Rating: 
Summary: The Classic Work
Review: The classic work on The Jewish Settlement of Palestine. This is the classic book that explodes the myths surrounding the establishment of a Jewish State in Israel. Peters originally intended to write a book describing the plight of the Palestinian refugees. Her main questions were "Where did the refugees come from?" , "What is the Palestinian claim to the land of Israel?" "how can the refugee problem be solved?". This book seeks to tackle these questions by examining life in the holy land prior to 1948. Peters looks at a massive amount of data to draw her conclusions and make her solid arguments.Central to the first portion of the book is the issue of Dhimmitude as it applied to Jews living in Palestine and the Arab countries prior to the British occupation in 1917. She shows the great hardships and discriminations and pogroms the Jewish minorities suffered in Palestine as well as throughout the middle east. Peters shows how the Jews never left Palestine and how a Jewish presence was maintained in cities like Hebron and Jerusalem from the time of Rome to 1948. The second portion of the book investigates the claims of 'numbers' and 'facts' that have permeated the 'who is the rightful owner debate'. Peters looks at the immigration data and shows how the British worked hard to suppress Jewish immigration while turning a blind eye to Palestinian immigrants. She further shows how absentee Arab landlords sold land to the Jewish settlers at very steep prices and that it was actually Arabs stabbing each other in the back that allowed for Jewish settlement and land purchasing. Peters examines the refugee issues and shows how the Palestinians were treated vastly worse in Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt then they were by the Israelis. She shows how Arab rhetoric never translated into aid on the ground for the many thousands of Palestinians who fled following the failure of their invasion of Israel in 1948. Peters goes on to show the best solution to the current problem would be a simple realization that an equal number of Jews were forcefully thrown out of the Arab countries in 1948 as the number of Palestinians who fled Israel. 500,000 Jews were forced to flee Yemen, Iraq, Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Iran and other Arab countries following the 1948 war and those Arab countries confiscated all the possessions of these Jews who were forced by the same Arab governments to leave. The Arab governments should have simply turned those possessions over to the Palestinians who had fled Israel, thus solving the refugee problem many years ago. This is a classic work, although criticized by many if you read it you will see the facts are clear and the thesis is sound.
Rating:
Summary: Arab Myths exposed
Review: The strength of Peters' book is in its research (almost 1800 references) and its unblinkered look at the facts. She exposes the myths that the Arabs had been in Israel "from time immemorial," (making Jews the interlopers), that Arabs want to live harmoniously with Jews, etc. She shows Jewish life in Moslem countries, and cites some of the hateful passages in the Koran which continue to guide contemporary Moslems, even secular Moslems. Her critics generally fail to identify specific alleged errors or misinterpretations for good reason, for then the discussion would be about those data, the data that Peters cites in detail. Terrific book, and terribly- and ominously- relevant to current events.
Rating:
Summary: Read the book!,
Review: There is fascinating research and original source material here that the author uncovered during several years of research. She claims to have changed her mind after looking into the issue. I believe her. To read this book is to be flooded with an avalanche of facts. Almost 100 pages of footnotes. And the realization that many of those debating the issue of Israel, the Palestinians, and the West Bank ignore much of history. The first casualty of any war is the truth, but the truth is that this book is worth reading for the viewpoint and hard work of the author in bringing some little-known facts to light. I have yet to see a similarly inspired work from the other side - and I've been looking...
Rating: 
Summary: Just Another Example of Pro-Israel Lobby's Work
Review: This book basically demonizes not just the Palestinians, but Muslims in general, as "violent, uncivilized savages." Peters essentially disregards the brutality that Jews and Muslims at the hands of Christians, both in Europe and in the Middle East, and makes it appear as if Muslims have always been oppressors and never victims, unless they were victimized at the hands of fellow Muslims. Worse, she also neglects to describe the relatively benign treatment of Jews and Christians that Muslims gave them in medieval Spain, leading to a flourishing civilization that preserved many of the classics, instead focusing only on the worst aspects of Islamic conquest (which was no more brutal than Christian conquest of Europe and the Middle East at the time, if even that violent).
