Peter Myers Digest: The Vax and Zionism

(1) Senator Ralph Babet (A) bill removes vaccine indemnity from manufacturers; public will see how pollies vote
(2) Former WHO Adviser Sounds The Alarm On Pandemic Treaty Proposals
(3) NYT defends ‘Kill the Boer’ chant, denies it’s a call to violence
(4) ADL defends ‘Kill the Boer’ chant, denies it’s a call for White Genocide
(5) Farm attacks in SA surge after ‘Kill the Boer’ song
(6) Australia backs down on plan to force companies to disclose global tax data
(7) Multinationals Shifted $1 Trillion Offshore, Stripping Countries Of Billions In Tax Revenues
(8) Netanyahu says Jews have exclusive right to all of Israel, hints at deporting Palestinians

(1) Senator Ralph Babet (A) bill removes vaccine indemnity from manufacturers; public will see how pollies vote

Senator Ralph Babet proposes shift in responsibility for vaccine-related issues.

By Avi Yemini

August 09, 2023

United Australia Party Senator Ralph Babet is spearheading a bill that aims to remove vaccine indemnity from manufacturers, shifting responsibility for any vaccine-related issues from the government to the pharmaceutical companies themselves.

Update: I have successfully petitioned the Senate to refer this bill to committee where it will receive proper scrutiny and the public will be able to make submissions.

— Senator Babet (@senatorbabet) <>August 10, 2023

Currently, if something goes wrong with a vaccine, the government foots the bill. Senator Babet argues that it’s common sense for the manufacturers to be accountable. The proposed bill would ensure that if pharmaceutical companies produce a vaccine that causes harm, they would be liable.

In a candid interview, Senator Babet stated that this legislation would reveal who in Parliament House prioritises the interests of the people over Big Pharma.

When asked about the possibility of the bill passing, he expressed optimism, emphasising that the voting process would disclose “who genuinely cares for Australians’ welfare”.

When questioned if removing indemnity might lead major pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer to stop selling products in Australia, Senator Babet countered by comparing the situation to car manufacturers. If a car is faulty, the manufacturer should be responsible, encouraging them to invest in safer products.

Babet claimed that indemnity is a recent concept, tailored to suit the interests of big pharma. He asserted that companies like Pfizer, Moderna, and AstraZeneca would not pull their products, as their primary interest is in making money.

“If they produce safe and effective products, there should be no cause for concern,” he said.

The bill, if passed, could signify a significant shift in how pharmaceutical companies operate in Australia, holding them directly accountable for their products and potentially encouraging them to prioritise safety and quality.

The debate around this issue continues, with many waiting to see how Parliament will respond.

(2) Former WHO Adviser Sounds The Alarm On Pandemic Treaty Proposals

Former WHO Adviser Sounds The Alarm On Pandemic Treaty Proposals

June 25, 2023

Former WHO Adviser Sounds The Alarm On Pandemic Treaty Proposals
A major WHO power grab.

By Cindy Harper

In a seminal discussion before the Pandemic Response and Recovery All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) in the UK, leading health experts raised serious concerns over the World Health Organization’s (WHO) proposed Pandemic Treaty and the amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR). The treaty would grant the WHO surveillance and censorship powers.

Dr. David Bell, an ex-WHO medical officer, and Professor Garrett Wallace Brown, who chairs Global Health Policy at the University of Leeds, outlined how the proposals could reshape the dynamics between the WHO and its member nations and imperil critical health initiatives.

The contentious point revolves around the unprecedented authority these proposals could vest in the WHO. According to Dr. Bell, the WHO could wield the power to demand hefty financial contributions from countries, suppress scientific discourse, and enforce travel restrictions, lockdowns, and compulsory vaccinations in response to health emergencies, which the body can declare at its discretion.

Bell explained the transformation of the WHO since its inception in 1946. Initially formed to offer guidance and coordination in health emergencies, it has increasingly become centralized. A shift in funding patterns, notably from private donors, has led to the WHO turning into an organization where external influences dictate the agenda. The implications of this shift are particularly alarming when considering the broadened definitions of health emergencies. “The WHO was established in 1946 with the best of intentions… Over the decades we have seen a significant change in direction… It is a worrying background against which the IHR amendments and the Treaty are being negotiated,” said Bell.

