Claimant’s further submissions 243. Mr Bennett submitted that it is important to bear in mind that the Claimant was delivering the DEVIANT GROUPS SPEECH (2010) on ‘home ground’, i.e. to an LIC audience who would have been familiar with the Claimant and his views and general behaviour and that (in Mr Bennett’s words) he was ‘a man of peace’. The home audience would, no doubt, have been paying careful attention to what their Chief Imam was saying and have been receptive to his message. Those who were regular attendees would, no doubt, have been particularly familiar with his work, views and also sermons. However, Mr Bennett’s bald assertion that the Claimant was known to Muslim audience to be ‘a man of peace’ is no more than assertion and not particularly helpful. The Claimant’s upstanding reputation in the community would have made his messages seem all the more credible and attractive. The core issue remains what did he mean by the things that he said to his in-house Muslim audience. 244. Mr Bennett also submitted that it was important to remember that the speech was being heard live by the audience and to be careful not to subject the speech to an overtextural analysis. As stated above, I have borne this well in mind, in relation to this and other live speeches by the Claimant, that meaning is to a large extent a matter of impression (c.f. Eady J in Bond v. BBC, supra). General observations 245. I have read the whole of the Claimant’s 42-page DEVIANT GROUPS SPEECH (2009) in one go as Mr Bennett suggested. In my view, the main messages in the Claimant’s speech are clear. The Claimant’s broad message is that armed jihad, i.e. “fighting the enemies of Islam”, is a general religious duty for all Muslims aimed at achieving “the promotion of the religion of Islam and the making the religion of Allah, the supreme, and the suppression of the Disbelievers and the Hypocrites and destroying the disbelievers and hypocrites...". The Claimant’s particular message, using and endorsing the words of Sheikh Abdul bin Baz, is that the Palestinian conflict is as an “Islamic affair” and Muslims should show “solidarity” by “...fighting the Jews an Islamic Jihad until the Territory (Israel-Palestine) goes back to its proper people…”. 246. In my view, the DEVIANT GROUPS (2009) is expressly and implicitly all about encouraging the audience to engage in aggressive, physical jihad in Palestine on behalf of Islam. It is a far cry from the notion of mere ‘proportionate self-defence’, which is nowhere mentioned. There are no words in the speech limiting or ameliorating the effect of the above passages. Indeed, the Claimant is scornful of those who are “weak” (see the sixth section). 247. The Claimants’ conflating of the meaning of jihad or jihad fiy sabilillah (striving in the path of God) with armed combat (qital) and his failure to articulate the Qur'anic conditions and regulations for qital, signals a vision of Islam which would be regarded as violent, extreme, partial and misleading to a young British Muslim audience. Given the sensitivities of the subject, a responsible speaker and teacher of Islam when discussing qital must be explicit about the conditions for declaring and prosecuting it. At no stage does the Claimant mention any of the limiting conditions in relation to qital. At no stage does the Claimant suggest that any of the means used by Muslim groups in Afghanistan, Chechyna, or Palestine, which included suicide bombings, 55