It is a point of mystery how some obtain their information. One can only guess at how they do it and looking at results wonder if it is actually done at all.

The two general steps one has to take to "find out what is really going on" are:

Obtaining information is necessary for any analysis of data.

• 1. Analyze the data,

If one obtains and analyzes some information he can get a hint of what information he should obtain in what area. By obtaining more data on that area he can have enough to actively handle.

Thus how one obtains information becomes a very important subject.

The way to analyze data is to compare it to the 5 primary points and see if any of those appear in the data.

Nations have whole mobs of reporters sent out by newspapers, radio, TV and magazines to collect information. Politicians go jaunting around collecting information. Whole spy networks are maintained at huge expense to obtain information.

The way to analyze the situation is to put in its smaller areas each of the data analyzed as above.

The Japanese in the first third of the 20th century had two maxims: “Anyone can spy.” “Everyone must spy.” The Germans picked this up. They had their whole populations at it. The Russian KGB numbers hundreds of thousands. CIA spends billions. MI-6 _________ well you get the idea.

Doing this gives you the locations of greatest error or disorganization and also gives you areas of greatest effectiveness.

It is not amiss however to point out that those 2 nations that devoted the most effort to espionage (Japan and Germany) were BOTH DEFEATED HORRIBLY.

Example: There is trouble in the Refreshment Unit. There are 3 people in the unit. Doing a data analysis on the whole area gives us a number of outpoints. Then we assign these to A, B and C who work in the unit and find B had the most outpoints. This indicates that the trouble in the Refreshment Unit is with B. B can be handled in various ways such as his hat, his attendance, etc. Note we analyzed the data of the main area and assigned it to the bits in the area, then we had an Analyzed Situation and we could handle.

Thus the QUANTITY of data poured in is not any guarantee of understanding.

Example: We analyze all the data we have about the Bingo Car Plant. We assign the data thus analyzed as out (outpoints) to each function of the Bingo Car Plant. We thus pinpoint what function is the worst off. We then handle that function in various ways, principally by organizing it and grooving in its executives and personnel.

Newspapers today are usually devoted to propaganda, not news. Politicians are striving to figure out another nation’s evil intentions, not to comprehend it.

There are several variations.

The basic treatise on data collection and handling used to found the US intelligence data system (“strategic intelligence”) would make one laugh — or cry.

WE OBTAIN AN ANALYSIS OF THE SITUATION BY ANALYZING ALL THE DATA WE HAVE AND ASSIGNING THE OUTPOINT DATA TO THE AREAS OR PARTS. THE AREA HAVING THE MOST OUTPOINTS IS THE TARGET FOR CORRECTION.

All these elaborate (and expensive) systems of collecting information are not only useless, they are deluding. They get people in plenty of trouble.

In confronting a broad situation to be handled we have of course the problem of finding out what's wrong before we can correct it. This is done by data analysis followed by situation analysis.

A copy of Time magazine (US) analyzed for outpoints runs so many outpoints per page when analyzed that one wonders how any publication so irrational could continue solvent. And what do you know! It is going broke!

We do this by grading all the data for outpoints (5 primary illogics). We now have a long list of outpoints. This is data analysis.

Those countries that spend the most on espionage are in the most trouble. They weren’t in trouble and then began to spend money. They began to spy and then got into trouble!

We sort the outpoints we now have into the principal areas of the scene. The majority will appear in one area. This is situation analysis.

News media and intelligence actions are not themselves bad. But irrational news media and illogical intelligence activity are psychotic.

We now know what area to handle.

So information collection can become a vice. It can be overdone.

Example: Seventy data exist on the general scene. We find 21 of these data are irrational (outpoints). We slot the 21 outpoints into the areas they came from or apply to. Sixteen came from area G. We handle area G.

If one had every org in a network fill out a thousand reports a week he would not obtain much information but he sure would knock them out of comm.

There is a moderate flow of information through any network so long as it is within the capability of the comm lines and the personnel.

The remarkable part of such an exercise is that the data analysis of the data of a period of 1 day compares to 3 months operating experience.

Thus we get a rule about collecting data in administrative structures.

Thus data and situation analysis is an instant result where experience takes a lot of time.

NORMAL ADMIN FLOWS CONTAIN ENOUGH DATA TO DO A DATA AND SITUATION ANALYSIS.

The quality of the data analysis depends on one knowing the ideal organization and purpose on which the activity is based. This means one has to know what its activities are supposed to be from a rational or logical viewpoint.

And

A clock is supposed to keep running and indicate time and be of practical and pleasant design. A clock factory is supposed to make clocks. It is supposed to produce enough clocks cheaply enough that are good enough to be in demand and to sell for enough to keep the place solvent. It consumes raw materials, repairs and replaces its tools and equipment. It hires workmen and executives. It has service firms and distributors. That is the sort of thing one means by ideal or theoretical structure of the clock company and its organization.

THE LESS DATA YOU HAVE THE MORE PRECISE YOUR ANALYSIS MUST BE.

