So what are you saying? That Mariupol was empty of Ukrainian forces and Russians just shelled it because... what? Or that Russians had entered undefended Mariu

So what are you saying? That Mariupol was empty of Ukrainian forces and Russians just shelled it because... what? Or that Russians had entered undefended Mariupol and then Ukrainians shelled it? How do you explain that Mariupol suffered so much damage? "Just because someone" Amnesty isn't 'someone' and their previous reports condemning Russian actions were considered credible. "its a good thing its become so transparent now" If you define anything that doesn't align with Western propaganda as 'Russian propaganda' then, yes, it's very transparent and simple.