Judgment Approved by the court for handing down. [2025] EWHC 1170 (Admin) AC-2024-LON-001310 HUSAIN v SRA Palestine is Islamic land.” The Tribunal saw this as an example of: “Trope that Jews do not originate from Israel.” (p) On 6 June 2021, Mr Husain tweeted: “1. U r the one who started ur sort like to start and cry wolf typical Zionist shite. 2. And Rifkind is a Zionist pig supporting theft of Palestine for his Eastern European kin. 3. You Zionists invent ownership papers. If we are silly enough to believe u never ethnically cleansed Palestine. 4. Why don’t you Eastern Europeans go home to Poland since Palestine is for Palestinians. Why don’t you pay rent for squatting in Palestine? 5. Why can’t you end the occupation- it is Palestinian land, it is their home they are not illegal Ashkenazi Immigrants. The Tribunal said: “Zionist used as a place holder for Jew and the trope that Jews did not originate in Israel.” See [27.38.1]-[27.28.7]. 43. Looking at the tweets as a whole, the Tribunal’s conclusions were as follows: “27.38.8 The Tribunal found the accretion of the Respondent’s Tweets over a spread of months; their frequency, sustained intensity, and the cumulative impact of the language used by the Respondent made it more likely than not that when viewed collectively the Tweets were founded on hatred or hostility towards Jews. 27.38.9 As an observation, it was notable that no one who engaged with the Respondent in the Tweets used racist or bigoted language against him and this tended to negate the Respondent’s submission that the Tweets had been part of fast moving and robust dialogue in which insults were traded. 27.38.10 Contrary to his assertions, it was clear to the Tribunal that in a number of his Tweets he had not acted rashly whilst in the heat of argument, but he had instead picked his words very carefully to deliver a particular message to Mr Myerson and Mr Rifkind whilst simultaneously attempting to occlude his true, underlying, meaning from the casual reader. Whilst the Respondent’s subjective intent was not relevant to the actual meaning of the words it was more likely than not that he had wished to obtain some plausible deniability if he was to be later picked up on the Tweets in the way which latter happened. 27.38.11 In some of the Tweets however, the Tribunal found that there was no nuance or subtlety and no attempt to obscure their meaning with such Tweets being plainly and deliberately crude and offensive. 27.38.12 Findings of antisemitism made the Tweets inherently offensive and/or inappropriate.” 44. The Tribunal went on to conclude, with respect to allegation 1.2, that some tweets directed at Mr Myerson and Mr Rifkind, which may have included an element of antisemitism, were also “starkly offensive, absent any taint of antisemitism” and that there were also other tweets of a more general nature which would have been offensive to people of other ethnicities and sexualities. These included: