The Winograd Committee on Sunday responded to petitions made to the High Court of Justice against its decision not to give advance warning to individuals who stand to be harmed by the committee's findings, and not to make personal recommendations in its findings. The committee has rejected both demands. In response to a petition by the Military Defender demanding that the Winograd Committee warn in advance anyone who may be hurt by its findings, the committee has said that the Military Defender has crossed the lines of good taste. While the Military Defender provides important legal assistance to military officers and soldiers, the committee said, it was not aware that the defense's members possessed "supernatural powers" which enabled it to determine today what the future report would say. The committee sees the petition as nothing more than an attempt to hurt public trust in its work, the response said. In response to a petition filed by the Movement for Quality Government, the committee confirmed that that there would be no personal conclusions or recommendations in it final report, as has been widely speculated. The committee attacked the movement's attempt to interfere with its work and to determine how the committee should edit its report, adding that to the best of its members' knowledge, there were no legal grounds for the movement's demands.