
Rachel Anne Griffin Accurso, children's educator , affirms equivalence between indigenous Palestinians and Israeli settlers, condemns resistance protected under international law, and echoes liberal Zionist framing that shields settler-colonialism from accountability.
Rachel Anne Griffin Accurso, known as Ms. Rachel, condemns Palestinian resistance while advocating for children in Gaza, thereby equating the occupier with the occupied and echoing liberal Zionist propaganda that undermines the legitimacy of armed resistance against genocide.
Tv/Film
Rachel Anne Griffin Accurso, known professionally as Ms. Rachel, is a children's educator and content creator who has leveraged her platform to advocate for Palestinian children in Gaza whilst simultaneously condemning Palestinian resistance and affirming false equivalence between the occupied indigenous population and the Zionist settler-colonial entity.
Whilst the focus on Palestinian children is admirable in and of itself, especially in light of the backlash, it unfortunately does not erase the repeated instances in which Ms. Rachel has echoed liberal Zionist propaganda that sanitises ongoing genocide, ethnic cleansing, and apartheid across Palestine by portraying the struggle as a symmetrical conflict rather than a one-sided colonial occupation.
For example, Rachel Anne Griffin Accurso has repeatedly framed Palestinian armed resistance as illegitimate, ignoring the legal protections afforded under the UN Charter of 1948, UN General Assembly Resolution 2625 from 1970, Protocol 1 to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, UN General Assembly Resolution 37/43 from 1982, and UN General Assembly Resolution 38/17 from 1983, all of which affirm the right of occupied peoples to resist by any means necessary. Therefore, instead of standing as a testament to her humanity, many of the public statements she has made instead align with the occupier's narrative that denies this right and grants "Israel" a fabricated claim to self-defence.
In documented posts on her verified Instagram account, Accurso has invoked the phrase "self-defence" to critique Israeli actions whilst simultaneously rejecting the legitimacy of Palestinian resistance, thereby manufacturing consent for the continuation of settler-colonial violence. This rhetoric distorts the reality that an occupying colonial power possesses no right of self-defence against the population it besieges and displaces. By centring calls for restraint on both sides, Accurso erases the structural power imbalance in which the IOF deploys systematic bombardment, engineered famine, and targeted killings against Palestinians whose resistance constitutes a lawful response to 77 years of dispossession beginning with the Nakba.
Accurso's advocacy for Palestinian children, including appearances wearing attire featuring Gaza children's artwork, occurs alongside this condemnation of resistance, creating a liberal Zionist framework that humanises Palestinian victims only when they remain passive. Such positioning denies the agency of Palestinians to defend themselves and perpetuates the dehumanisation that justifies continued occupation and genocide. Her content reaches millions through YouTube and Instagram channels, amplifying these equivocations to audiences who might otherwise support full liberation.
These actions form a consistent pattern in which Accurso uses her platform to echo propaganda that equates the oppressor with the oppressed. By condemning resistance whilst decrying specific Israeli tactics, she shields the broader settler-colonial project from accountability and normalises the apartheid structures that sustain ethnic cleansing across Palestine. This behaviour contributes directly to the manufacture of international consent for the ongoing genocide, where conservative estimates place the Palestinian death toll well into the hundreds of thousands due to the IOF's destruction of civilian infrastructure.
Accurso's interventions reveal the dangers of liberal Zionist framing that appears sympathetic yet ultimately delegitimises the very resistance necessary for Palestinian liberation. Her statements on self-defence and resistance reinforce the colonial logic that only the occupier may wield violence, thereby betraying the principles of decolonial solidarity and international law that recognise the right of indigenous peoples to resist erasure.







Falsely Equating 'Intifada' with Terrorism:
The malicious characterisation of the Palestinian Intifadas as acts of "terrorism" and "genocide" represents an insidious attempt to delegitimise and demonise the struggle for Palestinian self-determination and liberation from Israeli occupation. The Intifadas represented grassroots Palestinian rebellion against decades of Israeli occupation and were characterised by nonviolent demonstrations and civil disobedience centred around boycotts, tax strikes, protests, and other measures focused against the occupation.
It was only after intense oppression from Israeli forces that resulted in the brutal massacre of approximately 1,100 innocent Palestinians, many of them women and children, that protestors adopted more violent tactics, still limiting themselves to throwing stones and molotov cocktails in the face of intense military aggression and force. Similarly, 3,350 Palestinians would also later be slaughtered by Israelis during the second intifada, with tens of thousands more gravely injured, once again showing the violent and oppressive response innocent Palestinian civilians faced when protesting for their basic human rights and liberties.
