Based on the attitude system of appraisal theory, this study primarily examined Adila Hassim’s speech at the International Court of Justice, which addressed allegations of genocidal intent during the 2023 conflict in the Palestinian territories. It focused on the linguistic choices embedded within the speech to convey feelings, judgments, and evaluations to the audience, constructing a persuasive argument against the Israeli massive attack on Gaza. The analysis, incorporating both quantitative and qualitative methods, was semi-annotated using Corpus UAM 3.3v, a linguistic annotation tool, to examine attitude-related lexical items. The findings showed that various attitude resources were present in the analyzed discourse, among which judgmental resources were the most prominent in condemning Israel’s actions regarding legality, morality, and social standards. This was followed by affect resources to create an emotional engagement with the audience, while appreciation was the least-used resource to maintain a serious tone. In addition to this, Hassim used negative polarity extensively to highlight the humanitarian crisis and the violation of human rights in Gaza. Considering the nature of the speech, the findings effectively align with Adila Hassim’s purpose, as she combined judgment (evaluating Israel's actions as illegal) with affect (conveying emotional responses) to deliver a compelling message, persuading the audience to support her position.