Says AC-130 had to be on station, THEN says an armed Predator was there....inconsistent and speculative without being honest about it.
They’re taking a totally legit scandal and Alex Jones/Art Bell-ing it to death.
No, it said that a Spectre was **probably** on station but if, as Panetta says, it never scrambled, then it was an armed Predator. Bottom line: there is no painting of a target without there being SOMETHING real nearby ready to drop ordnance...and somebody VERY high up stopped it. I, too, would like to see firm evidence on this and other aspects up this f’ed up tragedy, but POTUS and his crew are desperately trying to classify everything to prevent it from blowing up pre-election. This means that all ANYONE can do is speculate, unless they’re in the know and wish to risk a court martial or criminal charges.
“If the AC130 never left Sigonella (as Penetta says) that means that the Predator that was filming the whole thing was armed.”
When one or more sides are lying, different partially-consistent hypotheses become in play. According to the Delta person, if someone was painting a target, that means a weapon was on scene and ready to fire at said painted target. But no attack happened, therefore, an order to stand down had to have been issued, and it could only have come from a high place.