White House briefly locked down for smoke bomb - Polidicks

[url]http://www.wtkr.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-whitehousetre80h06a-20120117,0,7870024.story[/url] [quote]WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House was locked down for more than an hour on Tuesday night as authorities investigated what appeared to be a smoke bomb tossed over the fence of the executive compound, a Secret Service spokesman said. The device was thrown over the fence at one point when about 1,000 to 1,500 "Occupy DC" protesters were demonstrating outside the White House, Secret Service spokesman George Ogilvie said. He gave the "all clear" later in the evening. A majority of the protesters had left the area earlier and there had been no arrests, he said. President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, went out to dinner to celebrate her birthday and were not at the White House when the incident began but returned while the investigation was under way. Members of the White House press pool were prevented from leaving for about 45 minutes before they were escorted off the grounds. Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House was also closed during the investigation. Demonstrators from the Occupy movement marched to the White House after earlier converging at the U.S. Capitol and congressional office buildings to protest against the influence of money on lawmakers. Several hundred demonstrators, some from as far as Nevada and San Diego, staged rallies and attempts to meet lawmakers as they returned from a holiday break. One demonstrator was arrested for assaulting a police officer and three others for crossing a police line, a Capitol Police spokeswoman said. The Occupy movement burst on the national scene in September in New York with its focus on income inequality in the United States.[/quote]

It was a failed magic trick...[i]Go home everyone[/i].

I know it's a matter of national security, but for fuck's sake. [i]A smoke bomb[/i] shut down the White House, Pennsylvania Avenue, and pulled hundreds of cops off their beats. [i]A smoke bomb.[/i] Oi...the proper response would have been to send a single white house guard out there with a pair of tongs to pick the thing up and toss it in a bin.

That was no smoke bomb. I told them not to let Michelle get the 99% burger.

Just a weather balloon folks, nothing to see here carry on.

[QUOTE=TestECull;34273805]I know it's a matter of national security, but for fuck's sake. [i]A smoke bomb[/i] shut down the White House, Pennsylvania Avenue, and pulled hundreds of cops off their beats. [i]A smoke bomb.[/i] Oi...the proper response would have been to send a single white house guard out there with a pair of tongs to pick the thing up and toss it in a bin.[/QUOTE] Reason they do that is because there could potentionally be a diversion or the like to attack the white house, and they can't know just what device it was that was thrown over. Sure, a bit over exagrated given the fact that the president and first wife wasn't there, but still, better safe than sorry. Is this the first time the white house has gone into lockdown, anyways? Don't think i've ever heard of anything similiar before.

[QUOTE=TestECull;34273805]I know it's a matter of national security, but for fuck's sake. [i]A smoke bomb[/i] shut down the White House, Pennsylvania Avenue, and pulled hundreds of cops off their beats. [i]A smoke bomb.[/i] Oi...the proper response would have been to send a single white house guard out there with a pair of tongs to pick the thing up and toss it in a bin.[/QUOTE] How would the proper response have been to risk the lives of pretty much everyone in the building with a halfass response? With this kind of shit, it's much smarter to assume the worst and act accordingly than to act badass and take unneccessary risks. [editline]18th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=The fox;34274279]Reason they do that is because there could potentionally be a diversion or the like to attack the white house, and they can't know just what device it was that was thrown over. Sure, a bit over exagrated given the fact that the president and first wife wasn't there, but still, better safe than sorry. Is this the first time the white house has gone into lockdown, anyways? Don't think i've ever heard of anything similiar before.[/QUOTE] My guess is that this lockdown thing is standard operating procedure in the event of an attack.

