Wanting a new job in the Washington DC area, and in a tough economy but where a wealth of languages offer opportunity, a career can be found within a government agency such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, where passing "the poly" is its own reward.

Is the polygraph nothing to sweat? Quite often the thought of being subjected to this sort of test almost assures the likelihood of failure. George Maschke, according to Jeff Stein with the Washington Post, is a former U.S. military counterterrorism translator who flunked an FBI polygraph and went on to help found an organization opposed to its use in employment screening.

Case in point....

"Suzan" is a Muslim-American of Egyptian descent who has worked so hard to get to where she has arrived in life and with so much to offer the FBI as an intelligence analyst, she possesses that very rare and highly valued skill-set involving the Arabic language—reading, evaluating and translating—but, moreover, her willingness and deep desire to serve the United States.

So what could be the problem?

She failed to pass the poly.

This forensic instrument known as "the lie detector" measures and records physiological indices of blood pressure, pulse, respiration, and breathing rhythms plus skin conductivity during Q&A in the belief that deceptive answers will produce physiological responses differentiated from those that are truthful.

Make no mistake, the polygraph is pseudoscience rejected by the United States legal system and by the scientific community. Rather it has become an interrogation tool with criminal implications as administered to suspects. As an instrument for candidates that may hold sensitive public or private sector employment, federal agencies such as the FBI (CIA) apply "psychophysiological detection of deception" (PDD).

Given the opportunity, Suzan is certain that she would pass the poly, if retested, confident that the agency would see that she is honest and trustworthy, and would be of great benefit to the bureau. She understands the need for use of the polygraph and feels the FBI is 100% justified in implementing the technique in their screening.

Not only has she not been deceitful at any stage of the process, but it would be a shame to disqualify her employment for the following reasons:

Told by the polygrapher that she failed the question relating to previous drug use, Suzan later appealed in a letter to the agency how she had been shocked by the results, because for over 20 years she has never used any illegal drug of any kind. The poly alleges that she was hiding something about the subject. Suzan is certain there must be some alternative explanation for the unfavorable result, standing by her affirmation that she had been completely honest throughout the application procedure, during both the interview and polygraph test.

Beyond being "nervous and feeling uncomfortable,"Suzan suggests one other possibility for what she deems an error:

She had grown up in an extremely conservative family so, accordingly, raised to associate "guilt" with drug use. Additionally, she had informed the FBI Polygraph Unit of a muscular dystrophy condition (Myotonia congenital) in medical documentation on the day of the test.

At one point, the polygrapher even tried to accommodate Suzan by moving the blood-pressure cuff down her arm. Despite this thoughtful effort, she could still feel the discomfort and some pain from the cuff, which cause her muscles to cramp and spasm a few times. No doubt this affected the results of the polygraph. Granted, not a full explication, but certainly a reason for her body reacting abnormally under the circumstances.

Nevertheless, her moral (Middle Eastern) upbringing views mood-altering substances (drugs and alcohol) an anathema. Of course, it's no blind or naïve assumption that all Muslim-Americans or Arab-Americans share the same view; yet in the case of Suzan's family, such mores as if genetically ingrained played the central role common to her culture.

The best example of this idiosyncracy that she can give is "eye contact". Even when dealing with people of the same sex, Suzan was taught that she should not maintain eye contact with those in authority, because this takes away respect that a senior person has earned and deserves.

However, FBI interviewers (interrogators/polygraphers) are trained to identify such as a sign of deception and perceive this behavior as PDD. Interrogators are also schooled on "bad" posture, candidates speaking loudly or quickly, and using tones and manner of speech indicative of a ruse or outright trickery; however, also indicative of people from the Middle East and Mediterranean, "a cultural shirt" borne by a lifetime of habit.

Yes, such openness and truthfulness can be so easily misinterpreted—misidentified as deception. But why should any of this matter to the FBI?

In light of these facts, no one is perfectly immune from peer pressure in growing up in America, including white males who have historically been the squeaky-clean avatar for the bureau. Far-from-perfect "role models" have been proven practiced liars who circumvent questions about past drug use, only later to override integrity with sedition. How many such trusted agents have passed the poly? How many had failed but were permitted to retake the test...and passed...only to betray the trust given?

In asking the FBI to allow her to retake the polygraph, Suzan—notwithstanding her notoriously grim experience—feels the need for vindication in getting pass the poly.

Frederick Louis Richardson