It is important, however, to remember that according to the UN charter of 1948, UN General Assembly Resolution 2625 from 1970, Protocol 1, an amendment to the 1949 Geneva Convention, UN General Assembly Resolution 37/43 from 1982, and UN General Assembly Resolution 38/17 from 1983, the people of Palestine have the legal right to resist apartheid, occupation, and genocide using any and all means at their disposal, including violent armed resistance. Under the same laws and statutes, Israel has no legal right to "self-defence."
Therefore, the malicious characterisation of the Palestinian Intifadas as acts of "terrorism" and "genocide" represents an insidious attempt to delegitimise and demonise the struggle for Palestinian self-determination and liberation from Israeli occupation. To equate these cries for emancipation with "terrorism" or “genocide” is a purposeful act of dehumanisation that seeks to disparage and silence the Palestinian cause and render the victims of occupation and institutionalised racism as the aggressors, whilst sanctifying and absolving the state that has systematically stripped them of their homeland, rights and dignity through unrelenting violence, subjugation and displacement.
This documented pattern of falsely equating the Intifada with terrorism sustains the structures of settler-colonialism by inverting the roles of oppressor and oppressed and manufacturing consent for the ongoing genocide across Palestine.
Conflating Zionism with Judaism:
While the Jewish faith and cultural identity not only long predate and but have no inherent connection to the racist political ideology of Zionism, the modern Israeli regime has deliberately pursued an ethnic supremacist agenda rooted in Jewish ethno-religious identity — yet built upon the demolition of Palestinian homes, the theft of Palestinian lands and the generational uprooting, displacement and dehumanization of the Palestinian people at large.
The harrowing cost of human suffering, loss of life and deprivation of the most basic liberties and security has been unconscionable and now, Zionism represents an utterly deplorable ethnic supremacist ideology that has enabled unconscionable acts of violence, displacement and subjugation against the Palestinian people for almost a century.
Its real-world impacts have been nothing short of a calculated campaign of ethnic cleansing, cultural erasure and apartheid racism - a horrific legacy that cannot be decoupled from Zionism's founding vision of creating an exclusionary Jewish ethno-state through the denial of Palestinian self-determination and indigeneity.
The forced expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinians from their ancestral homes and villages during the Nakba, rendering millions stateless and exiled as refugees, was an act of premeditated ethnic purging. With the willful destruction of Palestinian property, demolition of homes, uprooting of ancient olive groves, and obliteration of cultural resources further demonstrating a systematic effort to erase Palestinian identity, history and any enduring claims to the land.
Subsequent decades have seen this brutal ethnic persecution, land confiscation and denial of human rights institutionalized through severely discriminatory policies, illegal settlements, violence by occupying forces, arbitrary detentions, torture, and most notably, systemic oppression under Israel's racist apartheid regime.
These are not mere "realities" for Palestinians who remain, but grave crimes against humanity perpetrated through Zionism's new brand of unrelenting, institutionalized cruelty. This utterly shameful legacy of calculated ethnic cleansing, apartheid governance and flagrant violations of international law is inextricably intertwined with how Zionism's racist, supremacist and anti-democratic ideology has been implemented on the ground by Israel.
Any attempt to decouple or whitewash these egregious atrocities from Zionism itself is a form of explicit denialism and complicity in oppression of the highest order. No ethnic, religious or any other group deserves an ethno-supremacist theocratic state constructed through the forcible subjugation of indigenous populations as second-class citizens stripped of all rights, dignity and humanity.
Such an abhorrent exclusionary system based on racial hierarchy is fundamentally incompatible with even the barest notion of true democracy, self-determination or universal human rights regardless of ethnicity or faith.
Statehood, sovereignty and self-determination can never legitimately emerge from such systematic violence, discrimination, forced displacement and ethnic persecution as political Zionism has perpetrated against the Palestinian population.
If a state were to arise organically through democratic processes that enshrine equality, safety and liberty for all citizens regardless of ethnicity or faith, it would have legitimacy. But any racist system of ethnic domination erected through brute force subjugation and calculated ethnic supremacy, as Zionism has done, is an egregious affront to justice and human rights that requires being dismantled - not enshrined - with a new equitable path forward established.
