[FONT=&]I know for a fact that Steve Cannane read and researched every word of the transcript of the inquiry. Further, I provided him with my record (written) of my examination and testimony . . . but the gig became that my whole testimony and cross examination before the Board ended up "in camera" and not in the Official transcript. I also provided Steve with the rebuttal by the CofS published in a booklet by them in the title of: KANGAROO COURT: An Investigation into the Conduct of the Board of Inquiry Scientology.
Steve wisely chose not to bore the eyeballs out of his readers with what is available from the Inquiry transcript . . . it's all bloody boring; but findings as published are of use and interest to history, some of which he referred to.
Steve wisely chose to write a real page turner dealing with the truths of what happened to key individuals and their history in Scientology's development. There was a lot more he could have written, but he wisely chose to not do an encyclopedia monster. He kept his work exciting and interesting.
Seeing Rathburn's comment about Steve's work simply demonstrates to me how inept, dishonest, and lost Rathburn is. Frankly, when I saw Rathburn saying, regarding the Melbourne Inquiry, quote: "I went through this with him (Gibney) in some detail with Ewan (or, you and) Cameron being involved in this . . . etc., and prosecutor Dax . . . etc" Firstly, I can see absolutely how made up Rathburn's statements are. He is actually making his shit up as he goes trying to discredit Gibney but actually using Steve Cannane's work as a verification that the Mel Inquiry was a witch-hunt; which it was . . . it was conducted as a witch-hunt by Anderson, Joust and Dax, et al, . . . BUT, that does not invalidate the actual FINDINGS. The findings as published are actually correct.
This point of the CONDUCT of the inquiry was as a witch-hunt, but yet the findings were correct, is something Steve and I discussed at length . . . in fact, I well remember his pointed, very pointed, questioning of me on this point in the vein that we see TV journalists do when they are challenging for truth in their interviews. Steve and I spent time in my office and at dinner here at home. Plus subsequent follow-up questions and verifications.
RogerB
/[/FONT]