logoalt Hacker News

Personal Statement of a CIA Analyst

78 pointsby grubbstoday at 5:49 PM42 commentsview on HN

Comments

singleshot_today at 9:40 PM

> but I wondered why a petty thief thought she could get into the Agency.

It’s reassuring to know no one at the CIA has ever done anything wrong, like stealing fifty dollars.

ddtaylortoday at 9:14 PM

I watched at Derbycon multiple times someone that could make a polygraph test do whatever he wanted, otherwise he was a murderer that murdered himself and it all happened before he was born. The test was being administered by a long time veteran polygraph operator who had recently retired.

show 1 reply
ifh-hntoday at 8:10 PM

I've no idea why I read to the end of that, seems like a long ramble, I kept expecting something to happen and it never did.

show 3 replies
Animatstoday at 9:12 PM

I went through national-security polygraph exams twice, and they were no big deal. Filling out SF-86 (which used to start "List all residences from birth"), now that's a hassle.

In my aerospace company days, almost everything I did was unclassified, but I was put through the mill of getting higher level security clearances so I could be assigned to classified projects. Fortunately, I never was.

show 1 reply
zenon_paradoxtoday at 6:23 PM

The most troubling aspect of these accounts is the "unfalsifiable" nature of the countermeasure accusation. Once an examiner decides you’re manipulating your physiological response, there is no empirical way to prove you weren't. It essentially turns a high-stakes job interview into a test of how well you can suppress natural stress reactions. It’s a shame to see how many talented individuals are sidelined by a process that prizes a specific physiological profile over a demonstrated record of integrity.

shevy-javatoday at 8:26 PM

> countermeasures such as butt-clenching

Ehm ...

I am actually not that convinced of that, largely because e. g. the KGB operated quite differently. And it seems very strange to me that the CIA would train an army of wanna-be's as ... butt-clenching recruits. The more sensible option is to have a poker face; and totally believe in any lie no matter how and what. That's kind of what Sergey Lavrov does. He babbles about how Ukraine invaded Russia. Kind of similar to a certain guy with a moustache claiming Poland invaded Germany (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident).

show 1 reply
Paracompacttoday at 7:54 PM

Am I a bad person if the picture of someone in the CIA crying is funny to me? Not out of malice or anything. It's just something I didn't know they did.

Do they also have little "Hang in there!" posters on the wall, too?

show 5 replies
FergusArgylltoday at 8:14 PM

I don't get it, I thought it's settled science that polygraphs don't work. Why are these agencies still using them?

show 2 replies
joecool1029today at 8:18 PM

https://archive.ph/0gJFG

show 1 reply
mzajctoday at 7:57 PM

(2018)

stego-techtoday at 8:06 PM

Adding my POV from a former National Security perspective:

Author is 100% on point. The point of a polygraph is three-fold: weeding out the dipshits; exerting power over the powerless; and identifying the valuable assets (typically sociopaths). It does not - cannot - identify liars, deceit, or bad actors on its face (that comes from the manual the author linked). It's not scientific assessment, it's psychological torture.

Would I take a polygraph to reactivate my clearance? Yeah, if I had to. Would I pass? That's up to the examiner, because much like the author I won't tolerate being called a liar, nor will I capitulate to power games. I'll be honest, forthcoming, and cooperative - and if that's not enough to pass, then I don't want to work for you.

show 3 replies
marxisttemptoday at 8:46 PM

The guy trying to work for the psychological torture club got psychologically tortured a little? My heart bleeds for him

show 1 reply
strathmeyertoday at 9:17 PM

[dead]

nubgtoday at 8:26 PM

[flagged]

show 6 replies