The discussion also elicited responses from UK lawmakers. Esther McVey, APPG Co-Chair, called for greater parliamentary scrutiny, questioning the wisdom of granting sweeping powers to the WHO, a largely privately-funded body with no apparent oversight. McVey, referring to the WHO’s track record, expressed skepticism. “It seems unwise to give an unelected and largely privately-funded supranational body power over sovereignty and individual rights with seemingly no oversight,” she opined.

Labour MP Graham Stringer, also an APPG Co-Chair, voiced opposition to the WHO’s prospective expansion of powers. He expressed anxiety regarding the likely influence of commercial interests within the WHO and cited the organization’s controversial stance on mask-wearing as indicative of political, rather than scientific, decision-making. Stringer stressed that the potential impact on public health, democracy, civil liberties, and individual rights necessitates rigorous debate and transparent review.

Both experts and parliamentarians conveyed the urgent need for caution and thorough analysis of the WHO’s proposed changes, calling for countries to retain autonomy in addressing public health challenges, and for the protection of global health initiatives from undue influence.

(3) NYT defends ‘Kill the Boer’ chant, denies it’s a call to violence

‘Kill the Boer’ Song Fuels Backlash in South Africa and U.S.
Right-wing commenters claim that an old anti-apartheid chant is a call to anti-white violence, but historians and the left-wing politician who embraces it say it should not be taken literally.

By John Eligon
John Eligon attended the rally in Johannesburg where a political leader made the controversial chant

Aug. 2, 2023
The political rally was winding down when the brash leader of a leftist South African party grabbed the microphone and began to stomp and chant. Thousands of supporters joined in, and when he reached the climax, they pointed their fingers in the air like guns.

“Kill the Boer!” Julius Malema chanted, referring to white farmers. The crowd in a stadium in Johannesburg on Saturday roared back in approval.

A video clip of that moment shot across the internet and was seized upon by some Americans on the far right, who said that it was a call to violence. That notion really took off when Elon Musk, the South African-born billionaire who left the country as a teenager, chimed in.

“They are openly pushing for genocide of white people in South Africa,” Mr. Musk, who is white, wrote on Monday on Twitter, the platform he now controls.

In recent years, people on the right in South Africa and the United States, including former President Donald J. Trump, have seized on attacks on white farmers to make the false claim that there have been mass killings.

Mr. Malema leads the Economic Freedom Fighters, a party that advocates taking white-owned land to give to Black South Africans. That has made his embrace of the chant all the more disturbing to some whites.

Despite the words, the song should not be taken as a literal call to violence, according to Mr. Malema and veterans and historians of the anti-apartheid struggle. It has been around for decades, one of many battle cries of the anti-apartheid movement that remain a defining feature of the country’s political culture.

The chant was born at a time when Black South Africans were fighting a violent, racist regime, and was made popular in the early 1990s by Peter Mokaba, a former youth leader in the African National Congress. But the A.N.C., the liberation party that has governed South Africa since the beginning of multiracial democracy nearly 30 years ago, distanced itself from the song in 2012 — the same year it expelled Mr. Malema for his incendiary statements.

Bongani Ngqulunga, who teaches politics at the University of Johannesburg, recalled struggle songs from the apartheid days in which people proclaimed they were going to march to Pretoria, the capital city, or that Nelson Mandela would be released from prison the next morning. The people singing those songs were not actually planning to march to Pretoria, nor did they really think that Mr. Mandela was about to be released, he said.

Similarly, he said, the phrase “kill the Boer” — the word means farmer in Dutch and Afrikaans — is not meant to promote violence against individual farmers. “It was a call to mobilize against an oppressive system,” Mr. Ngqulunga said.

Nomalanga Mkhize, a historian at Nelson Mandela University, said of the chant: “Young people feel that it rouses them up when they sing it today. I don’t think that they intend it to mean any harm.”

But John Steenhuisen, the white leader of the Democratic Alliance, South Africa’s main opposition party, filed charges this week against Mr. Malema at the United Nations Human Rights Council, and claimed, without providing evidence, that “brutal farm murders continue to escalate in the wake of Malema’s demagoguery.”

Analysts say that Mr. Steenhuisen is eager to placate white South Africans, who might be attracted to parties to his right, ahead of elections next year.

Mr. Malema, who thrives on provocation, projected a blasé attitude toward the criticism. “Bring it on small boy,” he wrote in a Tweet to Mr. Steenhuisen.

Asked during a news conference on Wednesday about Mr. Musk’s comment, Mr. Malema responded: “Why must I educate Elon Musk? He looks like an illiterate. The only thing that protects him is his white skin.”

