Final_Judgment

The evidence presented in Final Judgment stands on its own, no matter
what the name-callers at the ADL and their assorted shills might say.
Anyone who contends that I believe the JFK assassination was a "Jewish
plot" is a liar or a fool or both—or illiterate, at the least.
Despite all this, as I've said, the frenzy over the college seminar
brought an amazing amount of fully-unexpected publicity to the thesis
presented in Final Judgment.
Of some 27 different news accounts of the controversy that came to my
attention in the days following the initial Los Angeles Times article, fully 21
of those subsequent accounts (based on the Times' report and on coverage
by the Associated Press) said specifically that the seminar featured a
speaker who contended that the Mossad had a hand in the president's
murder. Most of the references, in fact, actually appeared in the opening
paragraphs of the articles in question.
Not all of the accounts mentioned Final Judgment by name—although
many did—but the thesis herein was definitively referenced and no doubt
surprised those who had never heard of the theory before.
Some of the headlines on the articles themselves were quite forthright:
"Speakers say Kennedy killed by Israeli plot" read the article in the Bryan
College Station Eagle out of Texas. "Guest speaker claims Israel
masterminded the killing" announced a sub-headline in the Miami Herald.
"Class lecturers blame JFK death on Israelis," reported the Chicago Sun-
Times. "Community college speakers blame JFK death on Israel," declared
the Birmingham News. The Pasadena Star-News, in announcing that an
" uproar " had forced the cancellation of the seminar, added (falsely) that
"One panelist said Jews behind death of JFK."
And so it went—all across the country. In the end, what is so ironic is
that if the ADL had just ignored the seminar, the role of Israel's Mossad in
the JFK assassination might never have received the widespread national
exposure in the daily press that it at long last has.
Ironically, Michael Granberry, the young man who covered the story
for the Los Angeles Times—and whose byline appeared in many of the
stories across the country—left his post shortly after his story appeared. Did
Granberry pay the price for telling too much about the thesis of Final
Judgment to his readers? I don't know, but it's something to think about.
To his credit, noted commentator Nat Hentoff, who writes a widely
read column on First Amendment issues, weighed in on the controversy.
Hentoff wrote: "There is no academic freedom unless one has the freedom
to speak about any idea no matter how offensive or disgusting" (the
suggestion being, obviously, that my thesis is "disgusting" by the very
nature of the fact that I have said something less than friendly toward
Israel—a unique re-definition of the word "disgusting" indeed!).
Hentoff's comments were featured in a report entitled "Free speech in
academe under fire" published by the First Amendment Center at
Vanderbilt University. It turns out that none other than Caroline Kennedy,
daughter of the late president, is a member of the center's advisory board.