I had an interview with polygrapher and podcaster David Goldberg of Virginia about polygraph screening that was tangentially but materially related to the security clearance process. Our conversation stemmed from a public challenge I made to him in May about why, if, as he had claimed in a recent episode of his podcast, “you can’t [beat a polygraph test],” any polygrapher would care whether a person has looked up how to beat a polygraph test?
Our conversation is now online and may be viewed here:
More importantly, if the polygraph works, why would the examiner have to adopt an adversarial approach to the interview? Just ask the questions in a neutral tone, make no accusations, and let the chips fall where they may. The mind games alone call into question the validity of the technical results.
That’s a really good point… never thought of that. However, it is not just the machine involved, it is also the examiner, who is a trained interviewer. Sometimes I wonder if the polygraph is actually doing anything except making the applicant nervous.
The U.S. Secret Service’s polygraph branch actually had a challenge coin produced depicting a flaming winged skull emblazoned with the slogan, “LET THE MIND GAMES BEGIN.”
What if these days, it’s not just the interviewer, but a team - and they’ve contracted a position to blast information to invoke negative feelings or resentment towards polygraphs and/or interviewers - so that the interviewer in turn can use that as a subject to talk about during interviews???
Polygraphs prove nothing. All they do is generate physical reactions which are then “interpreted” to prove something… scientific it is not. Its sole purpose is to make people stress out in the hope they will confess to something. The irony is goodie two shoes stumble because they are so concerned to be completely honest about the time they thought about stealing that candy back in 85.. while the actual bad actors and spies know its bs and keep their cool because they know its all a joke. Likewise, sociopaths and psychopaths pass every time because they have no shame and no guilt reflexes.
I asked AI if any of he big spy cases was broken by polys - this is the answer…
I’ll search for information about American spy cases and whether polygraph testing played a role in their discovery.Let me search for more specific information about polygraph testing and spy cases.Based on my research, the answer is no- none of America’s greatest turncoat spies were discovered due to polygraph testing. In fact, the opposite is true - most of them successfully passed polygraph tests while actively spying:
Major Spy Cases and Polygraph Results
Aldrich Ames (CIA):
Ames, the CIA official turned-spy, convinced his polygraph examiners at least twice that “deceptive” readings were easily explainable. As a result, Ames “passed” his tests.
He spied for nearly a decade before his 1994 arrest
Robert Hanssen (FBI):
Hanssen’s case is particularly notable because he never underwent a polygraph examination during his tenure at the FBI. His eventual capture, after 22 years of espionage, highlighted the potential value of polygraph testing
Was caught through other investigative methods, not polygraph testing
Ana Belén Montes (DIA):
Montes successfully passed multiple polygraph tests during her tenure, which spanned over a decade.
Montes spied for nearly 20 years and passed several polygraph examinations
Montes and a friend, Maria Rita Velazquez, received training in polygraph countermeasures in Cuba before Montes started working for the DIA in 1985
Jonathan Pollard (Navy):
The Navy asked for but was denied information from the CIA regarding Pollard, including the results of their pre-employment polygraph test revealing Pollard’s excessive drug use
His polygraph revealed drug use but not espionage activities
One Exception: Harold James Nicholson
The only case where polygraph testing contributed to catching a spy was Harold James Nicholson, a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employee later convicted of spying for Russia, had undergone his periodic five-year reinvestigation, in which he showed a strong probability of deception on questions regarding relationships with a foreign intelligence unit. This polygraph test later led to an investigation which resulted in his eventual arrest and conviction.
The evidence shows that polygraph testing has been largely ineffective at catching major American spies, with most successfully defeating or passing these tests while actively committing espionage.
The notion that Harold James Nicholson was caught because of the polygraph is erroneous. This falsehood was evidently promoted by the FBI to protect the human source who fingered Nicholson as a spy, KGB and SVR officer Alexander Zaporozhsky.
Author Bryan Denson reported Zaporozhsky to be the key to Nicholson’s identification in his 2015 book, The Spy’s Son: The True Story of the Highest-Ranking CIA Officer Ever Convicted of Espionage and the Son He Trained to Spy for Russia.