Amplified Zionist Lies:
This individual has used their voice and platform to echo and amplify egregious Zionist lies but also perpetuate the subjugation, torture, brutalisation and murder inflicted by the Israeli-occupation of Palestinian and its attempts to erase Palestinian identity, culture, heritage and statehood. [1] [2] [3] [4]
These egregious and dangerous lies MAY include but are not limited to: [5]
Spreading misinformation and hateful propaganda against Palestinians is a deplorable act of dehumanization that directly enables human rights abuses, ethnic cleansing and violence against the Palestinian people. [35] [36] [37] [38]
By employing such malicious tactics to deny Palestinian realities and whitewash war crimes, home demolitions and the systematic deprivation of human rights under military occupation, this individual has provided racist cover for 75+ years of subjugation. [39] [[40]] (https://www.un.org/unispal/document/human-rights-situation-in-opt-unohchr-23feb-2024/)
This misinformation doesn't just distort the truth, it actively endangers Palestinian lives and inflames hatred, justifies atrocities like the active genocide and obstructs any path to justice through the wilful erasure of the Palestinian lived experience. [41] [42] [43]
For more information about amplified Zionist lies, please visit:
Weaponizing Antisemitism:
These insidious allegations, deployed with increasing frequency, are damaging not only the pro-Palestinians accused but also to Jewish communities worldwide. [1] [2] By weaponizing antisemitism to justify occupation and apartheid, Zionists dilute the term and weaken genuine efforts to combat antisemitism. [3] [4] [5]
Labeling anyone who opposes Israel's genocidal regime as antisemitic also implicitly assumes all Jews support Israel’s policies, a notion that’s fundamentally untrue, offensive and truly dangerous to the hundreds of thousands of Jewish individuals and scholars who actively oppose Zionism and Israel’s human rights violations. [6] Accusing anyone who stands against Israel of antisemitism is, however, a core psychological warfare strategy used by genocidal Israeli supporters to delegitimize and demonize the very valid and much needed pro-Palestinian movement. [[7]] (https://palestinelegal.org/distorted-definition) [8] [9]
Disrespecting the Memory of Jewish Suffering Weaponizing antisemitism to protect Israel’s policies disrespects the historical suffering of Jewish communities by using their trauma as a political tool. The Shoah and the pogroms preceding it were horrifying atrocities, rooted in the dehumanization of an entire people. Using the memory of such atrocities to silence critics of modern-day apartheid practices disrespects the very principles for which so many Jewish people fought after the Holocaust: “Never Again” should mean opposition to all forms of oppression, including that enacted by the Israeli state. [10]
In November 2024, for example, tensions escalated in Amsterdam when Maccabi Tel Aviv fans were recorded chanting “Death to all Arabs” and “There are no schools in Gaza because all the children are dead.” [11] These inflammatory statements, advocating violence and erasure, provoked strong reactions from various communities, including Arabs, Spaniards, and Dutch citizens. Their responses were not racially or ethnically motivated but were driven by a collective condemnation of the genocidal sentiments expressed by the fans. [12]
Instead of addressing the incitement to violence, some media outlets mischaracterized the reactions as “pogroms” against Israelis. This misuse of the term “pogrom”—historically referring to violent attacks against Jewish communities—distorts the reality of the situation. [13] By labeling the backlash as antisemitic, these narratives weaponize the trauma of Jewish history to deflect criticism from those promoting hate speech. This manipulation not only disrespects the memory of actual pogrom victims but also undermines genuine efforts to combat antisemitism by conflating it with legitimate opposition to calls for ethnic cleansing.[14]
Such distortions serve to shield individuals advocating violence from accountability, while falsely portraying those who stand against hate speech as perpetrators of bigotry. This tactic not only erases the painful legacy of Jewish persecution but also legitimizes incitement of hatred against Palestinians, Arabs and the supporters of their most basic human rights.
