Aviva’s Story: When a Green Offers a Jew ‘Support’

I have a Jewish friend. Aviva Sheb’a is a member of the Kiama/Jamberoo RSL Sub Branch of which I am secretary. Aviva served our country in the entertainment unit during the war in South Vietnam. She is a proud Australian.  But now she is also a frightened Australian.  As are her family and Jewish friends.

Aviva’s family originated in Poland.  Her grandparents migrated to Britain around the turn of the 20th century.  Her parents were both born in the East End of London.  Her father, Morris Marsh, served during the Second World War, I gather, mostly in the Royal Artillery, gaining the rank of Sergeant.  He was at the liberation of Bergen-Belsen and his testimony can be viewed below. Her mother, Birdie, worked in the War Office.

The family migrated to Australia in 1951, settling in Melbourne, where Aviva was born.  Her whole life has been devoted to song and dance.  From her website:

Fresh out of dance school in 1968, Aviva was the resident Flamenco dancer at Rafael’s Spanish Restaurant (Melbourne). In 1970 she turned 18 while entertaining the troops in Vietnam, then Thailand and Singapore. This launched her international career spanning over five decades.

In recent years, Aviva has learned the art and science of being an older woman. Learning to adapt her life and performances to accommodate her acquired disabilities has enriched her life. She is become a far greater performer because of, not in spite of, her disabilities and maturity.

As I said, Aviva has been feeling very bruised since the appalling events of October 7, and the disgraceful and deranged reaction of many supposed Australians. But fortunately for her, an empathetic Greens councillor from Wollongong, Cath Blakey, with whom she has an acquaintance, sensed that she might be in need of support and reached out to her:

Hi Aviva, not sure if you’ve seen this already or not, of if you’re interested or not, but a close friend of mine is participating tonight and is very welcoming. A supportive discussion space for Jewish people who want to understand the Palestinian struggle in the context of Judaism and Jewishness.

Aviva (below in her prime) says, “Her message was so unexpected, I was taken by surprise. I responded with gratitude.” Then she opened the UTS link given her by Cr Blakey. Here is what she found (emphasis added):

Tzedek Collective Jewish support space
A supportive discussion space for Jewish people* who want to understand the Palestinian struggle in the context of Judaism and Jewishness. Please read through all of the following before registration.

This event is for you if:

– You want a safe Jewish space to talk about Palestine, and receive and find support without judgement

– You are angry, upset, concerned, or confused about issues such as the ongoing occupation and genocide in Gaza, and dehumanising language about Palestinian people in media and the Jewish community

– You want to know more about what Palestinian liberation means

– You believe that “never again” applies to everyone, not just Jewish people

– You aren’t sure how to talk about Palestine with your friends and family

– You’re conscious of (or willing to discover) biases you still hold and want to work through without causing harm to Palestinian people

It is NOT for you if:

– You are an uncritical supporter of the Israeli government

– You want to debate

– You want to berate people for not thinking exactly as you do.

We will be assuming good faith and setting community agreements in session, but will not hesitate to remove participants if necessary. To facilitate open discussion and protect confidentiality, this event will not be recorded.

Aviva was gobsmacked. Needless to say, she declined this generous and welcoming invitation to be re-educated. Most, if not all, elected Greens, including Cr Blakey, are contemptible.  And most of the rest are, at best, useful idiots.  But you already knew that.

Recently, I visited the Jewish Museum in Sydney as a guest of my niece, Erin, who works there.  I had expected it to be sombre and depressing.  Instead, I found it bright and uplifting.  It does not deal only with the Diaspora and Holocaust, but also presents the story of Jews in Australia.  Their contribution to this country dates back to the First Fleet, which contained quite a number of Jewish convicts, many of whom later became successful business people and community leaders.  As have their descendants ever since.

But what struck me most, as an ex-military man, was the entrance, which is dominated by a plinth bearing the name John Monash, behind which is a beautiful black marble wall of remembrance bearing the names of all those Jews who served Australia in two World Wars.  There were 3,000 of them and 177 lost their lives.

What comparable contribution can these blow-ins from Bankstown possibly claim?

If you have not been to the Museum, I urge you to go.  I defy you not to be moved but, more importantly, you will give great encouragement to some fellow Australians who are feeling very hurt and vulnerable right now.

On Saturday we will commemorate the 105th anniversary of the end of World War One.   When we say, ‘lest we forget’, let’s not forget to also, at the same time, think ‘never again’.

