mass killing of civilians etc, were illegitimate. Instead, the Claimant fully endorses these campaigns as “legitimate Jihads”. 248. The Claimant defines the religious meaning of jihad not as ‘inner struggle’ but as “physically fighting and… the specific rewards attached to it”, i.e. qital. The Claimant asserts that there is a general religious duty on all Muslims of “fighting in the path of Allah the enemies of Islam”. The Claimant states that “those who fight have a higher status than those who do not fight”. The Claimant suggests that it is not enough to “die sitting in London in UK”: “The one who doesn’t make battle i.e. take part in battles and doesn’t have the intention to do so, he dies upon a branch of hypocrisy. So at least a Muslim should have that intention of struggling and fighting and sacrificing himself for the sake of Allah the Glorified and Exalted.” 249. The Claimant expressly praises and endorses the extremist teachings of Sheikh Abdul bin Baz, in particular that: “[J]ihad [i.e. fighting] in the path of Allah … is the best of those things that can bring us closest to Allah… because it leads to the victory of the Believers … and making the religion of Allah the Exalted supreme … and the suppression of the Disbelievers and the Hypocrites and destroying the disbelievers and hypocrites, and facilitating the propagation of Islam all over the world…” “By solidarity among Muslims to save it and to have that unity amongst the Muslims to save Palestine… and by fighting the Jews in an Islamic Jihad until the Territory goes back to its proper people… and to make jihad against the Jews [Jews], in an Islamic Jihad, Islamic jihad until the Territory goes back to its proper people… until the earth, i.e. the land of Palestine returns to its people i.e. the Muslims of Palestine.” Conclusion 250. In conclusion, in my judgement, in his DEVIANT GROUPS SPEECH (2009), the Claimant espoused extremist Islamic positions and promoted or encouraged religious violence. The principal features of the speech can be summarised as follows: (1) First, the Claimant clearly endorses, adopts and embellishes the extremist views of Sheikh bin Baz, which include a religious duty (wajib) “to be hostile to” or “to hate” non-Islamic states and “…destroying the disbelievers and hypocrites…” and “fighting the Jews in an Islamic Jihad...”. (2) Second, the Claimant in particular cites with approval the fatwa (legal opinion) of Sheikh bin Baz that “Jihad in the path of Allah is one of the best methods of getting closer to Allah… and one of the greatest acts of obedience.” (3) Third, the Claimant reduces the religious meaning of jihad to a single meaning of qital, and tells the audience that “fighting is prescribed upon you”, i.e. fighting is a personal religious duty, and he does not confine this to defensive fighting. 56