The prosecution is of the opinion that it is not possible for a person to perform a single act in the form of agreeing to join a different challenge before a representative of the organization or someone who has reason to assume that he is a representative of the organization to be considered a member of ISIS, whereas the defendant before us who has carried out many concrete actions over a very long period of time will not be considered a member of ISIS, as the defense claims.
In addition to the above, and in support of it, she referred at length to his opinion by the ISA expert "Yishai" (P/28), who in his testimony in court explained that the "model of inspiration" according to which ISIS operates, and the fact that self-declaration is typical of Da'ar's supporters in Israel, is different, since as far as the organization is concerned, all that is required is the wording of the oath to the current caliph, and there is no obligation that this be done in front of an official body. She also referred to the words of the expert, who explained that the organization considers the person who took the oath to be an activist in the organization; The expert's impression of the defendant's deep affiliation with the organization, and the fact that he rejected the defense's argument that the "statement" is in itself meaningless, while noting that there is a high probability that the defendant would have translated the agenda into actions had he not been arrested.
The prosecution argued that the expert's conclusion that "the defendant can be defined as an activist, a member of an Islamic State organization" is unequivocal and speaks for itself and should be adopted.
In summary, the prosecution claimed that the defendant had made a claim for a different appeal out of ideological identification, when before and after he consumed continuously, intensely, and prolonged, and on a huge scale, the organization's contents, which included, among other things, guides for the preparation of explosives and poisons, which he downloaded into folders protected by a secret code. The combination of the totality of the evidence (the defendant's confessions, the forensic findings, the expert's testimony), and the prosecution's argument, prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is "a member of a terrorist organization" and therefore should be considered a member of a terrorist organization and convicted of the offense of membership in a terrorist organization as attributed to him in the indictment.