The Honorable Judge D. Hasdai: No, he is talking about your opinion as a whole. After all, there is some kind of thesis in it. There is some kind of statement in it.
A: Yes.
(pp. 223-224).
And later on -
The Honorable Judge D. Chasdai: He was quoted. It does not disrupt the text. Not at all. Readers. I called him exactly word for word.
A: They have no power.
The Honorable Judge D. Chasdai: Yes. Do you want a word beforehand? Because the Amorai was very stuck on it. Although the data do not scientifically indicate a link between known and clear sources of contaminants and cancer morbidity.
A: I don't know what to say about it.
The Honorable Judge D. Chasdai: All right.
(p. 225) [See also Exhibits M/11 and 12 in this regard].
- Shlita also answered as follows:
Q: And confirm to me, please, that in the opinion The main, with the exception of the article from 2012, The vast majority of the sources are from 2004 onwards.
A: Let's see, you say b.
Q: The main opinion, the list of sources.
A: In the main opinion, Maybe. Maybe. Maybe, I relied mainly on reports. Maybe.
Q: Maybe.
A: Yes it could be.
Q: And in the opinion The Complementary, I see one source from 2016, and confirm me, please, If this is true, the rest of the sources are also from 2004 onwards in the supplementary opinion?
A: As it is written, this is how they are. But I have. All right.
Q: Does it make sense to you that it's like that?
A: Yes yes can be.
Q: Yes.
A: Good enough. And of course I have reports, reports from the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Environmental Protection.