#FactCheck:AI-Generated War Video Falsely Linked to Israel-Iran Tensions Goes Viral
Executive Summary
A video is being widely shared on social media linking it to the ongoing tensions between Israel and Iran. The clip shows multiple fighter jets flying across the sky, while massive flames appear to be rising from tall buildings below. The visuals are dramatic and alarming, creating the impression of a large-scale military strike. Users sharing the video claim that after Israel carried out an attack, Iran launched a retaliatory strike on Israel, and that the viral footage captures the aftermath of this counterattack. However, research conducted by the CyberPeace found the claim to be misleading. Our research revealed that the viral video is not authentic but AI-generated.
Claim
On the social media platform Facebook, a user shared the viral video with the caption: “Iran has also carried out a retaliatory attack on Israel.”
(Post link and archive link provided above.)

Factcheck
Upon closely examining the video, we noticed several irregularities in the visuals and motion patterns, which raised suspicion that the footage may have been generated using artificial intelligence. To verify this, we analyzed the video using the AI detection tool developed by Hive Moderation. According to the analysis report, there is a 62 percent likelihood that the viral video is AI-generated.

As part of further verification, we also scanned the video using Sightengine. The results indicated an even stronger probability, suggesting that the video is 99 percent AI-generated.

Conclusion
Our research confirms that the viral video does not depict a real military attack. It is AI-generated content being falsely shared in the context of Israel-Iran tensions.
Related Blogs

Introduction
In 2025, the internet is entering a new paradigm and it is hard not to witness it. The internet as we know it is rapidly changing into a treasure trove of hyper-optimised material over which vast bot armies battle to the death, thanks to the amazing advancements in artificial intelligence. All of that advancement, however, has a price, primarily in human lives. It turns out that releasing highly personalised chatbots on a populace that is already struggling with economic stagnation, terminal loneliness, and the ongoing destruction of our planet isn’t exactly a formula for improved mental health. This is the truth of 75% of the kids and teen population who have had chats with chatbot-generated fictitious characters. AI, or artificial intelligence, Chatbots are becoming more and more integrated into our daily lives, assisting us with customer service, entertainment, healthcare, and education. But as the impact of these instruments grows, accountability and moral behaviour become more important. An investigation of the internal policies of a major international tech firm last year exposed alarming gaps: AI chatbots were allowed to create content with child romantic roleplaying, racially discriminatory reasoning, and spurious medical claims. Although the firm has since amended aspects of these rules, the exposé underscores an underlying global dilemma - how can we regulate AI to maintain child safety, guard against misinformation, and adhere to ethical considerations without suppressing innovation?
The Guidelines and Their Gaps
The tech giants like Meta and Google are often reprimanded for overlooking Child Safety and the overall increase in Mental health issues in children and adolescents. According to reports, Google introduced Gemini AI kids, a kid-friendly version of its Gemini AI chatbot, which represents a major advancement in the incorporation of generative artificial intelligence (Gen-AI) into early schooling. Users under the age of thirteen can use supervised accounts on the Family Link app to access this version of Gemini AI Kids.
AI operates on the premise of data collection and analysis. To safeguard children’s personal information in the digital world, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act) introduces particular safeguards. According to Section 9, before processing the data of children, who are defined as people under the age of 18, Data Fiduciaries, entities that decide the goals and methods of processing personal data, must get verified consent from a parent or legal guardian. Furthermore, the Act expressly forbids processing activities that could endanger a child’s welfare, such as behavioural surveillance and child-targeted advertising. According to court interpretations, a child's well-being includes not just medical care but also their moral, ethical, and emotional growth.
While the DPDP Act is a big start in the right direction, there are still important lacunae in how it addresses AI and Child Safety. Age-gating systems, thorough risk rating, and limitations specific to AI-driven platforms are absent from the Act, which largely concentrates on consent and damage prevention in data protection. Furthermore, it ignores the threats to children’s emotional safety or the long-term psychological effects of interacting with generative AI models. Current safeguards are self-regulatory in nature and dispersed across several laws, such as the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. These include platform disclaimers, technology-based detection of child-sexual abuse content, and measures under the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.
Child Safety and AI
- The Risks of Romantic Roleplay - Enabling chatbots to engage in romantic roleplaying with youngsters is among the most concerning discoveries. These interactions can result in grooming, psychological trauma, and relaxation to inappropriate behaviour, even if they are not explicitly sexual. Having illicit or sexual conversations with kids in cyberspace is unacceptable, according to child protection experts. However, permitting even "flirtatious" conversation could normalise risky boundaries.
- International Standards and Best Practices - The concept of "safety by design" is highly valued in child online safety guidelines from around the world, including UNICEF's Child Online Protection Guidelines and the UK's Online Safety Bill. This mandating of platforms and developers to proactively remove risks, not reactively to respond to harms, is the bare minimum standard that any AI guidelines must meet if they provide loopholes for child-directed roleplay.
Misinformation and Racism in AI Outputs
- The Disinformation Dilemma - The regulations also allowed AI to create fictional narratives with disclaimers. For example, chatbots were able to write articles promulgating false health claims or smears against public officials, as long as they were labelled as "untrue." While disclaimers might give thin legal cover, they add to the proliferation of misleading information. Indeed, misinformation tends to spread extensively because users disregard caveat labels in favour of provocative assertions.
- Ethical Lines and Discriminatory Content - It is ethically questionable to allow AI systems to generate racist arguments, even when requested. Though scholarly research into prejudice and bias may necessitate such examples, unregulated generation has the potential to normalise damaging stereotypes. Researchers warn that such practice brings platforms from being passive hosts of offensive speech to active generators of discriminatory content. It is a difference that makes a difference, as it places responsibility squarely on developers and corporations.
The Broader Governance Challenge
- Corporate Responsibility and AI Material generated by AI is not equivalent to user speech—it is a direct reflection of corporate training, policy decisions, and system engineering. This fact requires a greater level of accountability. Although companies can update guidelines following public criticism, that there were such allowances in the first place indicates a lack of strong ethical regulation.
- Regulatory Gaps Regulatory regimes for AI are currently in disarray. The EU AI Act, the OECD AI Principles, and national policies all emphasise human rights, transparency, and accountability. The few, though, specify clear guidelines for content risks such as child roleplay or hate narratives. This absence of harmonised international rules leaves companies acting in the shadows, establishing their own limits until contradicted.
An active way forward would include
- Express Child Protection Requirements: AI systems must categorically prohibit interactions with children involving flirting or romance.
- Misinformation Protections: Generative AI must not be allowed to generate knowingly false material, disclaimers being irrelevant.
- Bias Reduction: Developers need to proactively train systems against generating discriminatory accounts, not merely tag them as optional outputs.
- Independent Regulation: External audit and ethics review boards can supply transparency and accountability independent of internal company regulations.
Conclusion
The guidelines that are often contentious are more than the internal folly of just one firm; they point to a deeper systemic issue in AI regulation. The stakes rise as generative AI becomes more and more integrated into politics, healthcare, education, and social interaction. Racism, false information, and inadequate child safety measures are severe issues that require quick resolution. Corporate regulation is only one aspect of the future; other elements include multi-stakeholder participation, stronger global systems, and ethical standards. In the end, rather than just corporate interests, trust in artificial neural networks will be based on their ability to preserve the truth, protect the weak, and represent universal human values.
References
- https://www.esafety.gov.au/newsroom/blogs/ai-chatbots-and-companions-risks-to-children-and-young-people
- https://www.lakshmisri.com/insights/articles/ai-for-children/#
- https://the420.in/meta-ai-chatbot-guidelines-child-safety-racism-misinformation/
- https://www.unicef.org/documents/guidelines-industry-online-child-protection
- https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/ai-principles.html
- https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/

