As to the question of whether the defendant deliberately consumed different contents of the appeal or whether he "stumbled" into them while wandering around the internet at random or as he claimed that these contents could have been deliberately implanted by the security officials in order to thwart him because of his Arab origins? - During his testimony in court, the defendant abandoned his arguments in this context, when he admitted that he had deliberately and consciously entered the sites of a different appeal, while later on, the defense in its oral summaries also abandoned this claim.
To the question of whether the defendant knew how to join the terrorist organization ISIS? - The defendant abandoned any argument in this context during his testimony in court, when he explained in detail and clearly how to join a different appeal, and later on, this argument was also abandoned by the defense in its oral summaries in court (October 27, 2025).
To the question of whether the defendant had committed a "bi'ya" and swore training to the leader of the Islamic State terrorist organization, she pointed out that contrary to his denial in response to the indictment, during his testimony in court while he was squirming, the defendant admitted that during his interrogation at the police, he told Policeman Haim that he had made a 'bi'a' and that he saw himself as someone who joined the Da'ar'ar organization differently from when he made a statement, although he further claimed that this act had no meaning.
The prosecution also referred to the defense's summaries in court, where the defense reiterated that it did not dispute the defendant's confessions during his interrogations (P/13, P/14, P/6), in which he admitted that he had made a claim to ISIS, nor did it dispute that the defendant had made a claim, but focused its arguments only on the question of whether the defendant's actions as described in the indictment consolidate the offense of membership in a terrorist organization for which he is accused.