As for her argument that the population of "Palestine" was transient, meaning that only the Jews had ever had a legitimate claim to the land, the bottom line is that 800,000 Palestinians were violently expelled from their homes in 1948 by the Israeli army, not because they were a threat to the Jewish settlers, but because they were non-Jewish (both Christian and Muslim), and Israel had to be "for the Jews only." No democracy should be given license to engage in this behavior, regardless of "past grievances" of any sort. Peters essentially gives Israel a free pass for this and later transgressions because she defends the Jewish "culture of victimhood," which is still used by pro-Israel groups in the U.S. to justify any Israeli wrongdoing as "self-defense," when, in fact, Israeli destruction of Palestinian homes and farmlands is usually an offensive measure designed to discourage any national identity among the Palestinians.
Beyond being a sloppy collection of many biased travel and anecdotal sources (which are never entirely accurate and suitable for a serious academic work such as this one claims to be), written by Christians, include British WASP's, desiring the Holy Land to be empty so that the Jews could "repopulate it for the coming of the Messiah, the book seems to represent Peters' own prejudices in favor of Jews. She often talks of them in the Old Testament-Messianic sense, suggesting that perhaps she herself is one of those "philosemites" who think Jews are "special," when in fact that is a form of closet anti-Semitism, for it views Jews as being "destined to take over the world," as the British WASP's who founded Israel, including Churchill, believed. Perhaps not, but the bottom line is that this woman is selective in her sympathy and uses her compassion for the Jews as "perpetual victims" to justify her hatred and intolerance towards Muslims.
Rating: 
Summary: Flaws in Scholarship and Craftsmanship Hurt a Valid Thesis
Review: This book has engendered an enormous amount of criticism since its publication in 1984. My review of the reviews reveals that some of the criticism is warranted. The book does contain a certain amount of sloppy scholarship. In particular, Peters' apparent misapplication of certain statistics regarding population growth in Palestine in the early 20th century is questionable. Enemies of Israel and historical revisionists have used these errors to condemn and discredit the book. In my experience, virtually all scholarly work contains errors of the kind Peters' is accused of. I have not checked her footnotes nor do I expect have most of her readers. The reader has a right to rely on the accuracy of footnotes. As I see it, Peters has been accused by the revisionists and enemies of Israel of misusing quotes, taking them out of context and over-relying on anecdotal evidence. I find this ironic since this is exactly what the revisionists have been revealed to have done. I suppose they should be familiar with their own technique. This does not excuse the action. I reject the "revisionist technique" which smacks of Marxist "correctness". The goal of the historian should be the revelation of the truth. The mis-application of evidence is one of the worst sins an historian can commit. I do not excuse Peters. And yet...And yet...the real question is whether the errors in her scholarship discredits her thesis. If one eliminates the problematic sources and quotes, does the argument fall apart? To this I offer a resounding no. Peters an American non-Jew, with no ax to grind for either side set out to research the history and discovered that what she was finding was the exact opposite of what she believed to be true. As her research continued she became more and more outraged as she realized that what she had thought was the truth was a deliberate hoax, fostered by the Arab world to maintain a perpetual conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs. This book was the result. Peters first sets out to demonstrate the true history of historical Palestine. She shows, quite accurately, the Roman destruction of "Judea", the invention of the term "Palestine", the continued presence of Jews in Palestine throughout the ages, despite intense persecution, the constant migrations in and out by assorted Moslem peoples (not Arabs primarily) and the severe under-population of the land in the 19th century. She then demonstrates the horrendous treatment of the Jews of the Moslem world, historically and in modern times as well. This is the most original part of her book. Few sources have focused on the Jewish refugees of the Arab world even though entire populations were forced to flee without any of their material belongings. Because they were quickly absorbed into the Israeli population, their plight has never seemed important but it is vitally important when considering the moral "claims" of the Arab refugees. Peters' gravest sin, in my opinion is that she becomes overwhelmed by her passions for her side of the story. It is hardly necessary for her to prove precisely how many Arabs lived in Palestine in 1880. To prove her point she merely needed to show the trend of Arab immigration and the restrictions on Jewish immigration. Any litigator or debater will concede that to ignore evidence which contradicts your thesis is deadly. Since in Peter's case, the contrary evidence or weaknesses in her own evidence are so readily