Thomas Suárez, State of Terror
ERRATA


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 though consistent with the report's general condemnation of Zionism, is not how the quote reads.

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.

 

about Thomas Suárez   •   about the book referenced here