Larry Sanger

So clear, in fact, that Jimmy Wales himself weighed in on the talk page of that particular article and said that it's biased and

And I followed up and said, well, here's something we actually agree on.

And a lot of people were up in arms about that because Wikipedia does tend to take, as I say, a sort of progressive stance.

And apart from some Jewish progressives, they tend to be...

very much pro-Palestinian on any issues connected to the war.

And that shows itself in the Wikipedia articles.

See, this is difficult because here we're talking about the law of nations, not criminal law, which is very different.

International tribunals have never been regarded by legal philosophers as quite the same thing.

as other sorts of, you know, ordinary tribunals.

And that actually does affect how people write history books, or at least it can.

You know, if somebody...

in good faith, who is in good standing in other respects, and on the global stage takes another view, that tends to affect how it's reported.

But now we're talking about just traditions of how things are reported, and we're not really talking about the issue itself.

So I mean, if you ask my opinion,

The fact that some international organizations are opposed to the bombardment of Gaza, not all of them even, and so much so that they call it a genocide, then that in itself...

That doesn't mean that they are fact-stating, right?

When you're talking about geopolitics in general, it's kind of important to remain neutral in any sort of way.

reference work, I think.

Right, right.

Of course they always deny it.