posted on May, 26 2015 @ 06:57 PM
a reply to: bucsarg
The difference is moot. The sort of people who would be tempted to test the security features and personnel at the location, will be able to gain
nearly as much intelligence on the disposition of forces, and the quality of the defences by monitoring nutcases throwing themselves over the fence,
parachuting into the grounds, droning the place, and what not, as they would from running their own exploratory operations to test security
Everything from response times, to the direction from which the most resistance comes, to how the individual members of a security detail move,
where they move to and from, how they deploy from whatever vehicles they have, what vehicles are present, what weapons are being carried, what results
in snipers being deployed, what doesn't... Every time something untoward happens at the White House, someone is watching to see what data can be
gleaned from it. So it matters little whether these incidents are relatively innocent or whether they are deliberate and calculated response tests.
Those who want to know how things run down at Pennsylvania Avenue and surrounds, only need to monitor the behaviour of a random crazy, to learn what
they want to know.
Summoning up some gonads however, is a matter of more than recon.