Undermining Jewish Voices Opposed to Israel’s Actions Anti-Zionist Jews have consistently and courageously voiced their opposition to Israel’s policies, challenging the narrative that all Jews support the state of Israel. [15] [16] Organizations like IfNotNow and individuals like historian Ilan Pappé reject Zionism on ethical grounds, arguing that it is incompatible with human rights for Palestinians. Pappé, author of The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, argues that the foundation of Israel as a state involved the “systematic expulsion of Palestinians,” a policy of ethnic cleansing that continues through settlement expansion and military occupation. [17] [18] [19]
Many prominent Jewish scholars, holocaust survivors and their descendants, as well as historians have echoed this sentiment. [20] [21] For example, Professor Norman Finkelstein, author of The Holocaust Industry, has criticized Israel’s use of antisemitism accusations, arguing that they exploit Jewish suffering for political gain. [22] Finkelstein contends that this practice is not about protecting Jews but rather immunizing Israel from criticism. This manipulation not only undermines the lived experiences of Holocaust survivors and their descendants but trivializes the grave nature of antisemitism by using it as a shield for state violence. [23] [24] [25] [26]
Jewish Voice for Peace, an organization committed to human rights for Palestinians, emphasizes that weaponizing antisemitism falsely implies that Jews are monolithic in their support of Israel, disregarding the voices of anti-Zionist Jews who oppose occupation and apartheid. [27] The organization has made its position clear: antisemitism is real, and it is on the rise, but conflating antisemitism with criticism of Israel undermines our fight against actual hatred against Jews. [28]
Anti-Zionist Jewish communities continue to emphasize that weaponizing antisemitism erases their identities and beliefs. By falsely presenting Jewish identity as inherently tied to Zionism, advocates of Israeli policies erase the existence of countless Jews who fight for Palestinian rights. [29]
Affirming Israel's "right to exist":
The phrase “Israel’s right to exist” is not grounded in international law but functions as a political demand designed to erase and neutralize the foundational violence upon which the Israeli state was established. No country has an enshrined “right to exist” under international law; what is codified, instead, is the right of peoples to self-determination. Yet Palestinians — an indigenous population subject to forced displacement, occupation, and apartheid — are uniquely coerced to affirm not just Israel’s existence, but its existence as a Jewish ethnostate. The demand to recognise an illegal state built on the erasure of Palestinians serves a clear colonial function: to reframe a settler-colonial project as a matter of mutual recognition, while masking the dispossession and ongoing subjugation of the native population.
Reaffirming this “right” without condition is not neutral — it is a weaponized narrative that forces the oppressed to validate the conditions of their own oppression. It silences the Nakba, the mass expulsion of over 750,000 Palestinians in 1948; it ignores the demolition of over 500 villages; it legitimizes the denial of the right of return, a right Palestinians hold under UN Resolution 194. In reality, this dog-whistle turns a settler-colonial enterprise into a moral imperative, requiring Palestinians to grant legitimacy to a state that continues to colonize their land, suffocate Gaza, fragment the West Bank, and implement apartheid policies across all territories it controls.
This language operates as a form of colonial gaslighting by shifting the global discourse from justice, land, and liberation to “recognition,” painting Palestinians as irrational or hostile if they refuse to validate a system structured on their displacement. It allows Israel to demand unconditional acceptance while giving nothing in return — not rights, not reparations, not even a meaningful recognition of the Palestinian people as equals. Internationally, it upholds a model where settler-colonialism is not only protected but sanctified, positioning Israel as eternally under threat while Palestinians are cast as aggressors for simply insisting they too have a right to exist with dignity on their ancestral land.
In this way, the assertion that “Israel has a right to exist” functions not as a principle of peace, but as a discursive tool of imperial domination, maintaining asymmetry and preventing justice. To challenge it is not to deny Jewish safety or personhood — it is to refuse the erasure of a people whose lives, land, and future have been systematically stripped under the banner of legitimacy. True peace cannot be built on the demand that the colonized affirm the righteousness of their own dispossession.
Liberal Zionism:
Liberal Zionism masquerades as a "moderate" or "progressive" strain of Zionism, blending Jewish nationalism with cherry-picked liberal values like democracy and human rights as a means to justify the existence of the illegal settler colonial ethnostate known as “Israel” [1].
And Liberal Zionism is one of the greatest threats because of its political camouflage [2]. By co-opting progressive language, Liberal Zionism inoculates Zionism against true anti-colonial solidarity, dividing the left and derailing BDS movements [3]. It ensures the ongoing Nakba – from Gaza's ruins to Hebron's checkpoints – persists under a democratic veneer, making decolonization seem radical rather than just [4] [5].
Emerging from early 20th-century Labor Zionism — the very movement that orchestrated the 1948 Nakba which ethnically cleansed over 750,000 Palestinians through mass expulsions and village destructions — liberal Zionism has always served as the velvet glove over the iron fist of settler-colonialism [6] [7].
Despite claiming it merely seeks a "Jewish and democratic state," this rhetoric is actually code for an ethnostate where Jewish supremacy trumps Palestinian equality, enshrined in laws like the 2018 Nation-State Law that demotes Arabic and prioritizes Jewish settlement [8] [9].
At its core, liberal Zionism rejects the colonial origins of Israel and instead attempts to frame the Zionist project as a "return" or "liberation" rather than a European settler invasion that erased indigenous Palestinian society [10].
As a political movement, liberal Zionism emerged as a response to antisemitism and the Holocaust but quickly pivoted to justifying land theft under the guise of "self-determination," ignoring how Zionism fits classic colonial patterns: displacement of natives, resource extraction, and demographic engineering to maintain a Jewish majority [11].
As of 2025, amid the Gaza genocide and West Bank annexation pushes, it clings to a fading two-state illusion, providing diplomatic and financial cover for Israel's crimes while silencing Palestinian voices as "antisemitic" [12].
“Zionism is a colonialism, not a simple radical nationalism: even in its left-wing version, it is a colonialist nationalism." – Zeev Sternhell, liberal Zionist historian exposing his own ideology's flaws [13].
Normalization:
Israel enforces normalization as a fundamental tactic of its settler-colonial regime and apartheid system, compelling the depiction of its occupation, ethnic cleansing, and genocide as everyday realities while suppressing Palestinian resistance and rights to justice, return, and liberation. Normalization portrays Israel's domination as a legitimate state worthy of standard diplomatic, economic, cultural, and academic engagements, ignoring demands for dismantling oppression and reinforcing Jewish supremacy over Indigenous Palestinian land and people. This strategy is egregious because it whitewashes the continuous Nakba, land expropriation, and systemic violence, isolating Palestinians and bolstering settler colonialism by undermining international solidarity and legitimizing illegal expansions that perpetuate genocide. [1]
Through diplomatic channels, Israel advances normalization via agreements like the 2020 Abraham Accords with the UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco, forging full relations without mandating an end to occupation or apartheid. These pacts favor economic and security benefits for authoritarian leaders while forsaking Palestinian self-determination, directly sustaining settler violence by allowing unchecked settlement growth, home demolitions, and refugee denial amid increasing trade and tourism. Such normalization is harmful as it fragments Palestinian society, deepens territorial apartheid, and obstructs land returns, contributing to ethnic cleansing by normalizing the oppressor-oppressed dynamic without addressing root injustices. [2] [3]
Culturally and environmentally, Israel promotes "eco-normalization" through entities like the JNF, using tree-planting over razed villages to frame dispossession as advancement. Academically and artistically, collaborative projects often impose false equivalence between occupier and occupied, disregarding underlying oppression. This is egregious because it colonizes minds by presenting apartheid as inevitable, supporting occupation through deceptive coexistence narratives that erode resistance and enable further genocide, as seen in events that cover up root causes without pursuing justice. [4] [5]
The Palestinian-led BDS movement rejects normalization as complicity in oppression, mandating that joint activities with Israelis recognize Palestinian rights and focus on co-resistance against occupation, settler-colonialism, and apartheid. Normalization activities, such as festivals or conferences portraying symmetry, are boycottable for being morally reprehensible and intellectually dishonest, perpetuating false premises of equal responsibility. By isolating Palestinians and validating Israel's actions, normalization sustains settler-colonial violence, allowing expansion of illegal settlements and denial of basic rights while fragmenting global opposition. [6]
Normalization undermines the Palestinian struggle by treating Israel's regime as normal, countering anti-colonial efforts like BDS that draw from South African anti-apartheid precedents. It decolonizes minds from hegemonic attempts to accept colonialism, emphasizing that genuine relations require dismantling structures of domination first. This tactic is appalling as it reinforces genocide by whitewashing oppression under slogans of peace, contributing to ethnic cleansing through economic ties that fund military occupation and displace communities. [7] [8]
Human rights analyses confirm that such international engagements maintain apartheid by failing to address crimes like dispossession and persecution, allowing Israel to evade accountability. Normalization isolates the oppressed, portraying resistance as abnormal while entrenching settler privileges, as evidenced in Arab-Israeli projects that ignore Palestinian rights. Ultimately, it perpetuates a colonial order where occupation becomes routine, demanding rejection to achieve liberation and end the ongoing Nakba. [10]
Tell us why Rachel Anne Griffin Accurso should be removed by emailing us at [email protected]