PTS RUNDOWN, FINAL STEP - HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JUNE 1972RA

[auditor]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JUNE 1972RA
Remimeo
Class IV Grad and above Auditors
Class IV Grad Check-sheet
Ethics Officers REVISED 15 OCTOBER 1974
RE-REVISED 8 DECEMBER 1978

(Cancels BTB 24 March 1973R,
“PTS RD ERRORS.”)

(Revisions in this type style)

PTS RUNDOWN, FINAL STEP

The following is an additional step to the PTS Rundown developed by me and tested at Flag. This step is run after each terminal is run, to prevent bypassing charge.
THE STEPS ARE:
1. Select the terminal already run in R3RA and ruds.
2. Clear “can’t have,” “couldn’t have” as DENIAL OF SOMETHING TO SOMEONE ELSE. Clear “enforced have” as MAKING SOMEONE ACCEPT WHAT THEY DIDN’T WANT. Have pc get the idea of these with an example or two.
3. Run on the SP item “can’t have/enforced have” as motivator repetitive, then overt repet-itive, the Flow Three terminal to others, others to terminal and the Flow Zero of the pc to himself because of the terminal (four flows of two commands each or five if the pc is Quad). Check the flows for a read before running them. Do not run unreading flows.
4. After the terminal is handled with the four (or five) flows of “can’t have/en-forced have” Objective Havingness should be run. Then the next PTS Rundown item is taken up and run on all steps, as above.

THE COMMANDS:
F1. Did _____run a can’t have on you? Tell me about it.
Did _____force something on you you didn’t want?
Tell me about it. (Alternate/repetitive to EP.)

F2. Did you run a can’t have on _____?
Tell me about it.
Did you try to force something on _____that he (she, it)
didn’t want? Tell me about it. (Alternate/repetitive to EP.)

F3. Did _____run a can’t have on others?
Tell me about it.
Did _____force something on others they didn’t want?
Tell me about it. (Alternate/repetitive to EP.)

F3A. Did others run a can’t have on _____?
Tell me about it.
Did others force something on _____that he (she, it) didn’t want?
Tell me about it. (Alternate/repetitive to EP.)

F0. Did you run a can’t have on yourself because of _____?
Tell me about it.
Did you try to force something on yourself that you didn’t want because of _____?
Tell me about it. (Alternate/repetitive to EP.)


– OBJECTIVE HAVINGNESS –

THEORY
The theory is that SPs are SPs because they deny Hav and enforce unwanted Hav. They also deny do and enforce unwanted do. They also deny be and enforce unwanted be. This is why we have never before been able to run Subjective Hav. It collided with SPs, overts, and withholds on them.
A very full rundown then would be to start with don t be, must be; go on to don’t do must do: end up with can’t have, enforced have. (Not to be run at this time.) Hav alone should handle without resorting to be or do.
END OFF AT ONCE AND BEGIN OBJECTIVE HAVINGNESS IF THE TA SOARS OR THE PC CAVES IN. If this does not handle, then do a C/S 53RL at once and handle.

PTS RD NOTES
With the issue of HCOB 17 Mar 74, TWC, USING WRONG QUESTIONS, it be-comes necessary to convert the PTS RD 2WCs for items into L&N questions. Example: Who have you known this lifetime who has troubled or worried you? L&N to BD F/N item.
Avoid listing the same question twice. The L&N for places and planets should be re-stricted to planets only on VA pcs and an L4BRA used at the first sign of trouble.
Additional PTS RD items can be obtained from past PTS interviews. Done by L&N the RD is very powerful and direct. The pc must be well set up for it.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:nt.jh.dr