of all illegal activity. For example, any sexual position other than the missionary position is illegal in most states. This includes oral sex. Are you a criminal based on these laws? Pot does not have the same affect as alcohol or any other drug, including cigarettes. Yet it's still as illegal as oral sex. I do agree that we can't have stoned police officers, but I had rather have a cop who smoked weed on vacation than a drunk who is looking for his/her next drink. Please don't get angry with me, but lets think about priorities and where pot falls. Aren't you in LA anyway?
Hey finally someone who sees it the way I do!
I don't smoke anything funky but what people do on their own time
is nobodys business
Hey I gots a question for someone who may know what they're talkin' about
cuz I sure don't.
I came to this website to find out the accuracy of CVSA's. Some web sites
swear that they're 98.6% accurate and higher. Others say they're as
far fetched as astrology. I've read books and so on and I'm getting the same
mixed signals.
In my head.. I think if someone tells me it's ok to lie I'm not going to stress like
I would if I were lying and not wanting anyone to know. They base the sound
waves on a known lie, and compare them to the soundwaves of what they
think is a lie. That's what I was told at least.
This is partially for a school (college.. I'm 22) project I'm doing, and by coincidence here I am
about to have one done. Well it's possible that I could if I go through with
charges that I could press.
I'm going to be vague, but It's a he said she said case. They're going to
interview the suspect, and depending on his/her (I don't want to specify
gender or ANY specifics) response, they will make him/her take a CVSA test.
Then I will be asked to take one. I've pretty much been told that if I refuse
to take it then it will "show" that I'm lying, though I've physical evidence
"working in my favor" so to say.
This is NOT a murder case.. but here's an example the detective gave me.
They ask one irrelevant question before and after each question that they want
to know the real answer to.
They will tell you to lie about a color of a wall.
"Is this black wall really red?" I'm supposed to reply "yes"
ok that's my registered lie
"Did you kill Bob" I reply "no"
"Is your hair brown?" I reply "yes" (it really is brown) so that's my
registered truth.
Ok I mean HELL YEAH when you go from asking me what color the wall is
to asking me if I am the person responsible for Bob's death my heart's going to
race, my palms will sweat and so on. I know in my head I didn't kill Bob but I
also know that is a crucial question so I'm going to freak, regardless if I'm guilty
of murder or not.
According to the detective (with the accuracy rate I was told) that these
machines are about as accurate as paternity tests. Well paternity tests hold
up in court, so why don't CVSA's if they're so accurate?
I'm just scared to prosecute this person because the CVSA may not work out
in my favor. Here I am, a victim and I'm scared to prosecute because I'm
scared that I won't be believed. What's up with that? This asshole will run
free, and I'm left with the emotional baggage. I was also told that if I do
prosecute, the results of the CVSA will rely heavily on whether the prosecutor
throws the case out. All may (hopefully) work out ok. If they're not accurate
enough to hold up in court then why are they accurate enough to determine
if the case goes to court or not?
(Pardon any grammar errors, I became more furious as I wrote this and I
quit paying attention to grammar)
SOMEONE ENLIGHTEN ME!!!
Marci,
CVSA, like polygraphy, is a pseudoscientific fraud. It's sole utility is as an interrogation ploy to get admissions/confessions from naive and gullible persons who believe that these devices can actually detect lies (they can't).
For further reading on the pseudoscience of voice stress analysis, see Chapter 11 of David T. Lykken's book, A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector (2nd ed., Plenum Trade, 1998). Your college library is likely to have a copy.
I think it is highly irresponsible for your local law enforcement agency to base its investigation on such nonsense as CVSA "testing." You might want to talk to someone in your local government who has oversight responsibility for this department, or with an investigative reporter for a local newspaper. And, perhaps most importantly, you may wish to seek the counsel of a lawyer. (That the police are asking you to agree to submit to a CVSA "test" is a good indication that they suspect your allegation is false.)
Hi Marci,
Are you a suspect in a criminal investigation? Is the state weighing evidence to decide whether or not to bring charges against you? If that's the case, then the investigators are essentially asking you to come in, leave your Constitutional rights at the door, and subject yourself to a criminal interrogation where your tormentors are aided by the prop known as a CVSA. Don't do it.
If the state is weighing a complaint made by you against someone else, in which there is little else but your word, then George is right-- irresponsible and just bad police work. Can you hire a lawyer?
It sounds to me like marci is accusing someone of (date)rape and they are basing their decision to go further on the test. If this is the case marci make sure you speak with your victims assistance program to make sure you get justice, and remember the burden of proof is less in a civil court. If you don't get justice in the criminal courts then file in a civil court and take his money, car or whatever you can.
this is marci..
I just wrote a paragraph but I lost it I think. Here's another one:
I don't want to go with a civil suit. First of all he's poor and I couldn't get him
for a dime. I don't want to drag out payments and have this jerk in my life
anymore than I have to. I was only told that I would be asked to have a
CVSA test if he denys my accusations. Which he will.
I did talk to a lawyer, my hired lawyer and he said to take it if I'm asked
I have a friend in law enforcement. He has one of these machines. He said
that I could "try" his out. He told me that people like me (who stress out over
everything) fail these often. He says though they're 86% accruate. (?) I know
more than 14% of those who take these tests are big stressers. My detective
holds tight to the theory if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't stress.
How thick people's heads are!!! OK if you're asking me a question that I know
determines if the world thinks I'm a liar or not I'm going to stress. I don't
care if you're asking my shoe size or if I was a hitman in the Mafia. I'm going
to freak out just because I know, or THINK you can determine lies.
I agree. These are ploys to lure gullable, uneducated ignorant people to tell
the truth. It's like when I was a kid. My mother told me that my tongue turned
colors if I lied. When she knew I was lying she would say, "let me see your
tongue" and I would and she would tell me it was purple or green, and I would
break down and tell her the truth. Well as adults we know (well most of us)
that our tongue stays red no matter what, and now they have to advance
their scare tactic. "Ahhh I know.. lets say we can read thier sound waves!"
Unless you're in that field of study or work you don't know one squiggly line
from another and have to take what they tell you as gospel because you don't
know any better. Ok as I step off my soap box....
I ask everyones advice and when I do I rebuttle it all. I don't know what to
do and I told my investigator that by next Mon when he's back from vacation
I would have an answer.
There are no politicians to go to. Election time is coming up. They can't make
a stand now. The local newspaper is a big butt kisser. They don't put any bad
news about anything. They don't use names either. And to give you insight
on how our prosecutor likes to plea bargain, a local school principal admitted
to molesting two 12 yr olds. He got 30 days house arrest and 1 year probation.
He's never seen the inside of a jail house.
Maybe I should hire a PI to get dirt on this person and make them look bad??
Marci,
If you email me and tell me in what state/county you reside, I will research and post the laws governing victim's rights as well as cvsa/polygraph evidence.
Your investigator is wrong. In addition to having no basis in science, the results of a cvsa are not to my knowledge admissable as evidence in any court in the United States. Your lawyer is being derelict in recommending you take a cvsa.
4x4@cluestick.org
Beech Trees
Quote from: Netnintubooly on Apr 06, 2002, 11:04 PM
BEAR
I have to admit that I like to talk as if I am an expert. I love being a smartass every now and then!
Really? Do you think? Well, at least you're no longer in the denial phase...
AMM (Stands For "A Major Motherfu**er"):
Do me a favor and keep that fat mouth of yours shut.
If I wanted to hear assholes speak I would have eaten beans this morning.
Oh, so very, very clever. You really hurt me with that one. Im sorry; must have struck a raw nerve...just writing what everyone is thinking. Looks like you can dish it out, but, well you know the rest of the story since you obviously know (or admittedly pretend to know) everything else. Your mom must be proud...you never disappoint. How easy it is to push your little buttons; must be a self esteem issue...
AMM states:
Quotebut, well you know the rest of the story since you obviously know (or admittedly pretend to know) everything else
When have I ever claimed that I know everything? I have never once made such a statement, and have only consistently posted messages in a logical and factual manner.
My polygraph-based posts have used information directly learned from The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. If you believe that George Maschke and Gino are are "know-it-alls," then I suggest you take up an argument with them...not me.