Mr. Malema emphasized a court ruling last year that said he was within his rights to chant “kill the Boer.”

“I will sing this song as and when I feel like,” he said.

Just over a decade ago, a South African judge ruled that the song was hate speech and prohibited Mr. Malema, then the leader of the A.N.C. youth league, from singing it. But after being booted from the party and founding the E.F.F., Mr. Malema sang the song publicly again.

AfriForum, an organization that advocates for the interests of Afrikaners, descendants of South Africa’s white colonizers, took Mr. Malema to court.

Last year, Judge Edwin Molahlehi ruled that AfriForum had “failed to show that the lyrics in the songs could reasonably be construed to demonstrate a clear intention to harm or incite to harm and propagate hatred.”

“Before democracy, the song was directed at the apartheid regime,” he added, “and more particularly to the dispossession of the land of the majority of the members of the society by the colonial powers.”

Mr. Malema testified during that court proceeding that the lyrics should not be interpreted literally. The song, he told the court, was directed toward the government’s failure to address a disparity in land ownership between Black and white South Africans.

John Eligon is the Johannesburg bureau chief, covering southern Africa. He previously worked as a reporter on the National, Sports and Metro desks. His work has taken him from the streets of Minneapolis following George Floyd’s death to South Africa for Nelson Mandela’s funeral. More about John Eligon

(4) ADL defends ‘Kill the Boer’ chant, denies it’s a call for White Genocide

ADL Statement on “Kill the Boer”

Published: 08.09.2023

New York, NY, August 9, 2023 … ADL (the Anti-Defamation League) today issued a statement in response to the recent debate over the song, “Kill the Boer” and baseless claims of “white genocide” that have been made by right wing extremists, and particularly white supremacists, in the United States for years.

Jonathan Greenblatt, ADL CEO and National Director, issued the following statement:

ADL is focused on fighting the surge of global antisemitism, but we have observed the recent debate over the song “Kill the Boer.”

While it is a historic protest song that called for the dismantlement of the racist apartheid system in South Africa, its crude lyrics could be interpreted as a call for violence.

At a time of intensifying political tensions worldwide, we see time and again that words matter, and people, especially those in public life, should refrain from expressions that invoke the threat of violence. Such rhetoric can prompt real-world consequences. This is true in the physical world. This is true on social media, including X. It has no place.

At the same time, baseless claims of “white genocide” have been made by right-wing extremists in the U.S., particularly white supremacists, for years. Such wild charges have been used to excuse hate, to justify harassment and to rationalize violence. This is a<>n issue ADL has tracked for decades – and we will continue to call it out.

ADL is the leading anti-hate organization in the world. Founded in 1913, its timeless mission is “to stop the defamation of the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment to all.” Today, ADL continues to fight all forms of antisemitism and bias, using innovation and partnerships to drive impact. A global leader in combating antisemitism, countering extremism and battling bigotry wherever and whenever it happens, ADL works to protect democracy and ensure a just and inclusive society for all.

(5) Farm attacks in SA surge after ‘Kill the Boer’ song

Farm attacks in SA surge after EFF sings ‘Kill the Boer’ song
The number of farm attacks in SA has surged in the wake of the EFF singing the “Kill the Boer” song last week Saturday.

Corné van Zyl
06-08-2023 17:01

There has been a sharp increase in farm attacks since the EFF’s controversial song.

The EFF’s song, which calls for the killing of white farmers, has been widely condemned by South Africans and international leaders. The EFF has defended the song, saying that it is a struggle song.

The increase in farm attacks has caused fear and anxiety among South African farmers.

The South African Agricultural Union (TAU) has called on the government to do more to protect farmers.

According to TAU SA, 35 farm murders have already been committed in the first seven months of this year. Many people have also been seriously injured and tortured. This is in comparison to last year’s 24 murders in the same period.

Afriforum had previously filed a hate speech case against the EFF, but Equality dismissed it last year. However, the organisation is currently appealing the court’s decision.

Ernst Roets, Afriforum’s Chief Executive for Strategy, clarified the ongoing legal battle, stating:

“The matter has been heard in the High Court, and there was a ruling on this last year, and the matter is going on appeal, so it will be going to the SCA in September.

“That is the matter of whether the chanting of the song ‘Kill the boer, kill the farmer’ is hate speech. Given the fact that the matter is still pending and in the process of going to court, it does not give Malema the right to chant this song.”
says Roets.

