Melissa Boyle Mahle on CIA Polygraph Policy

[alterego1]

George, why did you [sic] the word "censored" in that quote, if it is spelled correctly and used in the correct context?

[meangino]

Alterego one, the (sic) annotation is correct.  

The verb to censor means "to examine and expurgate."  The verb to censure means "to criticize severely; blame."

The writer should have used "censured."  

George is one of the best writers I've read.   He hardly ever makes writing and grammatical errors.  Besides my distrust of polygraphs the second reason I like to view this site is to read George's superb writing.

Why do you insist on trying to call him down?  Are you a polygrapher?  

[alterego1]

Why do you insist on trying to call him down?  Are you a polygrapher?  

Wasn't trying to call him down......I just had never heard the term "censured" before, so I stand corrected.  I'm a fan of grammar and spelling myself, so i'm always trying to learn something or call out someone's mistakes.  It's nothing personal against the people I call out (nor am I trying to embarass them).  After all, George states that "real Americans question authority."

[Drew Richardson]

Meangino,

You write in part:

...George is one of the best writers I've read.   He hardly ever makes writing and grammatical errors.  Besides my distrust of polygraphs the second reason I like to view this site is to read George's superb writing....

Dr. Maschke is a Ph.D. linguist.  That which you and many others have observed regarding his writing skills should come as no surprise to any.  I am glad to know him and value both his broad knowledge of matters concerning polygraphy and his unsurpassed articulate manner of sharing such with others on this board and elsewhere.  None of his detractors and/or opponents individually or in concert is any match for him, but it is most entertaining to see subsequent would-be champions come forth.

[alterego1]

None of his detractors and/or opponents individually or in concert is any match for him, but it is most entertaining to see subsequent would-be champions come forth.

Good job on knowing that the word "none" is always singular, regardless if the words in the prepositional phrase following it are plural.  Many mere mortals would have been tempted to state "None of his detractors are any match for him."  You definitely get an "A+" for the day.

By the way Dr. Drew, I love that call in show that you do with Adam Carolla on Comedy Central.  You guys are great!

[meangino]

Dr. Richardson:

I'm not surprised George is a Ph.D linguist.  I've known and worked with several excellent writers in my day; his writing as good as any of theirs.

[T.M. Cullen]

"You mean to say that not one single one of these people SAID anything during or after the polygraph process that might have POSSIBLY led to their disqualification?"

You hit the nail right on the head Nonobre.

The key is never, never, ever admit to anything during the polygraph.  Even is they test you for three days and jump up and down on their desk screaming.

If they insist the machine is showing deception or untruthfulness make them explain the scientific basis for such a conclusion.

Last thing one should do is answer a lot of open ended questions with a lot of jabbering and discourse.  That's what you want them to do.  Am I right?

Go in there with the attitude that you can take the job or leave it.  If you get it, great.  If not, well, then I'll try the private sector.  But at any rate, mr. polygrapher, I'm not going to sit here and lie (i.e. admit to something I have not done) just because your blood pressure machine says I'm getting flustered!  That would be RIDICULOUS!

What they want is for you to burst into tears because if you don't get the job, your life will end.  

[xenonman]

George,

Mellisa states that  approximately 75 percent of applicants are denied clearances by the CIA because of the polygraph. But she is quoating a study from back in 1979. Is it still the case now?

Opp

Actually, what she writes in her book is that in 1979, 75% of CIA and NSA security clearance denials were based on polygraph results, not that nearly 75% of CIA applicants are/were rejected on the basis of polygraph results, as Gabriel Schoenfeld reported in a March 2005 Commentary magazine article titled, "What Became of the CIA?"

What Mahle writes is that in 2001, some two-thirds of CIA applicants for whom security clearances were requested did not receive them, and that the "vast majority were rejected on the basis of the polygraph."

:-XAll aspects of the Agency's background investigation policies are wholly fucked up.   I was denied employment by the Agency because I was unlucky enough to have had various jerks interviewed by the investigators, who made negative remarks about me.  Essentially, the background check becomes virtually a popularity contest -- nothing more.  Fuck the agency!

[xenonman]

It is the background investigation process that is as damning for applicants as is the vile polygraph.

If any CIA scum are read :Ding this, ENJOY!

Dear George,

No doubt about it, the government not only relies on the pre-screening and current employment polygraph exams, it is expanding it.

Supply and demand.  Supply and demand.

Regardless of the validity or lack of validity of polygraph exams, the future holds this for the United States Federal Goverment:  highly gifted scientific workers in the United States are becoming rare.  Recent surveys and papers by the Chemical Engineering Society of America are demonstrating that other countries are now surpassing us in Doctorial Engineering Degrees of all types.

The United States Government is not going to be able to treat such highly educated and sought employees with its current hiring practices and expect them to be subjected to such practices as the polygraph examination.

Time will tell. Mark my words, there will be Congressional hearings by 2012 about our lack of qualified applicants for the needs of technology in government.  It is not pretty.

Regards.