“Ah, Twitter. Must be a solid evidence. Not!”
You asked for the mobile phone photos, which commonly are sent by Twitter or Facebook, so that is what you got.
“Not to mention your first link is not supported by any photo.”
That is true as far as it goes in that instance, but you deceptively omitted the eyewitness testimonies.
“Second link is backed by the photo showing a movement of APC in Rostov. Last time I’ve check Rostov was still a Russian city.”
True, but the comment claiming no pictures included within Russia as well as outside Russia. Tomorrow we may see these same military vehicles pushing their way through the Ukraine with another fairy tale cover story, so it is worthwhile to observe the details now.
“Is that your evidence?”
People have been posting photos of the Russian movements inside Russia for weeks. In response, Putin and Russia are now making it illegal in Russia to have an anonymous WiFi port available for Russian civilians and soldiers to post these photos on the social media. Inside the Ukraine, the Russian special service military forces have been directing the Russian terrorist mercenaries to destroy much of the mobile telephone networks to disable the ability of the Ukrainians to report the deployments and movements of the Russian military forces in the Ukraine. This would also account for the lack of the very kind of mobile cellphone photographs falsely assumed to be coming from sources whose cellphone services have been deliberately disabled by the Russians in the Ukraine.
Hmm, so no evidence of Russian troops in Ukraine due to Russian actions to destroy communication networks? Ok. What about indiscriminate bombing of civilians by Ukrainian forces? What makes these pictures and videos so special and eligible to pass through destroyed communications?
BTW, if movements of Russian equipment in Russia is an evidence of it’s infiltration into Ukraine, is movement of Egyptian equipment in Egypt means a war on Saudi Arabia, or maybe a US tank in Texas means war on Mexico?
Is it how you are reading evidence?