Responding to Malema’s “Kill the Boer, kill the farmer”. After the chant, several farmers were attacked on their farms in South Africa. 79-year-old farmer, Theo Bekker was brutally murdered. He was severely beaten before his throat was slit.

Please spread the word!@afriforum <>

— Ernst Roets (@ErnstRoets) August 2, 2023
He furthermore said after the chant; several farmers were attacked on their farms in South Africa.

Meanwhile, President Cyril Ramaphosa will not be establishing an inquiry into the ‘Kill the Boer’ chant anytime soon. This is according to the Presidency’s spokesperson Vincent Magwenya who briefed the media on Friday, 4 August.

According to Magwenya, this is because the matter is before the courts.

Here are some of the farm attacks that recently happened:

On Wednesday, 2 August 2023, Dr. Carel Nel was murdered in his home on his farm in Biesiesvlei, North West.
On Thursday, 3 August 2023, on Randridge’s small holdings, a couple and their two young children, aged eight and ten, were attacked. An AK-47 assault rifle was reportedly used in the attack. The man was shot dead, and his wife was seriously wounded in the back.
Theo and Marlinda Bekker were attacked on Sunday morning, 30 July 2023, in the Balfour region of Mpumalanga. Theo’s throat was slit after beating him with an iron bar while Marlinda was beaten. Theo was declared dead on the scene.
A farm attack took place on 28 July 2023, on Curuland Farm in the Motouleng area, near Clarens in the Free State province of South Africa. The farmer, Mr. Viljoen, was overpowered and assaulted by two attackers. During the attack, Mr. Viljoen suffered serious injuries and was hospitalised.
On 25 July 2023, at 08:00, a farm attack happened on the farm Buffelsdoorn in the Fochville area near Wadela. A farmer, Pietie Nel, was overpowered by five armed attackers. During the attack, two shotguns, a pistol, and a pellet gun were robbed.
On 22 July 2023, at about 17:00, the body of Mike Pattinson (67) was found with multiple wounds on the farm Summerslie, in the Sterkfontein area near Harrismith in the Free State province of South Africa.
The chairman of the Taxpayers Union of South Africa, Willem Petzer, said they are aware of nine farm attacks, resulting in 4 farmers brutally tortured and murdered.

“Seven more brutally tortured but thankfully surviving.”

(6) Australia backs down on plan to force companies to disclose global tax data

Australia spikes plan to force companies to disclose global tax data

Following pushback from business groups, the Australian government has scaled back a new law meant to crack down on profit-shifting by some of the world’s biggest companies.

By David Kenner

Multinational firms have won a reprieve from a new law that would have forced them to publicly disclose the taxes they pay around the world.

In late June, and just days before a self-imposed deadline to implement the plan, the Australian government backed away from <> its commitment to a public country-by-country reporting scheme that would have required companies to provide detailed accounts of their global operations from July 1. The decision came after intense lobbying from business interests, which warned that the proposed legislation would harm Australia’s global economic competitiveness.

The proposed legislation, which represented a campaign promise from the ruling Labor Party, would have required all companies with global revenues over AU$1 billion (roughly $668 million at the time of writing) to publicly disclose the assets they hold, the taxes they pay, and their effective tax rate in each country where they operate.

This public country-by-country reporting was intended to crack down on corporate profit-shifting, which <> a 2021 UN report estimated cost the countries where those profits are made $500 billion to $650 billion per year. In late June, however, the government introduced new legislation that weakened the data disclosure requirements and delayed implementation of the new law until July 2024.

A diverse range of multinational companies pressured the government to adopt this shift, arguing that the new rules could force firms to publish commercially sensitive data and would go beyond new transparency regulations <> being implemented by the European Union. A coalition of global fund management groups holding more than $120 trillion in investments lobbied Australia’s Treasurer to rewrite the legislation, The Australian Financial Review<> reported on June 15. The Business Council of Australia, which includes some of the country’s largest companies, also opposed the legislation, writing that it would “significantly increase the cost of doing business in Australia.”

Global technology firms also weighed in against the new disclosure requirements. The Silicon Valley Tax Directors Group, comprised of leading U.S. technology firms such as Alphabet, Apple, Netflix, Meta, and Microsoft, wrote that public country-by-country tax reporting “will seriously undermine existing collaborative relationships between the [Australian Tax Office] and taxpayers.” While the group requested that its letter opposing the legislation be kept confidential, its comments were nonetheless <> published on the Treasury’s website.

