70. In the course of argument, Mr Caldecott QC simplified the BBC’s position on meaning. He explained that the BBC denied the Claimant’s first meaning but accepted the second meaning put forward by the Claimant (see above) with the following minor change (indicated by underlining): “The Claimant had recently promoted and encouraged religious violence by telling Muslims that violence in support of Islam would constitute a man’s greatest deed.” Analysis 71. The WCO spoken in November 2013 contain two particular elements particularly directed towards the Claimant. The first is the labelling of the Claimant as an “extremist”, i.e. one of “…a number of extremist speakers and speakers who espouse extremist positions…” who speak or have spoken at the East London Mosque. The second is the sentence: “…This year Shakeel Begg, he spoke there and hailed jihad as “the greatest of deeds”...”. 72. As regards the Claimant’s first pleaded meaning, the Claimant is one of four people labelled an “extremist” and included in the category of the “extremist speakers” or “speakers who espouse extremist positions”. They are each included in the genus of “extremist” but the particular reasons for being so labelled are different: (i) the Claimant for hailing jihad as “the greatest of deeds”; (ii) the Al-Quaeda supporter; (iii) the speaker who described Christians and Jews as “filth”; and (iv) the jihadist supporter of the Taliban. However, the WCO do not purport to ascribe the particular views, or actions, of the four people mentioned to one another, or attribute any of the views or actions of the other three to the Claimant. Thus, whilst the other (unnamed) “extremists” are referred to, there is no suggestion that the Claimant has espoused their particular views. Nor does the programme explore at all the possible consequences of preaching jihad in the above sense or the Claimant’s intentions. For these reasons, I do not accept the Claimant’s submission that the WCO would be understood as referring to a “rogues’ gallery” of extremists, still less one which necessarily encouraged “murder” of non-Muslims, not least because the word “murder” nowhere appears. It is, however, appropriate for the first meaning to be in the present tense in order to reflect the present tense in the WCO (“speakers who espouse extremist positions”). 73. As to the Claimant’s second pleaded meaning, it is obvious, as Mr Caldecott QC accepted, that the reason why Mr Neil was criticising the Claimant for praising jihad as “…the greatest of deeds” was because the term “jihad” has in common usage an element of promoting or encouraging violence in the name of Islam. The sentence in question (“…This year Shakeel Begg, he spoke there and hailed jihad as “the greatest of deeds”...”) would clearly be understood as referring to a single recent, but past occasion, i.e. in 2013, on which the Claimant had spoken at the East London Mosque in the terms stated. Accordingly, in my view, the BBC’s minor modifications to the Claimant’s second meaning, with use of the past tense and the insertion of the adverb “recently”, are correct. Conclusion 74. following meanings: In conclusion, therefore, I find the WCO bear the 18