No, Diane you are wrong on several points.  Although the Scientologists
have recently released some alleged affidavit, while I don't remember
signing that specific document, the statements were indeed made by me *in
1984* when a bar association complaint was filed against Michael Flynn,
which believe me, I was all for.  If I did indeed sign that affidavit,
then I did it more than a decade ago as part of the final settlement and
I'm not supposed to discuss that.

And I don't know how you can say that Kim had "insufferable pressure" put
against her to sign affidavits but that I didn't have that excuse (in
1984).  I am not aware that Kim spent most of 15 years as SP#1 with a full
contingent of B1 people constantly plotting to get her, and with daily
dirty tricks against her; nor am I aware that Scientology ever had her
arrested and indicted and that she had to spend 8 months and $28,000
fighting those charges alone; nor am I aware that she was deposed for 50
days, that 50 of her friends were deposed, that her elderly parents were
repeatedly harassed, and that she had to defend 19 frivolous lawsuits
against her all over the world on her own money.  If I temporarily "broke"
in 1984, what should be surprising was not that I did but that it didn't
happen earlier.

I also found your statement interesting that I turned over the rights to
"The Scandal of Scientology" twice.  That certainly is news to me.  If I
did it twice, that means that the second time wasn't valid.  Hmmm.  :-)

And I resent your statement that I "most likely shafted a number of other
litigants involved in"my lawsuits.  I was the only one involved in my
suit, and I believe that my settlement helped those on other suits who
settled later.

And no you will never hear the whole story of the settlement, as you well
know, because I signed an agreement not to discuss it, as you well know.

I am not going to get into a public spitting match with you or any other
enemy of Scientology because I think if we're truly concerned about what
Scientology is still doing to its critics, then we should avoid acting
like the Scientologists and DAing and demeaning these critics ourselves.

It would be best legally if this is the last I have to say about his whole
issue, and those who truly want me to avoid going back to court with
Scientology will respect this by ending this whole discussion, so I don't
feel I have to defend myself by breaking the secrecy of the settlement
agreement--to defend myself from someone on "our side" no less!

Paulette Cooper