Those are the rational points.

And

From the body of actual current today data on the clock company one spots the outpoints for a DATA ANALYSIS.

INDICATORS MUST BE WATCHED FOR IN ORDER TO UNDERTAKE A SITUATION ANALYSIS.

One assigns the outpoints to the whole as a SITUATION ANALYSIS.

And

One uses his admin know-how and expertise to repair the most aberrated subsection.

A SITUATION ANALYSIS ONLY INDICATES THE AREA THAT HAS TO BE CLOSELY INSPECTED AND HANDLED.

One gets a functioning clock factory that runs closer to the ideal.

Thus, what is an “indicator”?

Military, political and PR situations, etc., are handled all in the same way.

An indicator is a visible manifestation which tells one a situation analysis should be done.

We call these two actions

An indicator is the little flag sticking out that shows there is a possible situation underneath that needs attention.

• DATA ANALYSIS,

Some indicators about orgs or its sections would be — dirty or not reporting or going insolvent or complaint letters or any nonoptimum datum that departs from the ideal.

This is enough to engage in a data and situation analysis of the scene where the indicator appeared.

The correct sequence, then, is

SITUATION - The broad general scene on which a body of current data exists.

1. Have a normal information flow available.

DATA - Facts, graphs, statements, decisions, actions, descriptions, which are supposedly true.

2. Observe.

OUTPOINT - Any one datum that is offered as true that is in fact found to be illogical when compared to the 5 primary points of illogic.

3. When a bad indicator is seen become very alert.

PLUSPOINT - A datum of truth when found to be true compared to the 5 points.

4. Do a data analysis.

5. Do a situation analysis.

6. Obtain more data by direct inspection of the area indicated by the situation analysis.

7. Handle.

An incorrect sequence, bound to get one in deep trouble is

A. See an indicator.

B. ACT to handle.

This even applies to emergencies IF ONE IS FAST ENOUGH TO DO THE WHOLE CORRECT CYCLE IN A SPLIT SECOND.

Oddly enough anyone working in a familiar area CAN do it all in a split second.

People that can do it like lightning are known to have “fast reaction time.” People who can’t do it fast are often injured or dead.

Example of an emergency cycle: Engineer on duty, normal but experienced perception. Is observing his area. Hears a hiss that shouldn’t be. Scans the area and sees nothing out of order but a small white cloud. Combines sight and hearing. Moves forward to get a better look. Sees valve has broken. Shuts off steam line.

Example of an incorrect action. Hears hiss. Pours water on the boiler fires.

When you slow this down to an Admin Cycle it becomes very easy. It follows the same steps.

It is not so dramatic. It could string out over months unless one realized that the steps 1 to 7 should be taken when the first signs show up. It need not. However it sometimes does.

Sometimes it has to be done over and over, full cycle, to get a full scene purring.

Sometimes the “handle” requires steps which the area is too broken down to get into effect and so becomes “Handle as possible and remember to do the whole cycle again soon.”

Sometimes “handle” is a program of months or years duration; its only liability is that it will be forgotten or thrown out before done by some “new broom.”

But it all begins with having a normal flow of information available and OBSERVING. Seeing a bad indicator one becomes alert and fully or quickly finishes off the cycle.

What is a “bad indicator” really?

It is merely an outpoint taken from the 5 primary outpoints.

It is not “bad news” or “entheta” or a rumor. The “bad news” could easily be a falsehood and is an outpoint because it is false bad news!

“Good” news when it is a falsehood is an outpoint!

Intelligence services are always talking “reliable sources.” Or about “confirmed observation.”

These are not very reliable ways of telling what is true. The master double spy Philby as a head MI-6 adviser was a Russian spy. Yet for 30 years he determined “reliable sources” for the US and England!

If three people tell you the same thing it is not necessarily a fact as they might all have heard the same lie. Three liars don’t make one fact — they make three outpoints.

So it would seem to be very difficult to establish facts if leading papers and intelligence services can’t do it!

Yes it is tough to know the truth.

But the moment you begin to work with them, it is rather easy to locate outpoints.

You are looking for outpoints. When they are analyzed and the situation is analyzed by them you then find yourself looking at the truth if you follow the cycle 1 to 7.

It’s really rather magical.

If you know thoroughly what the 5 primary outpoints are they leap into view from any body of data.

Oscar says he leads a happy married life. His wife is usually seen crying. It’s an outpoint — a falsehood.

The Omaha office is reported by Los Angeles to be doing great. It fails to report. The LA datum does not include that it is 6 months old. Three outpoints, one for time, one for falsehood, one for omitted datum.

Once you are fully familiar with the 5 primary outpoints they are very obvious.

“We are having pie for supper” and “We have no flour” at least shows out of sequence!

It is odd but all the “facts” you protest in life and ridicule or growl about are all one or another of the outpoints.

When you spot them for what they are then you can actually estimate things. And the pluspoints come into view.