=Powers=== 
 Having started on Powers "History As Propaganda", could I present my POV on his POV -) 

 First he tries to present himself as an NPOV (aren't we all?), but I get the impression he is quite a strong POV...he is clearly a follower of Tibetan Buddhism having also written "Introduction to Tibetan Buddhism", which is fair enough, but IMHO he has selected his sources, then criticises them (fair enough) and presents a synthesis: balanced eh? 

 But the balance he arrives at, much depends on the choice and presentation of sources, and the weighting given them. In other words Powers has given himself full freedom as to where he will find his balance: and that balance of course just happens to lie inside his comfort space as a believer in TB....  

 As an example: for Powers presents Goldsteins view of the DL as being a "devious but inept politician" who exasperates the Chinese with "duplicity, intransigence and bungling". Now Goldstein thinks the DL made strategic mistakes in his relations with the Chinese, but has a much more qualified view, and never uses that sort of language. So Powers has used the "straw man" technique by presenting a view and language not used by Goldstein, and attacking that to provide evidence of bias. 

 ==