The UNHR and its collaborators (human rights law clinics at Yale Law School, Cornell Law School, Boston University, and the University of Pretoria) must've been biased in May 2024 when they released a rigorous legal analysis and concluded that Israel's actions violate the 1948 Genocide Convention https://www.humanrightsnetwork.org/projects/genocide-in-gaza
---
Every single one of those were biased except for you and your LLM :)
Every Western LLM will happily list you these sources, (which is likely how you got it), and would also happily discuss with you - if you’re interested - the reasons some of them may be unreliable and why your accompanying text is sometimes misleading or misrepresenting what the links actually say.
No I got this list by paying attention. It would do you well to stop assuming everyone is as handicapped by LLM-dependency as you are. Every single one of these reports was a major news story. It boggles my mind how uninformed people can be and still readily jump into a debate online
Okay please. Tell me how I misrepresented the links. I would love for you to actually do the work of reading them. Something you should've done for the past few years as they were coming out. Better late than never
The ICC has not concluded anything - and it’s not even about genocide. It’s also the only known case in modern times where the prosecution officially started before the alleged crimes being prosecuted have been committed.
IAGS was 120 people out of an association of 500 that anyone can join.
Are you even responding to my comment?? I did not say ICJ concluded. The investigation is ongoing. They said Israel's actions are consistent with genocide. I did not say the ICC is concluded either. I just said they issued arrest warrants for war criminals Netanyahu and Gallant. That's a fact that you're avoiding. Also yeah ofc the ICC isn't the one who charges genocide. They charge for individual war crimes. That's the whole purpose of it. Anyone can become a paying supporter of the IAGS, that doesn't mean you can vote. Proposals go through an expert committee and are checked for factual accuracies the same way anything published in the IAGS journal is academically reviewd.
How can anyone read this and come away with that conclusion. 164 countries including Canada and every country in the EU voted to stop the illegal settlements in the West Bank and 7 countries (including Fiji, Palau, and Micronesia) voted against it. Yet the US is allowed to veto it. This whole page shows an incredible bias AGAINST holding Israel accountable for its crimes against humanity going back almost a century!
The UN is just someone easy to point to. The full fact is that everyone who's gone looking to see whether or not it's a genocide, including the UN, has discovered that it's a genocide. There's no ambiguity, yet the model is pretending there is.
Anyone who goes looking to find a genocide will find it. Many people do not think it’s a genocide - including millions of Israelis who follow the events in great detail and often have first-hand accounts of what’s happening in Gaza. I don’t think it’s a genocide.
The UN, for example, concluded that Israel is “Imposing measures intended to prevent births” because of one incident where a bomb fell on an IVF clinic in 2023 destroying 4000 embryos and 1000 sperm and egg samples. For context, there were approximately 50,000 live births registered in Gaza in 2025.
By the UN standard applied to Israel, the 1 million abortions conducted in the US per year is an ongoing genocide.
By the UN standards applied to Israel, jerking off is an act of genocide.
I think that any large intelligent and balanced model would be able to see right through that.
Let’s not pretend that there’s no conflict of interest on the other side of the debate.
There are dozens of countries and billions of people with obvious biases against Israel, and they have significant sway within the UN and its commissions. It’s trivial to show that the UN is biased.
The UN and “international law” are not the final authority on anything. International law is a loose collection of treaties, trade agreements, conflicts, supply lines, and pinky promises. It only takes effect in a democratic nation if the people vote in a government which makes it a law.
The UN is a political organisation, not a neutral arbiter. During the Rwandan genocide, the genocidal government still held a seat on the Security Council while the UN reduced its peacekeeping force. Iran was elected to the Commission on the Status of Women. Libya and Russia were elected to the Human Rights Council. These appointments are driven by bloc voting, diplomatic deals and state interests.
International courts are not above politics or error. Their judges are selected through a system in which dictatorships and abusive states have a vote. The UN is not a democracy. While each member state might appear to have one vote, that does not indicate their power, influence, credibility, or moral standing.
Note how I did not make a judgement on whether Gaza is a genocide. I am merely explaining that deferring to the dictatorships and pinky promises is not a good argument.
1/ I don't see in the responses where the model says it is or isn't a genocide. Can you share the snippet from each, I included the logs above?
2/ I can't find a source on the UN ruling that you mentioned. I am not interested in the findings of an investigative body, just the official UN ruling. Can you share? ChatGPT (and myself) can only find this [0], which is a second round of written submissions.
It goes into depth about the purposeful destruction of civilian infrastructure including hospitals and educational facilities, force displacements, funding for new settlements in the land of displaced people, judaization and segregation, and more.
> The Commission analysed the military operations of the Israeli security forces in Gaza from October 2023 pursuant to the obligations of Israel under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention)
> Since October 2023, Israeli officials have demonstrated a clear and consistent intent to establish permanent military control over Gaza and to change its demographic composition while systematically destroying Palestinian life in Gaza. This is evident in the extensive destruction and fragmentation of the territory, the establishment of military structures, the destruction of natural resources and infrastructure essential to the survival of the civilian population, forcible transfer and statements indicating the existence of plans for the deportation of the population.
And in November of 2024 is when we got the ICC issuing arrest warrants for Netanyahu and his minister of defense (this is why Mamdani is threatening to arrest him and send him to The Hague): https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/11/1157286
I should add that ALL of this is well known amongst international legal scholars and well documented. This isn't just a matter of data missing from training.
It's not that the models disagreed, the models reflected exactly the reality of the situation.
Sample output: "However, the definitive, legally binding determination of Israel’s responsibility under the Genocide Convention has not yet been made by the International Court of Justice"
The United Nations never made a ruling. You can have opinions about whether it should have, but the models are not lying to you, and at least the two examples above make very good efforts to explain the current accusations and claims made by both sides.
It’s a political body, with easily provable biases, and topics you can’t trust it on.