Following the release of the Australian government’s amended legislation, Assistant Minister for Competition Andrew Leigh said that Australia will attempt to align its policies with the EU’s rules. While the revised legislation is not as ambitious as the original proposal, some transparency advocates still see it as an important step forward.

“While Australia’s delay in implementing public country-by-country reporting is disappointing, the revised measures outlined by the government would still represent a monumental leap forward for international tax transparency,” said Ian Gary, the executive director of the Financial Accountability and Corporate Transparency Coalition. Even under the amended legislation, he said, “Australia would lead the pack in providing investors, lawmakers, and other stakeholders with information that they have been seeking for years.”

Those stakeholders must still wait at least another year, however, for the new rules to take effect. Until they do, transparency advocates are going to be anxiously waiting to see whether Australia’s government fulfills its promise to shed light on multinational firms’ profit-shifting practices.

(7) Multinationals Shifted $1 Trillion Offshore, Stripping Countries Of Billions In Tax Revenues

Multinationals Shifted $1 Trillion Offshore, Stripping Countries Of Billions In Tax Revenues, Study Says

The new analysis is based on corporation data first released in 2020 as part of an OECD-coordinated effort to tackle tax avoidance worldwide.

By Scilla Alecci

April 1, 2021

Multinational corporations shifted $1 trillion in profits from the countries where their economic activity takes place to a small number of tax havens in 2016, depriving governments worldwide of more than $200 billion in tax revenues, a new study shows.

Research supported by the U.K.-based International Centre for Tax and Development found that multinationals headquartered in the United States and Bermuda used profit-shifting more “aggressively,” while lower-income countries suffered the most losses because of such practices.

The <> study was mainly based on corporate information released for the first time last year by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, and only data from 2016 is available.

“It’s such a simple question: Where do [multinationals] pay taxes? And how much do they pay in low income countries?” said Petr Jansky´, an economist at Charles University in Prague, who co-authored the study with data scientist Javier Garcia-Bernardo.

The main issue at stake is not that “multinational corporations are benefiting from this tax avoidance scheme but that somebody is being harmed,” Jansky´ said. “Somebody is losing out because of this.”

In 2017, the <> Paradise Papers investigation by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists exposed the tax engineering of more than 100 multinational corporations, including Apple, <> Nike and Botox-maker Allergan. For instance, ICIJ documented how <> Apple found ways to keep tax rates ultra-low and accumulate a $252 billion mountain of cash offshore.

Jansky´ said that the new study shows that those are not isolated cases.

Ten tax havens received most of the companies’ profits, according to the ICTD research. Those include three European countries ? Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland ? as well as the Cayman Islands, Singapore, Bermuda and Puerto Rico.

While African countries appear to be the most “vulnerable” to profit-shifting, the study shows how multinationals’ tax avoidance schemes also deprive high-income countries, such as the U.S., Germany and France, of financial resources. The two European countries are estimated to lose at least one quarter of their profit base to profit shifting, it said.

(8) Netanyahu says Jews have exclusive right to all of Israel, hints at deporting Palestinians

Zionist Israeli Talmudic Holy War

Zionist Israeli Talmudic Holy War

VT’s Dr. Elias Akleh Shines Light on the Extreme Violence that is Israel

August 7, 2023

By Dr. Elias Akleh

In a previous article, we discussed how political clergy distorts religions to manipulate nations to wage wars. Human history is full of devastating religious wars. Human conscious evolution is hindered vigorously by the “Hidden Hand” to the point where humans are still waging religious wars even in the twenty-first century. The clearest present example is the Zionist Israeli Talmudic religious war not just against Palestinians, but also against both Christianity and Islamic religionists.

The current state of Israel, established by Zionist terrorist ideology, is a racist military genocidal settler-colonial project fueled by distorted Talmudic religion, whose god is a jealous, racist, real estate broker with a genocidal appetite. This god hates all other religions, discriminates among his own created humanity, favoring one group of people (god’s chosen) over all the rest, promising them the most geostrategic piece of land on earth (the promised land), and ordering them to annihilate all other humans, the Others, the Goyim, Christians as well as Muslims and all other religionists.

Israel is an expanding military colonial army, that formed its own colonial government claiming democracy which is actually an apartheid theocratic dictatorship. This state started with a politically colonial secular ideology laced with distorted Talmudic beliefs to herd Jews into Palestine as a launching pad to spread and control the rest of the vital geostrategic Middle Eastern region. Gradually, through successive generations of extremist militarily Talmudic brainwashing educational system, this Israeli political government has transformed from a colonial semi-secular Ashkenazi state into a far-right aggressively colonial extremist Judaic government.