20 thoughts on “Aviva’s Story: When a Green Offers a Jew ‘Support’

  • john mac says:

    The Blakey woman had to know what a nasty , veined insult it was to send that link. Typical leftist strategy. BTW, am in Sydney for the week ( magnificent) went to the maritime museum, boats great but the museum in full indigenous propaganda mode, soundtrack included. You’d think built the navy !

  • john mac says:

    Blame phone – You’d think “They” built the Navy.

  • cbattle1 says:

    I checked out the website of the “Tzedek Collective”; they are a nominally Jewish group, based in the Eastern Suburbs of Sydney, advocating a Leftist, anti-colonial, First-Nation acknowledging agenda, of the sort that might have a picture of Trotsky on their T-shirt!
    I am then reminded of an article of Winston Churchill’s that was published on page 5 of the “Illustrated Sunday Herald”, February 8 1920, titled “Zionism versus Bolshevism. A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People.” In the article, Churchill looks with horror at the machinations of the Bolsheviks in Russia, Hungary (Bela Kuhn) and in Bavaria, and notices the preponderance of Jews in the leadership. He describes the “Good” Jew as a loyal citizen of the country they inhabit, and the “Bad” Jew as the International/Terrorist Jew of the Bolshevik ilk. The third alternative he suggests is the Zionist Jew who desires a national homeland in Palestine. Churchill was a life-long supporter of the Zionist project, which isn’t surprising considering his relationship with Baron Rothchild. Churchill’s father worked for Rothchild in South Africa, and later Rothchild assisted the senior Churchill to gain a seat in Parliament. In his youth, Winston was a frequent visitor to the Rothchild estate, and cultivated a respect and admiration for the Jewish people. It is not surprising that, years later as Colonial Secretary, Winston was impressed with the Jewish settlements he visited in Palestine, but held a derogatory opinion of the Palestinian Arabs, telling the Peel Commission that he considered the Palestinian Arabs as being the “dog in the manger”, that was preventing the livestock from accessing their fodder.

    • rosross says:


      I don’t think there is any doubt that egregious racism toward Arabs played a major part in the creation of the Israeli State and ongoing treatment of the Palestinians.

      However, in that human way of being able to hold two conflicting views at one and the same time, it is evident that there was never an issue with Arabs or Palestinians because Israel gave immediate citizenship to all Arab Palestinian Jews, thereby demonstrating the only issue was religion.

      It equates with the current ‘one drop’ approach of those with Aboriginal ancestry in Australia, where the magical ingredient is able to eradicate or purify the ‘taint’ of the rest.

      It is of course just another form of deep racism on both those counts.

  • rosross says:

    Never again for anyone needs to be the mantra. The experience of holocaust litters our human history and has impacted many peoples, religions and nations. All of it must be condemned.

    Whatever one believes about the rights of Israelis or Jews, the religious legitimacy, of the Zionist State, or the history of this conflict there is no doubt that Israel’s attitude toward the native people of Palestine is one which never existed in Australia and most certainly does not exist today.

    There has never been a policy of genocide in Australia toward the people who inhabited the land before it was colonised. The beliefs and attitudes Israelis hold about the Palestinians is the source of this ongoing violence and injustice and while history cannot be changed and religious views will not change, attitudes can be changed and justice can be done.

    Quote: In early 2010, one of Washington’s most prestigious think tanks was holding a seminar on the Middle East which included a discussion of Israel’s December 2008-January 2009 assault on Gaza which killed about 1,300 Palestinians.

    When the death toll was mentioned, one expert on the panel smiled enigmatically and intoned: “It’s unfortunate, but every once in a while you have to mow the lawn.”

    The remark, which likened killing hundreds of men, women and children many of them noncombatants with trimming the grass, was greeted with a light tittering around the room, which was filled with some of Washington’s most elite, highly educated and well-paid Middle East experts. Not a single one objected to the panelist’s black humor.

    On the contrary, several analysts and experts were grinning at the reference to Israel’s strategy of mounting periodic attacks on the Palestinians to cull each new generation of militants. Such is the nonchalance of Washington’s policy-advising cognoscenti toward the ongoing and systematic genocide of Gaza’s oppressed population.”