[QUOTE=The fox;34274279]Reason they do that is because there could potentionally be a diversion or the like to attack the white house, and they can't know just what device it was that was thrown over. Sure, a bit over exagrated given the fact that the president and first wife wasn't there, but still, better safe than sorry. Is this the first time the white house has gone into lockdown, anyways? Don't think i've ever heard of anything similiar before.[/QUOTE] Closing Pennsylvania Avenue and occupying a hundred or so cops with what amounts to a firework is a waste of taxpayer money, unnecessary inconvenience on the public at large, and a waste of police time and manpower. It's just a smoke bomb. Worst case scenario it fogs your vision up a bit and makes you cough. Maybe burns your hand if you're dumb enough to pick it up barehanded. Pick the damn thing up with a pair of tongs, quench it in some water to cool it off, toss it in a trash bin, and that's the end of it. Save the bomb squad for an actual bomb. Just for sake of discussion, let's assume that it is a diversion. Under my scenario the main attack would be responded to appropriately, seeing as the forces that would respond to such an attack wouldn't be needlessly occupied, while the harmless little firework is disposed of by a white house rent-a-cop. If we go by what actually went down half the fucking army descends on a firework while the only thing seperating terrorists/angry mobs/anti-SOPA mobs/whatever your flavor of malcontent is and the Oval Office is Paul Blart. Which scenario better protects the safety of those in the white house? [editline]18th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=iFail;34274325]How would the proper response have been to risk the lives of pretty much everyone in the building with a halfass response? With this kind of shit, it's much smarter to assume the worst and act accordingly than to act badass and take unneccessary risks. [/QUOTE] There's nothing badass about sending a normal security guard out there to toss it in a bin and see if someone snuck in. I don't know where you got that idea. It's also not an unnecessary risk, it's not difficult to tell a firework thrown over the fence by bored Occupiers and an actual threatening device. You don't even have to get the head of security out of his office chair, the security cameras there are sufficiently high res to tell a pipe bomb/grenade/whatever from a smoke bomb.

[QUOTE=TestECull;34274369]Closing Pennsylvania Avenue and occupying a hundred or so cops with what amounts to a firework is a waste of taxpayer money, unnecessary inconvenience on the public at large, and a waste of police time and manpower. It's just a smoke bomb. Worst case scenario it fogs your vision up a bit and makes you cough. Maybe burns your hand if you're dumb enough to pick it up barehanded. Pick the damn thing up with a pair of tongs, quench it in some water to cool it off, toss it in a trash bin, and that's the end of it. Save the bomb squad for an actual bomb. Just for sake of discussion, let's assume that it is a diversion. Under my scenario the main attack would be responded to appropriately, seeing as the forces that would respond to such an attack wouldn't be needlessly occupied, while the harmless little firework is disposed of by a white house rent-a-cop. If we go by what actually went down half the fucking army descends on a firework while the only thing seperating terrorists/angry mobs/anti-SOPA mobs/whatever your flavor of malcontent is and the Oval Office is Paul Blart. Which scenario better protects the safety of those in the white house? [editline]18th January 2012[/editline] There's nothing badass about sending a normal security guard out there to toss it in a bin and see if someone snuck in. I don't know where you got that idea. It's also not an unnecessary risk, it's not difficult to tell a firework thrown over the fence by bored Occupiers and an actual threatening device. You don't even have to get the head of security out of his office chair, the security cameras there are sufficiently high res to tell a pipe bomb/grenade/whatever from a smoke bomb.[/QUOTE] I used to serve under an officer like you in the Marine Corps during my first tour in Afghanistan. He didn't take matters of security and the safety of his men seriously, and half-assed his responses to threats. No one liked him. People stopped listening to him. He eventually got "promoted" to an administrative job and got sent back to the US.

[QUOTE=The fox;34274279]Reason they do that is because there could potentionally be a diversion or the like to attack the white house, and they can't know just what device it was that was thrown over. Sure, a bit over exagrated given the fact that the president and first wife wasn't there, but still, better safe than sorry. Is this the first time the white house has gone into lockdown, anyways? Don't think i've ever heard of anything similiar before.[/QUOTE] It goes into lock down all the time. Some asshole jumped the fence and started walking toward the White House. He got maybe three or four feet before armed guards told him to get on the ground and he did. I'm pretty sure that was a lock down. This asshole. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtR40jhVQFE[/media]

[QUOTE=RyanH;34273750]It was a failed magic trick...[i]Go home everyone[/i].[/QUOTE] Magic missile?

