This is a quick outline of the activities of the Ethics Officer.

The purpose of the Ethics Officer is ”To help Ron clear orgs and the public if need be of entheta and enturbulation so that Scientology can be done.”

The activities of the Ethics Officer consist of isolating individuals who are stopping proper flows by pulling withholds with Ethics technology and by removing as necessary potential trouble sources and suppressive individuals off org comm lines and by generally enforcing Ethics Codes.

The technology of how this is done is quite precise.

In a nutshell, (a) one finds an imperfect functioning of some portion of the org and then (b) finds something that one doesn’t understand about it and then (c) interrogates by despatch the individuals in that portion connected with the imperfect functioning.

Just those three steps done over and over are usually quite enough to keep an org running quite smoothly.

On first taking over post in an enturbulated org, or in viewing a portion of the org in an enturbulated condition the actions of the Ethics Officer consist of: (1) Run back entheta by asking for names of who said it to the person who is now saying it, (2) locate those persons and find out who told them and then (3) look amongst those names for no-case-change or for potential trouble sources. Bill voices a rumour (usually with a ”they” say _________). The Ethics Officer asks Bill what „they’s“ name is, Bill thinks and finally says it was Pete. The Ethics Officer locates Pete and asks Pete who told him, and when Pete says ”they” the Ethics Officer finds out what „they’s“ name is. Pete says it was Agnes. Ethics Officer locates Agnes. Agnes maintains it is true and can’t say who said it. Ethics Officer looks up Agnes’ case folder or puts Agnes on a meter and sees by high or very low TA that he has a Suppressive. Or he finds Agnes has a suppressive husband and that she is a Potential Trouble Source.

The Ethics Officer then handles it as per Ethics Policy Ltrs.

In short, rumour comes from somewhere. The somewhere is a Potential Trouble Source or a Suppressive. One runs it down and applies the remedies contained in Ethics HCO Policy Letters to that person.

An Ethics Officer’s first job is usually cleaning up the org of its potential trouble sources and requesting a Comm Ev for the Suppressives. That gets things in focus quickly and smooths an org down so it will function.

Then one looks for down statistics in the OIC Charts. These aren’t understandable, of course, so one interrogates by sending Interrogatives to the people concerned. In their answers there will be something that doesn’t make sense at all to the Ethics Officer — Example ”We can’t pay the bills because Josie has been on course.” The Ethics Officer is only looking for something he himself can’t reconcile. So he sends Interrogatives to the person who wrote it and to Josie. Sooner or later some wild withhold or even a crime shows up when one does this.

The trick of this „Org Auditing“ is to find a piece of string sticking out — something one can’t understand, and, by Interrogatives, pull on it. A small cat shows up. Pull with some more Interrogatives. A baby gorilla shows up. Pull some more. A tiger appears. Pull again and Wow! You’ve got a General Sherman tank!

It isn’t reasonable for people to be lazy or stupid. At the bottom you find the real cause of no action in a portion of an org or continuous upset.

When you have your General Sherman, call a Court of Ethics on it. Or take action. But in actual fact you have probably already fixed it up.

There’s always a reason behind a bad statistic. Send out Interrogatives until you have the real reason in view. It will never be ”Agnes isn’t bright.” It is more likely, Agnes is on a typing post but never knew how to type. Or worse — the D of P audits org pcs for his own profit. Or the D of T simply never comes to work.

The real explanation of a down statistic is always a very easily understood thing. If you Interrogate enough you’ll get the real explanation and then you can act.

Never use conduct for anything but an indicator of what you should interrogate.

Never buy rumours as generalities. Somebody said them and that somebody has a name. Get the name.

Filing is the real trick of Ethics work. The files do all the work, really.

Executive Ethics reports patiently filed in folders, one for each staff member, eventually makes one file fat. There’s your boy.

Call up a Court of Ethics on him and his area gets smooth.

Whatever report you get, file it with a name. Don’t file by departments or Divisions. File by names.

The files do 90% of the work. When one file gets fat, call the person up for Ethics action.

Run a Time Machine and let it accumulate data for you.

The orders that fall off of it that weren’t complied with should be reported to the senior issuing them.

But file those non-compliances. Soon, a file gets fat and we know why the org isn’t running in one of its portions.

All Ethics policy applies to the actions of an Ethics Officer.

But the above is his workaday world, auditor to the org, filing his replies, watching for the fat file and then calling a Court on it.

That way an org soon begins to run like a well greased river, doing its job in a happy atmosphere.

Be as sudden and swift and unreasonable as you like. You aren’t there to win a popularity contest.

Make Executives report all those Ethics items they should. Make them write their orders and send you a copy. Make your Comm Centre give you the responses for pairing with the copies. File carefully and call the lightning down on the person who gets a fat Ethics file.

It’s an easy job. Mostly admin. But so is all Intelligence work. The files do the job if you make people report and if you file well yourself.

And when you feel exasperated and balked and feel like taking it out on somebody, do so by all means.

Whoever heard of a tame Ethics Officer?

The sanity of the planet is all that is at stake.