I read the transcript, and this "keeps offering him the opportunity to back down" looks more like something to cover their asses. It seems like Gibson hasn't analysed the flaw (ie, proper reverse engineering) but rather just fiddled with .WMF files until he produced one that worked, and then jumps to conclusions that 1 is a "magic backdoor value", while it sounds more like a buffer overflow to me. I haven't done RE of it either, but I'd rather opt for something that sounds plausible instead of brewing up conspiracy theories.
you have to give him some credit for sticking his neck out so far on something that's going to get a lot of push back.
Not really. Sticking out his neck this way gives him publicity, and that's what he wants.