Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: Polygraph Screening



At 22:07 12/22/99 +0100, George Maschke wrote:
If you have students who may be considering employment at any of
America's national laboratories where atomic weapons research is conducted
(Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos, Sandia), you might do them a favor
by warning them about the U.S. Department of Energy's recently-adopted
policy of polygraph screening for certain as yet to be defined positions.

I have written an exposé on the polygraph screening format adopted by
DOE, "The Lying Game: National Security and the Test for Espionage and
Sabotage," and I invite you to peruse it on the Federation of American
Scientists' website at:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/polygraph/maschke.html

or, alternatively, on my personal website, with e-mail addresses for
the key persons mentioned in the article, at:

http://www.humnet.ucla.edu/people/maschke/the_lying_game.html

Critical comment is welcome, and I'll do my best to answer any
questions.

Sincerely,
George Maschke


I think there is some better advice that students considering
security-sensitive positions could be given:

"If you are considering a position with a weapons lab, it would be
better to make another choice if you feel you have personality aspects
that could leave you open to interference from secure information seekers.

"The personality defect that has been most exploited by foreign agencies
is the undue hunger for cash or valuable considerations. Unfortunately,
this is a trait that is otherwise encouraged in our culture.

"Other secondary weaknesses that can provide chinks in one's armor:
other than normal sexual proclivities - such as impulsive acceptance of
opposite sex offers of liasons. Unfortunately, this is a trait that has
proved somewhat high in Darwinian 'fitness' value until the last
generation, when the prevalence of AIDS has moderated the behavior.

"But note; these weaknesses are not in themselves the security risk -
one would suppose that an overt transvestite in a weapons lab would
be a rather small risk for example - it is the fear of exposure,
and the opening for blackmail and coercion that is the danger.

You can expect your financial state and overt behavior to be more
or less discreetly monitored. In order to attempt to uncover
personal habits that people defend strongly from exposure, you can
expect authorities to offer stimuli for embarassment and disclosure
with unwarranted slurs, sham polygraph tests (which as I suppose
everyone realises, are not by any means "lie-detectors") and any other
convenient means.

"In this connection, it is important to realise that anyone who
seriously intends to divert secure information for the benefit
of foreign intelligence agencies will have been very well briefed on
how not to be identified as a person who can be brought to divulge
his guarded characteristics by psychological pressure from,
for instance, the polygraph.

"If you should be so misguided as to become involved in secure
occupations despite behavior that you cannot publically reveal,
you should at least take some of the turn-coat's precautions
for polygraph testing:
provide exaggerated physical cues to test question series -
with moderated breathing depth, rate, muscle tone, sphincter tension
and induced galvanic skin response (if you have some chilling image
you can call up).

This is not the recipe for a satisfying work life.
Avoid it by all means."


Sincerely

Brian Whatcott




brian whatcott <inet@intellisys.net>
Altus OK