We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
https://time.com/6763293/antisemitism/
You will also remember why ROC used to be part of P5 in the UNSC before the US for its own interests shed ROC and brought in PRC. Ofc, India stupidly supported without getting anything substantive. Not that it would have got much then. Look at ROC, its "protector" not only had it vacated from UNSC but from the UN itself!
"Here's a thought for @NoahRFeldman : perhaps no state has brought a #genocide case against China at the #ICJ because China's ratification of the Genocide Convention included a reservation stating that it does not accept Art. IX's compromissory clause?"
Also, most of the facts are wrong in the article. One of his students have shown that: https://x.com/AlfoqahaT/status/1762679465564307952?s=20