explainable, her failure to present opposing points and refute them is particularly inexcusable. It just lends false credence to her adversary's claims. Peters is guilty of over-exuberance for her subject. But this kind of argument in the face of hostile opposition calls for cool reason. Extensive footnoting is no substitute for properly constructed argument. Ironically Peters, who had no personal devotion to Zionism and thus no need to justify it, ends up tarred with the brush of partisanship. One need not be "neutral" in thought to write a logical analysis defending Zionism and refuting its detractors. Benjamin Netanyahu did it in his book "A Durable Peace" where he does not shrink from responding to revisionist arguments. To the contrary he revels in it. Again let me make it clear that I support Peters' thesis 100 percent. Those who condemn her are almost exclusively from the revisionist/anti-Israel camp. As they always do, they seek to obstruct the truth by throwing up a smokescreen. Peters did not need to provide them with the smoke. Not one critic has genuinely attacked her premise. Indeed, it is the revisionists who have been largely discredited by legitimate historians. This does not excuse these errors. Am I surprised to learn that the supporters of this book are Americans while Israeli and European academics have rejected it? Of course not. The Israeli academy is in thrall to the revisionists despite the fact that their works have been largely proven false and ideologically driven. The European academy is even more in thrall to the leftist ideology that utterly rejects Zionism. The European academy has become worse than useless. Of course individual exceptions apply. Two good British historians who wrote of the Arab-Israeli conflict are Paul Johnson and Martin Gilbert. American historians are an independent and diverse lot. I trust them more than European or Israeli academics. Peters makes a number of cogent and important points about the conflict. Much of it is a rehash of previously known facts which have become largely forgotten in today's climate of relentless Arab propaganda. Her most original contribution to the debate is her contention that in any accounting of Arab suffering, the vast suffering of the Jews of the Muslim world needs to be considered as well. The book is not riveting, but is instead scholarly and at times pedantic. Peters could have lopped off several hundred pages and presented a stronger case for her clearly valid observations. For this reason, I would say there are better books than this one available.
Rating:
Summary: Completely Fabricated; A Hoax
Review: This book is a hoax. Almost all of its sources are completely fabricated and this book was rejected both in the UK and Israel.
[...]
Rating:
Summary: Informative and Important
Review: This book is required reading for anyone hoping to learn the truth about the Arab campaign to destroy Israel. Peters uses quotes from Arab leaders themselves to rebut lies and misconceptions about the "Arab-Israeli" conflict and to support her arguments....
Rating:
Summary: Excellent, truthful, and informative! A must have!
Review: This book is undoubtedly one of the best books on the middle east conflict. What makes this book different and more interesting from the rest is that the author first set out to write about what she believed were the poor suffering "Palestinians." Through her extensive 7 year research on the conflict she found the truth to be exactly the opposite of what she first believed it to be. Such personal accounts as her witnessing "Palestinian" children counting out arsenals of Kalashnikovs on the shells of a small "hospital supply" warehouse make the book amazingly informative. Overall it is an absolutely excellent book providing a thorough analysis on the root of the conflict. Those who rate this book low refuse to accept history. Dont hold back. Buy this book and be informed. You won't regret it.
Rating:
Summary: This Book Belongs in the 'Fiction' Category
Review: This book was first published in 1984 and surprisingly enough, it received rave reviews inspite of its outrageous claims. It was enormously popular in the US, until it was released in Britain and some of the reviewrs got suspicious and actually started following up on the references to confirm the claim. Turns out, that the whole thing is a fraud. References are misleading, statistics are doctored, and the book is one giant hoax. Even Israeli historians, such as Baruch Kimmerling have written about it in their books. But for full details of the fraud, read the following articles.
1. Baruch Kimmerling, 'The Palestinian People', Introduction, xxvii.
2. Norman G. Finkelstein, 'In These Times', September 1984.
3. Albert Hourani, The Observer, March 5, 1985
4. Yehoshua Porath, "Mrs. Peters' Palestine", New York Review of Books, January 16, 1986
Rating:
Summary: A very objective view of the Arab-Israeli conflict......
Review: This book was recommended to me to help understand the madness of the Middle East. Interestingly enough I browsed through the reviews prior to purchasing the book. It was interesting to see how the ratings and comments where on opposite sides of the rating scales (i.e. one star or 5 five stars).... So I was captivated to read this book. Everyone interested in finding out the history of this conflict shoud read this book - regardless of ideology and stance.
| 
