Thomas Suárez, State of Terror
ERRATA

This list of misprints and other substantive errata is believed to be comprehensive
but will of course be updated if any further issues are discovered.
Benign, obvious typos are not listed.


IMPORTANT MISPRINTS

page 29, regarding the quote from Dr. Paul Nathan, he appears to have been referring to the plight of non-Zionist Jews (those refusing to learn and speak Hebrew), rather than Palestinians specifically.

• page 44, I suggest that the NY Times was the first to print the supressed King-Crane Report (3-4 December, 1922). While it was this printing that brought the report to a wide audience, it had in fact appeared a day earlier, December 2, in Editor & Publisher, V.55, No. 27.

• page 80, Hunloke's reference to “stir[ring] up anti-Semitism ... in order to force Jews ... to come to Palestine” was presented in speculation. The spirit of the rest of his testimony supports this, but it is inaccurately characterized in the book as a positive statement. All the other Hunloke quotes are accurate.

page 96, the sentence beginning "It is noticeable..." is a quote. This is probably clear, but it should have been indented.

• page 83, US Intelligence raised the question as to whether Zionists “would have got further towards rescuing the unfortunates in Axis Europe, had they not complicated the question by always dragging Palestine into the picture”. Due to an editing, it wrongly appears as a claim, which would be consistent with the report's general condemnation of Zionism.

page 106, the phrase "the Hagana and Irgun would agree on a particular terror attack, the Irgun would carry it out, and the Jewish Agency would then publicly condemn it" belongs with the defence summary in the next sentence, not with the Kollek quote.

• page 164, the citation for the Daily Herald report appears in endnote 331 instead of 330.


• page 263, four lines from the bottom of the main text (not footnote), "like Haifa" is a misprint. It should read "unlike Haifa". [UK edition only; corrected in the US edition]

• page
286, UN Resolution 194 is of course General Assembly, not Security Council. This obvious error resulted from a rewrite in which later Security Council resolutions had been cited involving the continuing ethnic cleansing of East Jerusalem, then removed for brevity. The essential argument is unaffected, as right of return is an individual right enshrined in international law.






CLARIFICATIONS
• "The Times" always refers to the London Times.
• The New York Times is always referred to as such.






BENIGN MISPRINTS
• Page 273, word "he" missing (middle of page, "...member, he quickly...").


 

about Thomas Suárez   •   about the book referenced here