My drug-related posts have been based solely on facts derived from professionaly-run studies. If you would like, you can argue with the entire professional world as well. I guess they are know-it-alls too...eyy?
QuoteHow easy it is to push your little buttons; must be a self esteem issue...
What an odd and contradicting statement! On one hand you boast about pushing my buttons, clearly a behavior of someone with a self-esteem problem (have you ever seen the classic bully in school who picks on kids because he or she feels like shit about themself?), and then you go on to tell me that I'm the one with a self-esteem issue. An equivelant statement would read, "Jesus Christ...how dare you say God's name in vain!"
Your initial lashing out at me--coupled with your comment claiming that I think I am a "know-it-all"--indicates that you have an underlying inferiority complex; this is the type of behavior people exhibit when they feel inferior...they try and suppress others who make them feel inadequate in a subconscious attempt to make themselves look (and feel) better (about themselves). Simple psychology.
Let me leave you with another contradictory stament you made:
QuoteI am just writing what everyone is thinking...you obviously know (or admittedly pretend to know) everything
Apparantly you're a mind-reader, as you know what everyone is thinking. Perhaps you, my friend, think that
you know everything...?
While it was my intention to "rest my case" on Ms. Netin's rationalization, since it is clear she can't take ANY criticism (playful or otherwise, and therein lies her self esteem "issues"), I found one comment from her significantly interesting:
"When have I ever claimed that I know everything? I have never once made such a statement, and have only consistently posted messages in a logical and factual manner."
I suppose included in those "logical and factual" posts would be the ones you fabricated to slander DUC748. What did the Administrator have to say about that on 3/1/02? Oh, yeah:
"Netnin, to send a profane private message and then falsely deny it reflects poorly on one's judgment and credibility, but to fabricate defamatory words and falsely attribute them to others is downright slanderous. Such behavior is unwelcome here. Please cease and desist."
Your posts and willingness to lie about them (and then rationalize those lies) speak volumes about your utter lack of character and credibility. (Maybe you have an excuse; maybe you were stoned when you wrote them.) With that, I will end my participation and cede the floor to Ms. Netin, since I KNOW she will insist on having the last word. Please, don't disappoint us...I know you will never, ever be able to resist.
Oh, and by the way, I have in fact received private messages agreeing with my position on your character and personality...
AMM:
In the present chain of posts that you are now examining (above), you will find the following support for my argument about the use of marijuana as a recreational drug.
Fred F. States:
QuoteNetnintubooly,
Your logic is plausible and your defense of even more so. There are probably many Police Officers that may very well smoke marijuana occasionally as a stress reduction measure.
Bear States:
Quotenetnin,
I agree with your position on the severity of weed. You're preaching to the choir on that issue.
Fred--pot and alcohol is a faulty analogy, apples and baseballs. Just because something is illegal doesn't mean it should carry the weight of all illegal activity. For example, any sexual position other than the missionary position is illegal in most states. This includes oral sex. Are you a criminal based on these laws? Pot does not have the same affect as alcohol or any other drug, including cigarettes. Yet it's still as illegal as oral sex. I do agree that we can't have stoned police officers, but I had rather have a cop who smoked weed on vacation than a drunk who is looking for his/her next drink. Please don't get angry with me, but lets think about priorities and where pot falls. Aren't you in LA anyway?
And Marci States:
QuoteHey finally someone who sees it the way I do!
You, AMM, state:
QuoteOh, and by the way, I have in fact received private messages agreeing with my position on your character and personality...
What would I rather receive: 1.Support made publicly by those who want to stand up and let their voices be heard in unison? or 2.Support from individuals who want their opinions expressed in privacy (for whatever reason, including fear of rejection from the whole?)
Hmm...I think I like the former.
As for your comments about the game-playing that I can't help myself from indulging in every now and then, I have always made it clear that I am the type of person who enjoys posted verbal-wars and silly arguments/battles.
Regarding my battle with Duc748, I apologized and, as I have done many other times, brought to everyones attention how much I truly love controversy, playing games, and arguing (to no end, as in this case) until there isn't anything left to argue about.
QuoteI would like to take this opportunity to apologize to Duc, and to all those who I have misled. I am simply a sicko who thrives in the light of controversy.