As soon as it was formed, this extremist administration intensified the Zionist 75 years old persecution and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians to further the “Greater Israel Project” from the Nile to the Euphrates. The Israeli terrorist army launched a campaign of war crimes attacks against several Palestinian towns and their suburban refugee camps.

The Israeli army used Apache helicopters, drones, armored military vehicles and bulldozers to attack Palestinian cities and refugee camps such as Jenin, Nablus, Al-Khalil (Hebron), Hawwara, Silwan, Turmus ‘Aya, and many others. They killed civilians, forcefully evicted hundreds of residences from their homes making them refugees for the third time, and destroyed whole suburbs of refugee camps, Israeli military bulldozers plowed deeply through streets cutting off electricity, sewage and water supplies, and schools, hospitals and particularly mosques were targeted and destroyed.

The representative of the European Union in Palestine, Sven Kun von Burgsdorff, during his visit to the Jenin refugee camp accompanied by 30 European diplomats, said that the Israeli military incursion into the Jenin camp was painful, citing the destruction of dozens of houses within a 9 km radius, the destruction of drinking and sewage pipes, and the damage to electrical lines, as a violation of international law. He called for the need to put pressure on the occupation forces to stop the attacks.

Illegal colonizers (so-called settlers) also are playing a big role in this war crimes campaign. They established their own armed militias, and under the protection of the Israeli army started attacking the neighboring small and secluded Palestinian villages burning their properties, homes, cars, shops, crops, and olive trees, and at times murdering young Palestinians who happen to be in their way. Young Israeli colonizers formed terrorist gangs, that antagonize and attack Palestinian youngsters and civilians.

These terrorist settlers’ attacks became so rampant to the point where some Israeli media quoted this Saturday, October 5th, Col. Kobi Merom, of the reserves forces, as saying that the Israeli army, the Shin Bet, and the police have lost control in the West Bank, in light of the terrorist attacks by settlers against Palestinian villages. He stressed that there is also coverage by ministers on these actions.

Israeli ministers in the new government, such as Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich want to annex the occupied Palestinian territories, and thus support and encourage settler’s terrorist attacks on Palestinians. Already, the Israeli government is allowing settlement construction and expansion at new levels. “Israel’s far-right government has made clear that its goal is to remove the few restraints that exist on formalizing its system of apartheid and furthering its theocratic vision. Smotrich published a radical manifesto entitled “Israel’s Decisive Plan” that advocates the expulsion of Palestinians who seek an independent state. His self-described “pragmatic document” also detailed how to further advance the settlements and illegal outposts, what he calls “Victory Through Settlement.”

Ben-Gvir called for arming every settler, and for rewarding every Israeli who kills a Palestinian. Similarly, a decade before gaining his current role as minister of justice, Yariv Levin told a conference that judicial changes are necessary to fulfill the goal of annexation of occupied Palestinian territory.

<> Grief Stricken: Another Human Being facing life with nothing destroyed by Grotesque Evil Psychopaths in IDF uniforms Posing as Men of God

Netanyahu emphasized: “These are the basic lines of the national government headed by me: The Jewish people have an exclusive and unquestionable right to all areas of the land of Israel. The government will promote and develop settlements in all parts of the land of Israel – in the Galilee, the Negev, the Golan, Judea, and Samaria.”

Adopting Netanyahu’s emphasis an Israeli court ordered on Friday, July 28th 500 Palestinian residents out of their homes so that Israel can expand its Dimona colony. Palestinians are to be evacuated, ethnically cleansed, their homes to be completely demolished, and fined $31,630 worth of legal charges.

Colonizers (Settlers) attacks pose a serious threat to Palestinian safety and civil rights. In 2020, these colonizers carried out 127 incursions into Palestinian villages and towns. This year such incursions have tripled in number so far. Israeli colonies (settlements) have seized most Palestinian groundwater. Many water wells that are deep within Palestinian territories are routinely sealed with concrete by the Israeli army.

Israeli colonizers (settlers) in the West Bank and East Jerusalem now number upwards of 750,000 people. Sources based on official statistics from the Israeli government claim that the number of settlers in the West Bank is more than half a million. According to reporting from Al Jazeera, the Palestinian Applied Research Institute estimates that the number has already reached one million.

Benjamin Netanyahu once again is leading the way to the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in the name of God