Mehr examined;

Mehr examined; Bloody wedding in Sirik; how Western media exposed America's crime? 🔺After every aggressive attack and crime, the battle over the narrative begins, and the same has happened in the Kohestak incident. 🔺While media reports and technical evidence have intensified questions about the role of the United States in the attack, efforts to change the nature of the issue continue, including Washington's emphasis that the incident is under investigation and highlighting potential targets around the impact site. 🔺The narrative of the U.S. attack on the Kohestak wedding ceremony, contrary to what some opposition groups try to impose, is not solely based on the accounts of Iranian officials. The New York Times, Reuters, and the Associated Press have each published evidence through their analysis of images, videos, and significant remnants of munitions that reinforce the attribution of the attack to U.S. forces. 🔺On the other hand, some opposition groups present narratives to explain and justify the incident before the results of any investigation are disclosed. Although these two processes begin from different points, they converge at one point, which is the reduction of pressure for accountability of the perpetrator of the attack. 🔺The New York Times, in its investigation, identified the U.S. attack as the cause of the impact on the building where the ceremony was held. This American newspaper referred to the analysis of "ballistic terror" from an independent weapon expert and former U.S. Army munitions technician in its examination of images and weapon remnants. 🔺Reuters went a step further and entrusted the matter to four weapons experts. According to this investigation, three experts found U.S. munitions likely and assessed the destruction pattern to be more consistent with a direct impact of an aerial munitions rather than the hypothesis of a ricochet from an Iranian defense missile.