Ian wrote in his comment to my post of yesterday: “Per my review of Michel’s link, it seems that there’s confusion even with the original clear certainty directions with cancellation of the HCOPL 13 Sept. 1967 – a time we know LRH was alive and well for certain – which is cancelled & conflicted by another HCOPL on 9 Jan 1968. Seems like there’s a major inconsistency even by Hubbard – unless one or both of these are false policies or signed by someone else?”
Yes, there is a inconsistency. The HCOPL 9 Jan 1968 is “a bit” weird. It cancels our stable datum HCOPL 13 Sept. 1967 Clear Check Outs without giving a new stable datum. This throws out the baby with the bathwater.
First I show the 2 references, then I can explain:
There is a correct indication in the HCOPL 9 Jan 1968, it gives the good reason for the cancellation
“both policies contain inspection before the fact and therefore violate the Fast Flow System of Management.”
What does inspection before the fact mean?
This is explained in HCO PL 6 Feb. 1968 “Organization—The Flaw”:
The basic flaw in organization is INSPECTION BEFORE THE FACT. That means inspection before anything bad has happened.
Violations are so harmful they destroyed every great civilization—the Roman, the British, the lot. For every flow is slowed or stopped.
What does this critic refer to in the HCOPL 13 Sept. 1967? It is this 2nd part of the Policy:
No person may be declared Clear who has a bad Ethics record which demonstrates suppressiveness. He can be told he is Clear but the Clear cert must be sent to the Ethics Officer who holds it for 6 months pending any new symptoms of suppressiveness. The person meanwhile may enroll on Advanced Courses but it must be plainly noted he is a “Pending Clear Cert”. …Any declared Clear before this date who subsequently developed an Ethics record is to be stricken from the list of Clears.
This opened the door to a lot of heavy invalidations without the application of basic justice. Just based on “bad Ethics records”. And every powerful good guy in Scientology had experienced that: he got a thick ethics folder due to the many attacks by the “20%” (PTS and SPs).
So THAT had to be cancelled. It was not even necessary to issue a new Policy for the items 1. to 5. of the CLEAR CHECK OUTS, as this was already based on existing standard tech:
- As the CC is THE WAY to become Clear
- As TA between 2 and 3 with F/N is the standard EP of all processes
- As all lower grades have to be in: this is standard also for each Level of the bridge
- without that, no grade would be valid
- All examination is based on the check, whether the person is cheerful and happy about achieving the current grade.
So all items 1 to 5 are standard and here just applied to the Clearing Course. So the main message of that HCOPL was the second half about the Ethics part and that’s LRH intended to cancel.
Even if we accept HCOPL 13 Sept. 1967 being cancelled in full – which makes no sense as other Policies are based on the steps 1 to 5 of it – the steps 1 to 5 are still the Clear Check Out, as these are based on standard procedure for every Grade of the Chart.