Max Veifer, the social media personality who recorded two Australian nurses saying that they would kill Jewish patients, is flying to Australia this month to testify in court against Sarah Abu Lebdeh and Ahmad Rashad Nadir.

Veifer, whose real name is Max Ilinsky, posted a video thanking the Australian authorities for organizing his trip and paying for his hotel stay, meals and security. But Veifer still fears for his safety, saying that he has received credible death threats for his public work, and is reaching out to the public for help in coordinating greater security with the New South Wales Police.

“Over the past year, I’ve received many threats because of my public work. People know my face. People know my name. And after everything that has happened recently in Australia, and with antisemitism rising around the world and in Australia, I’m not taking any chances,” he explained.

“For any time not covered by the official security arrangements, I want extra licensed security with me, and that’s why today I’m asking for your help,” he said.

The activist said that all he wants is for the truth to be heard.

“At the end of this month, I’m getting on that plane. I’m going to Australia. I’m walking into that courtroom, and I’m going to do exactly what I’ve been asked to do: answer every question honestly. All I want is for the truth to be heard and for justice to be done. The court will decide the rest. Let’s go in peace and come home in peace,” he said, concluding his video statement with “Am Yisrael Chai.”

The Australian nurses suffered a major setback in their case recently after they were fired when a video went viral in which they said they would kill Israeli patients.

Lebdeh and Nadir pleaded not guilty to using a carriage service to menace and harass after making shocking statements to Veifer. A court ruled last month that the video was inadmissible as evidence because it was improperly obtained and infringed on privacy laws. But prosecutors appealed the ruling to the Court of Appeal, which reversed the lower court’s decision, allowing the video to be used as evidence.