Slashdot Mirror
Leaked Documents Confirm Polygraph Operators Can't Detect Countermeasures (antipolygraph.org)
George Maschke writes: AntiPolygraph.org has published a document (14 MB PDF) on polygraph countermeasures that is allegedly derived from classified information. The document suggests techniques that polygraph operators might use in an attempt to detect efforts to beat the polygraph, but fails to offer any coherent strategy for detecting sophisticated countermeasures such as those outlined in AntiPolygraph.org's The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (1 MB PDF) or Doug Williams' How to Sting the Polygraph. Ominously, the leaked document avers that an examinee's stated lack of belief in polygraphy is a marker of deception. AntiPolygraph.org has also published an older U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations polygraph countermeasure handbook (3.2 MB PDF) that similarly offers no methodology for detecting sophisticated countermeasures (such as any actual spy, saboteur, or terrorist might be expected to use).
I propose a little test then, being you are so convinced you can beat the polygraph, that you take one...
MythBusters did a segment on this and they where not able to demonstrate a way to beat the test that was reliable. In fact, I don't think any of their "test subjects" where able to do so. Can some people do it? I think so. But I seriously doubt *you* could beat it unless you are a pathological liar who just doesn't care anything about truth, ethics or morals.
So it's more than just those who are susceptible to believe the polygraph, it does have some success. Efforts to beat the polygraph are largely ineffective and usually very detectable. Most of these techniques take practice to effectively use and even though folks like you walk around thinking you can easily manipulate the test, you really can't, even if you don't believe in the test.
So, back to my point.. Polygraphs may not be a perfect tool, they *can* be manipulated by sufficiently trained people, they are never the less a useful tool in the tool box of those tasked with securing information and things. While not admissible as evidence, can assist investigators in confirming or eliminating suspects in crimes. They are still useful part of the tools in the box.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Note that the US Government REQUIRES that people pass a polygraph test to gain certain clearances (those above the basic SECRET level). Yes, that's right. Anyone with a TOP SECRET (or any of the more specialized) clearanced must pass a polygraph test, where they are asked about, well, their general "moral fiber", and whether they are fit to know and keep military secrets.
TRANSLATION: Only those who play along with a game that they know to be stupid witch-doctoring are allowed to know the most closely held US government secrets (of how to kill people).
Oh, it gets even wilder at the upper levels of military - aerospace - spy-craft Clearance requirements. A colleague HAD TO POOP IN A CUP as part of one Program clearance process.
Many others I know have had to allow "clearance officers" to pluck a hair from their head, assumedly to use it as a months-long document of alcohol or other chemicals ingested into the body. So, this hair thing –yes, it is possible, in principle, to obtain such fine-grained information –but the cost to do so would be phenomenally prohibitive. Imagine, slicing a hair into tiny disks, and then looking for parts-per-trillion of metabolic byproducts of various illicit substances in each of those thousands of slices of that hair. GATTACA was a movie, not reality!
All of these are part of a great sham. It is a sham that only the stupid – or those who know that it will increase their salary "value" if they have another clearance if only they play along – submit themselves to. That is, people with integrity and intelligence refuse to be subjected to such situations. I have had University professors refuse 100's of thousands of $$$, solely because the project had the potential of "clearance" red tape getting in the way of publishing great results.
Thus, the dummies are the only ones let in, and they make the rules, and they run the system, all of this ensuring that only dummies can be hired in the future. Because, you know, hiring skillful people would reveal their mediocrity, so the system weeds out the brilliant as well as the merely smart.
Sleep tight.
Yes.
An intelligent person will recognize when the 'polygrapher' has moved from the baseline questions to the particular 'question(s) of interest.'
I would notice, and would be nervous simply because of that realization, regardless of the 'true' answer to the question(s). Like you, I can tell an innocuous question from a 'gotcha' type of question, and those things, in such a situation, would stress me out. Just knowing that a trained monkey is firing what he thinks is his secret bullet will peg the body-signal charts. The correlation of my answer to 'truthiness' will be irrelevant to the operator's "decision based on the quantitative (but unrelated) data taken during questioning."
About the US Government requiring a polygraph to hold a Top Secret clearance and higher....
That's both true and false.
If the person is in the military, then a polygraph isn't taken. The reason is that duty assignments are considered "involuntary" and as such requiring a polygraph would be unjust. However, civilian employees are required to pass a polygraph. In fact, there have been a few cases where a military member left the service and immediately came back to the same organization as a civilian and was required to take a polygraph .... and failed ... so were denied employment at the very same organization that they just left.
I used to be active duty military and at the end of my career was working in WHCA (White House Communications Agency). That position required a TS/SCI Yankee White investigation (they tend to be a bit paranoid when you're in a position where you could physically touch the president without the Secret Service batting an eye). It was an interesting assignment, but eventually I left the service and took employment with a government contractor and was required to obtain another TS/SCI clearance. And yes, a polygraph was required.
The first polygraph that I took had "issues" and I was rescheduled to take a second polygraph. I too had issues with the polygraph since it felt to me that a game was being played where I wasn't informed as to the rules. So in my typical fashion, I researched polygraph technology and found out quite a few interesting things. One item I encountered was a reference to a classified study on polygraphy. I wasn't able to obtain the study itself, but assuming that the study reflected the publicly available information on the polygraph and if I were to be a classification authority, then I too would have classified the study.
Why?
Because simply, the publicly available information boils down to this.
Polygraphy as a means of detecting true or falsehood, it's totally worthless. But as a means of eliciting voluntary confessions from naive subjects, it is extremely effective.
Notice the phrase "naive subjects."
Let's just say that on my followup polygraph, I understood the rules of the game, informed the polygrapher and she was the one who had an unhappy time. The results were inconclusive and I did get my TS/SCI clearance.
Yes, as a civilian employee in the United States, you are required to take a polygraph to obtain a TS or higher clearance, but that it just one element of the clearance process and it doesn't require the subject to actually believe in the effectiveness of the polygraph.