Upon recognition of Duc748's strong character, competitive nature, and strong will, I found him to be an easy target for a posted verbal war...something I tend to get off on.
I clarified my love for chaos in this chain of posts as well:
Quote
I have to admit that I like to talk as if I am an expert. I love being a smartass every now and then!
The fact is that I really don't know anything about beating a drug test other than what I learned from doing a small amount of research (when I thought I would be facing a drug test a couple years back).
Anyone who has taken any time to read my prior posts will know what they are getting themselves into when they partake in a dialogue with me; this includes you AMM.
You are just one more of the many who have been sucked in by my ability to verbally manipulate people into feeding (me and) my love for chaos. Let me ask you (and leave you with) a question:
Who (or what) is at fault in the following situation?
The fire that burns the person? or,
The person who plays with fire and gets burned?
You, my friend, have been burned....
Sucker.....
netnin,
please do not use my quote as support for your argument. Indeed I have that view but I must say that I had this view before you (even if it wasn't made public in this forum) so in all actuality you are supporting my argument. ;)
As for your notion that you are sucking people into your chaos, believe it or not some may be trying to educate you not argue as I was with the lesson on "flushing".
And as for the fire you speak of, I think maybe you are getting a little too close to that fire when you use it to fire up your joint. :-*
BEAR:
What's with the incoherent gibbrish ramblings that seem to be falling from your brain to your fingertips?
QuoteIndeed I have that view but I must say that I had this view before you (even if it wasn't made public in this forum) so in all actuality you are supporting my argument
God forbid you are as articulate in spoken word as you are in typed script...you sound like a second-grader trying your hardest to pass your first grammar quiz (and let me tell you...if that was the case, you would surely fail with a capital F!)!
Quotenetnin,
please do not use my quote as support for your argument.
Too late...done deal. ;)
QuoteIndeed I have that view but I must say that I had this view before you (even if it wasn't made public in this forum) so in all actuality you are supporting my argument
Correction hun...I used your agreement as a form of support for
my argument. Had you been the one to start the discussion on marijuana use, and had I been the one to agree with your position, then you could claim that I supported your argument.
If you didn't want to support my argument in any way, then you should have never agreed with me...rather, you should have disagreed with me.
Too late...done deal again. ;)
QuoteAs for your notion that you are sucking people into your chaos, believe it or not some may be trying to educate you not argue as I was with the lesson on "flushing".
When did I ever doubt that some people have tried to educate me? I even went as far as saying that you were the authority on the topic of "flushing":
QuoteI am now putting down my gun and throwing my hands up in the air...I believe you to be clearly the more knowledgeable in the area of drug tests.
QuoteAnd as for the fire you speak of, I think maybe you are getting a little too close to that fire when you use it to fire up your joint
I don't smoke pot...why would fire be needed to light up something that isn't there?
For God's sake, could either you or AMM please come up with one solid argument--written in proper English--for me to ponder? Your tag-team partnership with AMM only proves that you are both worthy of one connected title:
DUMB AND DUMBER!
Gentlemen,
This discussion, although fruitful, is not exactly appropriate on this thread.
Would one of you be so kind as to create a marijuana pro/con thread on one of the other forums. Either the off-topic posts or police (non-polygraph related) forums would be appropriate.
Once again, this discussion is certainly welcome on the message board. If we can, we like to keep things organized to make it easier for newcomers to the board to follow things.
Best,
My apologies to Gino and everyone else who had to read all that. At least I didn't apply countermeasures to irrelevant questions, not bad for a second grade education. I guess that makes me dumb and you simply dumber.
And on the fourth day God created the "What Will Make You Fail" chain of posts that soon got out of hand...and on the the fifth day He destroyed it!
-Graphesis
This concludes the marijuana battle. I would think it safe for me to say that the opinions are out on the table, and that nothing further needs to be said.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those who participated in the "420" discussion. This was a fun one!
[glb]Keep TOKEN![/glb]
To: Netinyahoo
From: An unbiased observer
What a lame attempt to turn the tables on AMM. You are the sucker. AMM predicted that you couldn't resist, and true to form, you responded with a rambling rationalization for your lack of character. You would rather die then let someone else have the last word.
