“IMHO, the limited number of fires in the morning ceasing after they had been eliminated, and their being told to stand down, vice render supporting verification, indicates they might have been targeted as witnesses by friendlies, rather than as collateral damage.”
I’m sorry, I did not understand that sentence.
My apologies.
IMHO, the limited number of fires by the attackers with mortar rounds (4 rounds, 1st one reportedly landing outside the Annex gates, the other 3 miraculously accurate, then no more mortar fire) in the morning( about 0400 local time at the Annex) ceasing after they (the 2 ex-SEALS) had been eliminated, and their (the 2 ex-SEALS) being told to stand down, vice render supporting verification, indicates they (the 2 ex-SEALs) might have been targeted as witnesses by friendlies (i.e. whomever destroyed them appeared to have been more controlled by Washington than by enemy forces at the Annex), rather than as collateral damage (2 contract employees just happening to be at the wrong place at the wrong time).