Majid Freeman defends Palestinian resistance in powerful challenge of the state's cross examination

Birmingham — Majid Freeman in evidence today maintained that his social media activity expressed a confident and consistent support for the resistance of the Palestinian people against occupation and genocide, and that at no point was he inviting support for a proscribed organisation.

The prosecution pressed him repeatedly on the distinction between "the resistance" and Hamas specifically, on his use of the red triangle, and on individual posts documenting Al-Qassam military operations. When asked whether his expression of amazement at footage of resistance fighters equates to direct support for Qassam Brigades specifically, he told the court: 

“If all you see is fighting, that’s what you’re going to see. However, if you pause and reflect and see the bigger picture, there’s death and destruction. These people had no choice but to defend themselves from these savages, these genocidal maniacs who were trying to kill them. They made it open, they were documenting killing them. They were raping doctors. Now, in the midst of all of that, we’ve got two young men here, Palestinian. Who cares what group they're from? They’re still able to resist after this long. Of course, I find it extremely courageous.”

On the question of whether "the resistance" and Hamas are interchangeable terms, Majid drew a clear and consistent distinction. "Hamas are part of the resistance," he told the court, "but Hamas are not the resistance." He pointed to his own posting history to support that position - noting that across more than 78,000 tweets, Abu Obaida, the Al Qassam spokesperson, was referred to as a spokesperson of "the resistance" on only two occasions, both of which were posts he had copied and pasted directly from another account.

On the red triangle, Majid maintained the position he set out in his evidence the previous day, that he has used it consistently as a symbol of solidarity with the Palestinian resistance, and that its use in Al-Qassam combat videos as a targeting symbol was entirely separate from the way he employed it. "It's like the kaffiyeh, like the olive, like the watermelon," he told the court. "These are signs you see everywhere. We are trying to narrow it down and make it all about Hamas, when that is not the case."

Additionally, when speaking on the mischaracterisation of his social media, Majid said: 

“Look at the timeline and the bundle - you’d think this person does nothing but post about fighting. But between those posts there could be fifty, one hundred others documenting the atrocities in Gaza. That context has been stripped out entirely. What’s presented here is one dimension of a much fuller picture.” 

Taken as a whole, Majid’s output is that of a citizen journalist. One who documented the genocide taking place, informed the public of the daily war crimes, and inspired others to highlight injustice and prevent the loss of more lives. 

Anas Mustapha, Head of Public Advocacy at CAGE International said:

"What the prosecution has not been able to shake, across a full day of cross-examination, is Majid Freeman's central position: that supporting the Palestinians irrespective of their affiliations, in their resistance against the Zionist genocide is not the same as supporting Hamas, and that conflating the two is a political choice, not a factual conclusion. That conflation is precisely what CAGE International has challenged through our deproscription application, and it is precisely what is on trial in Birmingham today."

​