You also tried to bolster your position (in a very pathetic attempt, I might add) by extrapolating Bear's agreement with you on a very narrow issue (marijuana) into support for you personally. Incredibly, you then proceeded to flame him when he asked that you not use his quote as support for your argument. I'm just glad that someone else noticed your pathetic post where you confessed to using countermeasures on an irrelevant. Just how stupid are you? Wake up and smell the irony!!!! Here's a person with chronic diarrhea of the mouth and delusions of grandeur that is so dumb they couldn't tell an irrelevant from a control or relevant. You obviously spend more time running off at the mouth than actually reading what's on this website. When I see your posts, I am reminded of an old saying: "Life's tough...but it's tougher when you're stupid!"
I can only imagine what your reply will be as you surely will have one! I rarely wish ill will on anyone, but you are most deserving of it. We see you for what you are: a lying sack who should never be placed in a position of trust.
Well good morning, good afternoon, and if I don't see you, good evening to you too Voyeur!
So nice to see that you have been sucked in by my verbal manipulation as well.
In case you don't realize it, my verbal manipulation comes in the form of dialogue that forces--yes, FORCES--those who read it to add their two cents. People just feel, as in your case, that they can't walk away with feeding the inferno of chaos that I create.
QuoteWhat a lame attempt to turn the tables on AMM. You are the sucker. AMM predicted that you couldn't resist, and true to form, you responded with a rambling rationalization for your lack of character. You would rather die then let someone else have the last word.
Let me set you straight...you seem to be missing the point:
I had drawn all these suckers into adding their commentary to my initial post. I started this whole string of "marijuana" messages with the initial post I presented on how to pass the drug test. I knew that it would serve as a controversial topic, and considering even you had to ramble off your mouth, I was surely correct.
As I said before,
QuoteAnyone who has taken any time to read my prior posts will know what they are getting themselves into when they partake in a dialogue with me
It was clear from the start that I would always want to have the last word. AMM didn't predict anything...she was well aware of the fact that I would feel obligated to respond.
How can something that is known be predicted? You have made it clear that you are not a person of logic.
QuoteFor God's sake, could either you or AMM please come up with one solid argument--written in proper English--for me to ponder? Your tag-team partnership with AMM only proves that you are both worthy of one connected title:
DUMB AND DUMBER!
I stand corrected...
Throwing you into the scenerio yields a connected title of
"Dumb, Dumber, and Dumbest"
My game plays like this: I throw a controversial topic/post into play, and whenever anyone makes any type of response, I consider it a victory for me.
A response from anyone (to my initial post) is representative of the fact that I was successfully able to verbally manipulate them (and draw them in) into feeding my love for chaos.
You are totally illogical and unaware of reality if you claim that anyone has made me the sucker. I am winning at my game, and will only lose when someone allows me to give the last word without them (being verbally manipulated into being forced to have to respond) feeling obligated to respond yet again.
Hence, a response from you to this post yields a victory for me, while no response yields a loss for me (and a victory for all others who have responded to my post).
I have just told you how to beat me at my own game...do you still feel obligated to respond again(?), even though doing so will just prove that I am the king of manipulation?
QuoteWake up and smell the irony!!!! Here's a person with chronic diarrhea of the mouth and delusions of grandeur that is so dumb they couldn't tell an irrelevant from a control or relevant
Let me correct you yet again...
The reason I used countermeasures on irrelevant questions was because the examiner used disguised control questions. As soon as I was aware of that fact, I used countermeasures correctly on only the control questions.
Let me ask you: Do you have the balls to walk in to a polygraph agency with a tack in your shoe placed strategically so that you could walk absolutely normal, yet be able to use it during the exam? Probably not...
I was able to do it two times now because as I said, I am the king of manipulation.
Go ahead...give me another victory. Let's hear what you have to say now.
"...I have just told you how to beat me at my own game...do you still feel obligated to respond again(?), even though doing so will just prove that I am the king of manipulation?
...I was able to do it two times now because as I said, I am the king of manipulation..."
So what is it king or queen?
You seem to have an identity crises.
Quote"...I have just told you how to beat me at my own game...do you still feel obligated to respond again(?), even though doing so will just prove that I am the king of manipulation?
