Mr. Solway takes some things out of context, in my opinion. I believe this
is the link to the Ajahn Brahm talk in question (will open mp3 file). It's easy to pluck out certain parts of any talk and take a few swings at those parts. But doing that is just a distraction from the underlying important points Ajahn makes.
Interesting to read some of the comments posted with the video. One of Mr. Solway's latest comments (as of this posting) is a swipe at E-Sangha. He claims members get banned merely for not holding the views that the forum admins hold. False.
My impression is that in this video, Mr. Solway oversimplifies, overgeneralizes and exaggerates. His closing thought, for example, is that it is an act of "violence" to hold the view that if one denies rebirth, one must believe in annihilationism. An act of violence? I don't see how that comment can be justified, even if you don't agree with Ajahn Brahm.
More broadly speaking, Mr. Solway seems to believe he is arguing against Buddhism when in fact he is not. Rather, he's arguing against one man's Dhamma talk, and he's arguing against reincarnation. Obviously, belief in rebirth is not falsifiable, so what does Mr. Solway think he's trying to accomplish? Other than merely to point out the obvious, which is that Buddhism in this respect is a religion. Duh.
I think this
is the same guy. He writes:
Increasingly I realized the inseparability of reason and masculinity. At the same time I could not help noticing the increasing feminization of society. The only course open to me was to attack femininity at the root. My life's work, I decided, would focus on making people aware of the shortcomings of femininity and the great benefits of masculinity. For there to be wise men, there must first be men.