    Elizabeth Murray served as Deputy National Intelligence Officer for the Near East in the National Intelligence Council before retiring after a 27-year career in the U.S. government, where she specialized in Middle Eastern political and media analysis. She is a member of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

    • Citizen Kane says:

      The British colonisation of Van Diemen’s Land (later Tasmania) began in 1803. There was an estimated 6,000 Aborigines (Palawa) living on the island with a history dating back over 40,000 years. By 1835, there were just over 100 Palawa living in forced exile on one of Tasmania’s smaller offshore islands. Only two residents remained when the government closed the Aboriginal Settlement in 1871. This chapter traces the history of Tasmania’s colonisation from 1803 to 1871 and finds that the British committed acts against the Palawa that meet the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide: killings, child removals, and creating conditions unconducive to sustaining life. Tasmania has been cited as one the ‘classical’ cases of genocide
      When lawyer Raphael Lemkin formulated the idea of “genocide” after the second world war, he included Tasmania as a case study in his history of the concept.

  • rosross says:

    The rules cited for participation in the discussion represent all that is wrong in our world today. Censorship, prior to participation, and during discussion is the modus operandi and should be totally rejected as your friend Aviva sensibly did.

    We all lose if we are told what we can think and say and such controlled and constructed discussion groups are a joke. They are also dangerous.

    Anyone who says, you are acceptable if you toe the line is to be avoided. The Greens wallow in a delusion that the world can be perfect and it can be controlled. It is not and it cannot be. The world and life are both messy because humans, all of us are flawed and conflicted. Perhaps the most troubling thing is that all sides seem to take a similar approach to the Greens. The urge to censor is a powerful force in our world today and ironically, perhaps more in the West than anywhere else. How the Gods mock us mere mortals.

    Free, frank, open, honest, factual and often painful debate is the lifeblood of freedom and sanity.

    • cbattle1 says:

      B-B-But, what about manners? The “Comments” section below the Q-O-L articles have become somewhat like a forum, with people commenting on comments. However, most if not all internet forums have certain guidelines as per the conduct of the posters, with moderators moderating (policing?) the debate. Clearly, I perceive some comments on Q-O-L to be within the definition of “flaming” or “cyberbullying”, in that the commentor seems to be actively looking for a fight. Would it be censorship or the inhibition of free speech to have such a standard or code of ethics/manners within QOL?
      An amusing anecdote has come to mind: Back in the 70’s/80’s, there was an annoying serial heckler that used to turn up regularly at Sydney’s outdoor free-speech forum at the Domain, held on a Sunday. This guy would go from speaker to speaker obnoxiously heckling, and when he’d done them all, he would start all over at the beginning. One day he thought he’d have a go at being a speaker himself, so he got a couple of milk crates from the nearby kiosk, and proceeded to mount his tower and harangue one and all, particularly in this instance he was dumping on women. A young woman then snuck up behind him and yanked the boxes from under him and he came toppling down, much to the amusement of the crowd! Having pulled the crate tower from under him, the girl ran and hid amongst the crowd, whilst the serial heckler sought out the mounted police that happened to be there, demanding justice! Don’t know what the moral relevance of this story is, but the incident was amusing!

      • rosross says:


        Yes, the level of bullying of posters, by what almost amounts to a gang of other posters, is disappointing although some have serial form on other comment threads. The goal no doubt is to bully people into silence or self-censorship and that certainly works for some but not all.

        I find it interesting that in general, those who seek to censor and want only unqualified support for Israel use fake names to hide behind, and those who are striving for open discourse and information across the spectrum are more likely to use their real names. What does that say?

        All I do know is that any issue which is devoid of balance in terms of all factors, will simply topple to the ground in time.

        However, such things are best ignored and those who seek to explore and understand this tragic conflict can still sift through the detritus and gain useful information and insights.

        You might want to read an article in a Jewish American media site called Mondoweiss which is titled: Are Israelis Jews? and which looks at the treatment of orthodox Jews in Israel, particularly in recent times when they too have been attacked by Israel. Such attacks seem very unwise but they also reflect a social attitude to and fear of orthodox Jews who want a very different Israel to that the Zionist secular/atheist have created.

  • Citizen Kane says:

    Its always amusing to me to watch how the victimhood mentality works. On every article on the subject of the Gaza conflict, almost without exception two contributors on QoL are the first to respond to the article, as if salivating in anticipation to offer some Antisemitic insights. When these comments are called out for their obvious antisemitism, rank hypocrisy and often mendacious lies proffered as fact, they then cry foul on being called out for their Antsemitism.- they claim victim status. It brings to mind the general modus operandi of the Left on almost every issue they address; Trans-right activists bully non-conformists then claim victim status, Privileged climate change protestors deface invaluable paintings then claim victim status, BLM protestors set cities alight then claim victim status, Pro-Palestinian protestors scream ‘gas the Jews’ – deface hostage posters, start physical altercations with peaceful Israeli protestors then claim victim status.