...I was able to do it two times now because as I said, I am the king of manipulation..."
So what is it king or queen?
You seem to have an identity crises.
Just couldn't resist Lay...could you?
QuoteIn case you don't realize it, my verbal manipulation comes in the form of dialogue that forces--yes, FORCES--those who read it to add their two cents. People just feel, as in your case, that they can't walk away with feeding the inferno of chaos that I create.
My game plays like this: I throw a controversial topic/post into play, and whenever anyone makes any type of response, I consider it a victory for me.
A response from anyone (to my initial post) is representative of the fact that I was successfully able to verbally manipulate them (and draw them in) into feeding my love for chaos.
Thanks for keeping the game alive, and letting me put another notch on the post.
PS: Something tells me that one of you out there keeps altering your identity. Some of the above posts are by the same person, but posted under different names.
Just to let everyone know...
I was correct in my hunch that someone was altering their identity.
I just received the following private message from Bear (and no, this one isn't fabricated like the one I made up for DUC748...George or Gino can verify this for you):
QuoteBEAR
New User
Posts: 12
(No subject) on: 04/12/02 at 00:39:42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ok you busted me on the lay thing but only because you never answered my IM's.
you really threw me a curve ball with your IM saying you were a male, and once again you have won with baiting me into more responses.
I am assuring you that I only posted the one message.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And since BEAR didn't want to publicly post her response, I found it necessary to publicly display BEAR's private message because it serves to show--yet again--that I am still the king of manipulation.
She couldn't resist responding, but she was afraid to respond publicly because she knew it would demonstrate her falling further into my game.
Bad bad naughty girl! "Ohh the web we weave when we deceive." The truth has been set free.
Who is up to bat next?
And BEAR responds yet again!
In another private message, BEAR states:
Quote(04/12/02 at 12:08:25) BEAR has sent you the following Instant Message:
->*<-
Ok so why are you calling me a female?
And the only reason I sent you the IM is because you were asking me where I lived and what I looked like, I see you failed to mention that.
BEAR seems to be falling further and further into my vicious cycle of manipulation...kind of like an alcoholic that steadily falls further into drinking more and more quantity--only to continuously rationalize why he or she is doing so.
BEAR also stated:
QuoteI too laugh when I see the people who simply can't resist and try to take a stab at you.
Funny that she is the one who can't resist, yet laughs at others for doing the same thing...seems to me that she is in a clear state of denial.
Every word a planned move...
I won't recognize or qualify you by mentioning names but, those who are posting unrelated polygraph crap, please refrain. This is an antipolygraph site. Not a personal power site. You are showing great disrespect to George, Gino and others who are interested in the stated purpose. Fodors.com is a good site to vent your adolescent tripe.
And No I will not respond to any replies to this post. If I did I would be childish.
Before some wisecrack, I ment to say "crap unrelated to the polygraph"
Well said TwoBlock.
QuoteAnd No I will not respond to any replies to this post. If I did I would be childish
While your initial post does not prove you childish, it does prove you to be oblivious.
When are the people that have been following this chain of posts going to realize that I will not post any further messages if I don't receive any reactions?
It is so damn simple...the only reason I am responding again is because twoblock had to add
yet anothercomment.
It appears as though BEAR, AMM, and others who have taken part in this "battle of power," as twoblock calls it, have realized that the way to win this game is
to not respond at all, thus beating me at my own game by not allowing me to respond to anything further.But of course, just when things seemed to die down, twoblock had to throw in his two cents which were not needed.
This game is similar to when a child (me) throws a temper-tantrum when he or she doesn't get his or her way. As long as the parent continues to give in and crumble under the influence of the child's behavior, the child will continue to throw a fit when he or she wants something.
A smart parent, however, will realize that the way to correct this child's behavior is by giving the child no reaction (not giving in) when he or she throws a fit.
This game--regardless of how childish it is--proves one thing:
People just can't help themselves. Plain and simple.
QuoteIn case you don't realize it, my verbal manipulation comes in the form of dialogue that forces--yes, FORCES--those who read it to add their two cents. People just feel, as in your case, that they can't walk away with feeding the inferno of chaos that I create.
It is each individual's job out there to show some restraint and prove my above assertion wrong.
Any individual who responds will surely ruin it for the whole, and will show further disrespect for the founders of this site.
The very reason I use IM is because I too feel this conversation is not worthy of the board.
And for the record the only reason I was asking netnin what its gender was is because she or he is using this site as a dating service. She or he wrote me a IM asking where I lived and what I looked like. Then "it" wrote "you know I'm a male".
I obviously offended "it" by asking why it mattered what I looked like.
Since then I tried to keep that conversation off the message board to spare all of the others and that is the reason I sent IMs.
Now Netnin, I'm a male, I'm not gay, I'm not interested in knowning any more than I do (and even that is too much).
Get a job so you can have your operation to make you whatever gender you want to be.
If I were falling into your cycle then I wouldn't have used IMs I would have continued on the board. You may think you are winning some great game but the thing is, you are only playing with yourself. Like everyone else I came to this forum to learn about polygraphs, something which I achieved based on the passsing of my first test. Maybe you should do the same. Shut up and learn. Only offer information that can help others. I would also offer a word of advice, if socialization is what you need, then try some chat rooms for people with shared interest, and Paxil.
And because of your previous frabication of IMs, at this point, noone knows if you are being honest with any of your quotes no matter what you claim and furthermore they just don't care. please give us all one more post to show your ass.
QuoteQuote:And No I will not respond to any replies to this post. If I did I would be childish
While your initial post does not prove you childish, it does prove you to be oblivious.
When are the people that have been following this chain of posts going to realize that I will not post any further messages if I don't receive any reactions?
It is so damn simple...the only reason I am responding again is because twoblock had to add yet anothercomment.
It appears as though BEAR, AMM, and others who have taken part in this "battle of power," as twoblock calls it, have realized that the way to win this game is to not respond at all, thus beating me at my own game by not allowing me to respond to anything further.
But of course, just when things seemed to die down, twoblock had to throw in his two cents which were not needed.
This game is similar to when a child (me) throws a temper-tantrum when he or she doesn't get his or her way. As long as the parent continues to give in and crumble under the influence of the child's behavior, the child will continue to throw a fit when he or she wants something.
A smart parent, however, will realize that the way to correct this child's behavior is by giving the child no reaction (not giving in) when he or she throws a fit.
This game--regardless of how childish it is--proves one thing:
People just can't help themselves. Plain and simple.
Quote:In case you don't realize it, my verbal manipulation comes in the form of dialogue that forces--yes, FORCES--those who read it to add their two cents. People just feel, as in your case, that they can't walk away with feeding the inferno of chaos that I create.
It is each individual's job out there to show some restraint and prove my above assertion wrong.
Any individual who responds will surely ruin it for the whole, and will show further disrespect for the founders of this site.
AND ONCE AGAIN...ANOTHER MEMBER OF THIS SITE CANNOT RESIST ADDING ANOTHER RESPONSE, THUS FORCING ME TO POST AGAIN.
Netnin,
To the extent that you have anything to contribute to the discussion of polygraphy and polygraph policy your participation is welcome here. But puerile antics contribute nothing to this discussion and are not welcome. Please cease and desist.
OK...
This BS is going to stop from here on out.
Some people--mainly myself--got too caught up in a rediculous "mind game." It is clear that this site is not a place for such conduct.
Moreover, I think such childish games reflect poorly on the professionalism of this site. This site serves to educate and enlighten those who have been falsely misled into believing that the polygraph is a reliable "science."
I owe more respect than I have shown to George and Gino...they have helped me indefinitely in coming closer in my attempt to enter a career in law enforcement.
I offer a sincere apology...
I am truly sorry. Sometimes my alter ego gets the better of me.
Come on people.. let's all be nice here!!! Golly gee cats and dogs I tell ya.. Speaking of cats a pregnant cat came to my door tonight (where I work,.. I work the graveyard shift) I fed her TacoBell and she went away. Anyway that's besides the point.
This is somewhat related to what you guys were arguing about. I work in an office, where there is no physical work whatsoever. We're subject to random drug testing. Every six weeks we have a staff meeting and someone's name is drawn. There are about 20 of us that work here. I don't understand it but it's done regardless. One person has been fired because she failed it, though it didn't harm the way she was doing her job. Anyway first of all there's a fat loophole. Ok the drug tests are every six weeks. That gives everyone two free weeks to get toasted and come up clean for the drug test. I don't do anything illegal, I have a baby and I'm not about to jeapordize my childs well being for any reason, let alone an illegal recreational reason. I believe marijuana should be legalized. I am going to use the cop out everyone else uses. When you're drunk as hell you can't drive, you puke all over the place if you eat anything (burritos especially) you wake up sick, you can die from alcohol poisioning, many people have gone to bed with hot people when they're drunk just to wake up next to a freak. Now what happens when you're high? Who dies of a weed overdose? Who has gone to bed with a hot person high?? Well at least they wake up and they're still hot and not butt ass ugly. You don't ralph up your weed, you don't have weed hangovers, and I would rather be on the road with a bunch of stoners than drunks. All you do when you're stoned is drive 8mph instead of 30, and you frantically look for the nearest VP because your yearning for some Kristy Kreams is something fierce. I have smoked my fair share of weed and drank my fair share of alcohol, I'm 22 and I have a nice paralegal job lined up for me come this summer, I have an associates degree in paralegal, and I am working on a bachelors, majoring in English (ya I know you can't tell.. all of my paragraphs run in to one SUPERPARAGRAPH) my point isn't to make my head any bigger than it is already it's to point out that I am successful, and I have done recreational drugs. People like to blame drugs when someones life goes bad. That's a cop out. I did them and I had the maturity to stop when I had enough and to keep my priorities in line. I know I'm waaaaaaay off the subject but that's my two pennies worth. anyone who has read my other messages.. I took the "test" CVSA test to see if I could pass and I couldn't so I'm not pressing charges because I can't pass a damned lie detector test. CROCK OF SHIT but that's my opinion. It's a mans world and we women simply have to exist smile, wear our short skirts to look sexy and hopefully land us a successful husband so we can get somewhere other than paralegal.. that is unless someone wants to pay my tution to law school..?? ANYONE???
DIDN'T THINK SO!! I guess it's still low cut tight sexy shirts and short skirts and 6 inch heels for me to get anywhere in this mans world! Perhaps if I were a stripper??? I just conquered three subjects. Damn I'm good!
TOODLES
Note: this message has been edited for ease of reading; hard returns at the end of each line were removed. -- AntiPolygraph.org Administrator
Once again, the marijuana topic is certainly relevant in any forum where law enforcement (and especially law enforcement hiring) is discussed. We just like to keep things organized so those late in joining the discussion can catch up.
Someone please make a marijuana related thread in the off-topic or police (non-polygraph related) forum...
George, this website is only to help those who are victimised by poly. care to explain why people are using it to teach others to pass a dope test. a self-confessed and heavy dope user. don't blame this one on poly cos he confessed voluntarily without anyone even asking him to. First, LAPD waz blamed for hiring someone with records. Now, folks are teaching somebody with dope record how to beat the dope test and join CIA. No wonder there's so much problem in your country. People can't decide what they want. Is that what democracy is all about?
QuoteGeorge, this website is only to help those who are victimised by poly. care to explain why people are using it to teach others to pass a dope test.
Semen Gary:
Don't blame George or Gino for my mistake. I made the error of bringing up and continuing a chain of posts on a topic that should have never been discussed on this message board.
Moreover, if you would have paid more careful attention to the above chain of posts, you would have noticed that George and Gino pleaded with me to take this topic elsewhere.
I eventually came to my senses and brought an end to the irrelevant topic of passing a drug test, and also brought an end to the games I was playing. I SPECIFICALLY did so because I thought it reflected poorly on the professionalism George and Gino have maintained on this website.
Also, where do you see anything about teaching a person with a dope "record" how to beat the drug test in attempting to get a job with the CIA...?
QuoteNow, folks are teaching somebody with dope record how to beat the dope test and join CIA
Judging from your grasp of the English language, it is easy to understand how you became confused.
As for your comment about America, the fact that nearly every country in the world is striving to become more and more like us is evidence enough of our greatness. I'll bet wherever you are, whatever country your residing in, you can walk out onto the street you live on and find a Mcdonalds within 15 minutes.