You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
"Cross-border movements common to both Border Crossing Points:
The profile of the people crossing the border remains unchanged and can be categorized as follows:
Families on foot or by car with a lot of luggage;
Elderly people with few bags;
Adults (usually of younger age) with no luggage or empty cars;
People wearing military-style clothes with or without backpacks."
"Throughout the week, the OTs noticed a net increase of young people (both men and women) wearing military-style dress crossing the border in both directions but did not observe any weapons among these groups. OTs had regular interactions with supporters of the self-proclaimed republics. Some discussed openly with the OSCE while others expressed their total mistrust toward the OSCE. At both Border Crossing Points, some supporters of the self-proclaimed republics explained that they are not allowed to cross the border with weapons. However, on the other side, there are organized places where they receive weapons, ammunition and equipment and are dispatched to their assigned areas on the Ukrainian side. Upon return, they hand over weapons, ammunition and other military equipment and cross back into the Russian Federation."
The source that globalresearch quotes says the exact opposite of what they are trying to claim, they are obviously a conspiracy site with an agenda to push.
You've not only linked to a NATO site as reference, but this is your only post since you have created this account 8 hours ago. For you to label something as a "conspiracy site' is the extent to your perspective. To categorize a group without respecting either truthful points or a level playing field through critical thinking sort of re-assures the quality of your stance.
[–]Arbiter0 points
1 point
1 point
(+1|-0)
ago
(edited ago)
Of course NATO would be biased in this regard, however it is evidence, and for globalresearch.ca to claim there is no evidence of Russian intervention especially when the source they quoted says quite the opposite, is ludicrous and is testament to the readers who take this site as a legitimate news source.
I can't tell whether this 'news' site is intending to deceive people, or if their 'journalists' are too stupid to read through the sources which they quote. It seems they pick and choose only the phrases which will fit their agenda.
Sort: Top
[–] Arbiter 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Oh really?
From OSCE's website (http://www.osce.org/om/123151):
"Cross-border movements common to both Border Crossing Points:
The profile of the people crossing the border remains unchanged and can be categorized as follows:
"Throughout the week, the OTs noticed a net increase of young people (both men and women) wearing military-style dress crossing the border in both directions but did not observe any weapons among these groups. OTs had regular interactions with supporters of the self-proclaimed republics. Some discussed openly with the OSCE while others expressed their total mistrust toward the OSCE. At both Border Crossing Points, some supporters of the self-proclaimed republics explained that they are not allowed to cross the border with weapons. However, on the other side, there are organized places where they receive weapons, ammunition and equipment and are dispatched to their assigned areas on the Ukrainian side. Upon return, they hand over weapons, ammunition and other military equipment and cross back into the Russian Federation."
Here is evidence of russian tanks crossing into Ukraine: http://www.aco.nato.int/statement-on-russian-main-battle-tanks.aspx
The source that globalresearch quotes says the exact opposite of what they are trying to claim, they are obviously a conspiracy site with an agenda to push.
[–] TheVeryWiseOwl [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
You've not only linked to a NATO site as reference, but this is your only post since you have created this account 8 hours ago. For you to label something as a "conspiracy site' is the extent to your perspective. To categorize a group without respecting either truthful points or a level playing field through critical thinking sort of re-assures the quality of your stance.
[–] Arbiter 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Of course NATO would be biased in this regard, however it is evidence, and for globalresearch.ca to claim there is no evidence of Russian intervention especially when the source they quoted says quite the opposite, is ludicrous and is testament to the readers who take this site as a legitimate news source.
I can't tell whether this 'news' site is intending to deceive people, or if their 'journalists' are too stupid to read through the sources which they quote. It seems they pick and choose only the phrases which will fit their agenda.