> I am not specifically targeting the Buddhist supporters for dishonestly
> presenting a false picture. I could also target certain academics such as George
> Lakoff who gave an entire presentation full of good points but deliberately
> chose to leave out relevant information in order to justify a certain
> conclusion. I do have valid premises for that statement.
I'd be interested to hear what relevant information you feel Lakoff
omitted, and how that information might have hurt his conclusions. While
I admire Lakoff a lot, I don't feel he's infallible (There are a fair
number of mutterings of disagreement in my pencilled scribblings in the
margins of _Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things_).
Eva