Executive Summary:
A viral online video claims Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau promotes an investment project. However, the CyberPeace Research Team has confirmed that the video is a deepfake, created using AI technology to manipulate Trudeau's facial expressions and voice. The original footage has no connection to any investment project. The claim that Justin Trudeau endorses this project is false and misleading.

Claims:
A viral video falsely claims that Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is endorsing an investment project.

Fact Check:
Upon receiving the viral posts, we conducted a Google Lens search on the keyframes of the video. The search led us to various legitimate sources featuring Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, none of which included promotion of any investment projects. The viral video exhibited signs of digital manipulation, prompting a deeper investigation.

We used AI detection tools, such as TrueMedia, to analyze the video. The analysis confirmed with 99.8% confidence that the video was a deepfake. The tools identified "substantial evidence of manipulation," particularly in the facial movements and voice, which were found to be artificially generated.



Additionally, an extensive review of official statements and interviews with Prime Minister Trudeau revealed no mention of any such investment project. No credible reports were found linking Trudeau to this promotion, further confirming the video’s inauthenticity.
Conclusion:
The viral video claiming that Justin Trudeau promotes an investment project is a deepfake. The research using various tools such as Google Lens, AI detection tool confirms that the video is manipulated using AI technology. Additionally, there is no information in any official sources. Thus, the CyberPeace Research Team confirms that the video was manipulated using AI technology, making the claim false and misleading.
- Claim: Justin Trudeau promotes an investment project viral on social media.
- Claimed on: Facebook
- Fact Check: False & Misleading
.webp)
Executive Summary:
A video circulating on social media claims that people in Balochistan, Pakistan, hoisted the Indian national flag and declared independence from Pakistan. The claim has gone viral, sparking strong reactions and spreading misinformation about the geopolitical scenario in South Asia. Our research reveals that the video is misrepresented and actually shows a celebration in Surat, Gujarat, India.

Claim:
A viral video shows people hoisting the Indian flag and allegedly declaring independence from Pakistan in Balochistan. The claim implies that Baloch nationals are revolting against Pakistan and aligning with India.

Fact Check:
After researching the viral video, it became clear that the claim was misleading. We took key screenshots from the video and performed a reverse image search to trace its origin. This search led us to one of the social media posts from the past, which clearly shows the event taking place in Surat, Gujarat, not Balochistan.

In the original clip, a music band is performing in the middle of a crowd, with people holding Indian flags and enjoying the event. The environment, language on signboards, and festive atmosphere all confirm that this is an Indian Independence Day celebration. From a different angle, another photo we found further proves our claim.

However, some individuals with the intention of spreading false information shared this video out of context, claiming it showed people in Balochistan raising the Indian flag and declaring independence from Pakistan. The video was taken out of context and shared with a fake narrative, turning a local celebration into a political stunt. This is a classic example of misinformation designed to mislead and stir public emotions.
To add further clarity, The Indian Express published a report on May 15 titled ‘Slogans hailing Indian Army ring out in Surat as Tiranga Yatra held’. According to the article, “A highlight of the event was music bands of Saifee Scout Surat, which belongs to the Dawoodi Bohra community, seen leading the yatra from Bhagal crossroads.” This confirms that the video was from an event in Surat, completely unrelated to Balochistan, and was falsely portrayed by some to spread misleading claims online.

Conclusion:
The claim that people in Balochistan hoisted the Indian national flag and declared independence from Pakistan is false and misleading. The video used to support this narrative is actually from Surat, Gujarat, India, during “The Tiranga Yatra”. Social media users are urged to verify the authenticity and source of content before sharing, to avoid spreading misinformation that may escalate geopolitical tensions.
- Claim: Mass uprising in Balochistan as citizens reject Pakistan and honor India.
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading