Thread by @ichbinilya

A bit more on that UN story. Earlier today, @NaomiOhReally reported that UN staff had been instructed not to use the words "war" or "invasion" to refer to Russia's invasion of, and war on, Ukraine. irishtimes.com/news/world/uni…

This is obviously problematic because, in the name of trying to be impartial, they're adopting the Russian narrative. The New York Times pulled out of Russia today, in part because it's now punishable by up to 15 years in prison to describe what's happening as a war. Which it is.

So, while Russians and journalists risk long prison terms to speak the truth, the UN is instructing its staff not to.

MOREOVER, in response to the story, an official UN account @UN_Spokesperson smeared @NaomiOhReally as a liar, calling the story "fake" and baldly denying it.

They then deleted the tweet and reposted, this time without the word "fake." But note the sleight of hand. As "evidence" that the story is false, they cite a senior official using the word "war." But this doesn't contradict the claim that (lower-level?) staff were told not to!

Moreover, the claim "it is simply not the case that staff have been instructed" is a lie, considering the email Naomi obtained. Here's a screenshot. It has capital letters on the word "NOT"! That's not an instruction, @UN_Spokesperson?

Naomi showed me the unredacted email. It's real. And when she challenged the UN spokesperson on it, they said:

"All I can tell you is that no email went out from NY to staff with these instructions. I don’t dispute the validity of that email but it can not be considered official policy to staff."

Ok, so it didn't come from New York. And it's "not policy."

You be the judge of whether that's a fair defense — and whether it's fair grounds on which to publicly insult a professional journalist.