    Even in response to this article, not a scintilla of empathy towards the subject of the article which is not even addressed, rather their response is used as a platform to whinge and whine about being victims of
    their Antisemitic views via a cosy little online love in. Pathetic

    Right hear on QoL, we have a couple of individuals who claim it’s their right to have an antisemitic ‘point of view and perspective’ and to voice that holding their freedom of speech card. These two individuals now pathetically claim victim status. I for one will call them out every time using that exact same freedom of speech card. And if they don’t like it they are welcome to use their freedom of movement and association card and go and hang with the leftist swill over at say the ABC, Crikey, Mama mia or some such were I’m sure they will be much better received along with the Trans, AGW, BLM and Pro-Palestinian crowd.


    • rosross says:

      Since you have consistently failed to make a case for anti-semitism your constant repetition of unproven charges is a waste of space. Make a case. Take one comment from those you deem anti semitic and categorically prove it to be anti-semitic. The ball is in your court where it has always been sitting.

      Ad hominem attacks do not make a case they just make you look desperate and foolish.

  • Citizen Kane says:

    I almost forgot the latest and greatest example of the victimhood mentality. The Pro-Palestinian celebration nee protest at the Opera House before the blood of the slain 1400 Israeli citizens had even settled. And again not a word of condemnation from our resident Pro-Palestinian comment contributors on all things Gaza.

  • john mac says:

    Agreed CK , despite the reams of moral relativity from rr and co , nothing will alter the fact that Palestinians are a death cult, the tip of the Arab spear and they know only to destroy , not build. The millions in aid are spent on tunnels, weapons, and propaganda. Not housing, health or infrastructure. While Israel, with no oil six inches under it’s soil has produced an oasis amid a desert of hate. Did they vote “Yes” in the recent referendum.as surely we must be guilty as well for the indigenous plight . And rosross, I have enjoyed your posts on all other issues here ,but on this will respectfully disagree. Cheers.

    • rosross says:

      @john mac,

      It would be a strange world if everyone agreed on everything. However, all of my conclusions are sourced in the application of principles of justice, rule of law, democracy, human rights and common human decency.

      On those counts, Israel as the all powerful occupier and coloniser is the aggressor and the Palestinians are the victims and that is regardless of what atrocities, real or imagined are committed, and regardless of personal views about Islam or Muslims or Palestinians.

      One presumes the Germans believed the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto were a death cult.

      Israel is in the wrong under international law on many counts and the fact Australia supports that makes us complicit. For example, in regard to Israel’s Apartheid Wall across Occupied Palestine:

      Quote: This is the International Court of Justice judgment on the obligations of other states:

      “Given the character and the importance of the rights and obligations involved, the Court is of the view that all States are under an obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem. They are also under an obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction.

      It is also for all States, while respecting the United Nations Charter and international law, to see to it that any impediment, resulting from the construction of the wall, to the exercise by the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination is brought to an end. In addition, all the States parties to the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 are under an obligation, while respecting the United Nations Charter and international law, to ensure compliance by Israel with international humanitarian law as embodied in that Convention.”

  • cbattle1 says:

    Given that Arabs are Semites, any derogatory or deprecating language used against them is in fact Anti-Semitic! So lets not have any more of the racist Anti-Semitic language, please.

    • Citizen Kane says:

      Because Semitic-speaking peoples do not share any traits aside from language, use of the term “Semite” to refer to the broad range of Semitic-speaking peoples has fallen out of favour. For this reason, some critics even encourage the removal of the hyphen in the term anti-Semitism to help dispel any pseudoscientific notions of a “Semitic race.” They advocate instead for the use of antisemitism to describe the hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious or racial group.

      Of course, I could just use the term “Jew hater’ if you prefer.

      • cbattle1 says:

        So, has the word “Semite” been appropriated by the Jews? I do not accept that. The descendants of the the legendary Ishmael are certainly Semites, and, archeologically, all the peoples in the relevant area used a Semitic language, Phoenicians, etc., so I just use the term for anybody living in the area that uses a Semitic language and has ancestorial links to the area.
        Yes, I would prefer that you use the term “Jew-hater” instead of anti-Semite, thank you. Of course, it also follows that I would prefer you use the term “Arab-hater” where appropriate, so that there not be any confusion arising from using the word “anti-Semitic”.
        It appears you derived you knowledge of “Semite” from the entry on the “Britannica” website! Wikipedia goes further and says that the term “anti-Semitic”, in reference to Jews, was popularised by a German of the name Wilhelm Marr in the late 19th century.

Leave a Reply