Is S. Dhammika's book The Broken Buddha, a misleading angry reaction?

Recently I happened to read the following review and comments about the book "The Broken Buddha." The Broken Buddha and its Implications The Broken Buddha: The revenge of the unfaithful monk > By Carl Stimson: > > The book is the work of Shravasti Dhammika, an > Australia-born man who ordained as a Theravada monk in 1976. It was > published in 2008, though as he states in the preface, most of it was > written several years earlier and he only decided to publish after an > “unauthorized draft” appeared online. I am unsure how much the > official version differs from this draft, but the text retains a rough > feel. At less than 80 pages, it is somewhere between long essay and > short book, and is at turns angry, funny, cutting, astounding, and, > unfortunately, sometimes poorly researched. For some, Bhante > Dhammika’s casual relationship with facts and tendency toward > generalization may limit their ability to take the thrust of his > arguments seriously. Both of them says most of the S. Dhammika's views are angry and and misleading. Is S. Dhammikas work poorly researched and baseless?