Nice fucking going! Which douchebag threw it?! The morning news are all over it, saying again, Occupy are a bunch of rioteers marching to the White House, throwing a "grenade" over the fence! Ding dongs

Than there was that one guy who walked up to the White House fence and emptied a mag from an SKS in the general direction of the Oval Office and men in suits who "looked like Bill Clinton" Or the time someone flew a plane into the South Lawn. Or the several hundred other times things occurred at the White House. It's hardly overreacting considering the amount of shit that happens there and the value of who they are protecting.

Hmmmmm, so a smoke bomb locked down the White House, eh?

Y-M-C-A

[QUOTE=TestECull;34273805]I know it's a matter of national security, but for fuck's sake. [i]A smoke bomb[/i] shut down the White House, Pennsylvania Avenue, and pulled hundreds of cops off their beats. [i]A smoke bomb.[/i] Oi...the proper response would have been to send a single white house guard out there with a pair of tongs to pick the thing up and toss it in a bin.[/QUOTE] You're kidding right, the security of the white house has always been taken extremely seriously. Nothing wrong with being safe and trying to protect the president. The response you suggest would hardly be proper. [QUOTE=TestECull;34274369]Closing Pennsylvania Avenue and occupying a hundred or so cops with what amounts to a firework is a waste of taxpayer money, unnecessary inconvenience on the public at large, and a waste of police time and manpower. It's just a smoke bomb. Worst case scenario it fogs your vision up a bit and makes you cough. Maybe burns your hand if you're dumb enough to pick it up barehanded. Pick the damn thing up with a pair of tongs, quench it in some water to cool it off, toss it in a trash bin, and that's the end of it. Save the bomb squad for an actual bomb. Just for sake of discussion, let's assume that it is a diversion. Under my scenario the main attack would be responded to appropriately, seeing as the forces that would respond to such an attack wouldn't be needlessly occupied, while the harmless little firework is disposed of by a white house rent-a-cop. If we go by what actually went down half the fucking army descends on a firework while the only thing seperating terrorists/angry mobs/anti-SOPA mobs/whatever your flavor of malcontent is and the Oval Office is Paul Blart. Which scenario better protects the safety of those in the white house? [editline]18th January 2012[/editline] There's nothing badass about sending a normal security guard out there to toss it in a bin and see if someone snuck in. I don't know where you got that idea. It's also not an unnecessary risk, it's not difficult to tell a firework thrown over the fence by bored Occupiers and an actual threatening device. You don't even have to get the head of security out of his office chair, the security cameras there are sufficiently high res to tell a pipe bomb/grenade/whatever from a smoke bomb.[/QUOTE] Uh it is the police's job to respond to security issues and investigate. Obviously at the time they didn't know it was just some prankster using a smokebomb. You know they do sell smokebombs for tactical use right? On top of that what happens if it isn't just a smoke bomb and a chemical weapon as well? You can go in to a million what-if's, better to be safe then sorry. You got to protect the most important person in the US (whether you agree or not with his political stance) along with that protect the staff that works within the building as well because they're equally as important. Use your head and stop being so literal, damn.

If this was Ireland: "Ah sure it'll stop in a minute, dont mind it."

[QUOTE=TestECull;34274369]Closing Pennsylvania Avenue and occupying a hundred or so cops with what amounts to a firework is a waste of taxpayer money, unnecessary inconvenience on the public at large, and a waste of police time and manpower. It's just a smoke bomb. Worst case scenario it fogs your vision up a bit and makes you cough. Maybe burns your hand if you're dumb enough to pick it up barehanded. Pick the damn thing up with a pair of tongs, quench it in some water to cool it off, toss it in a trash bin, and that's the end of it. Save the bomb squad for an actual bomb. Just for sake of discussion, let's assume that it is a diversion. Under my scenario the main attack would be responded to appropriately, seeing as the forces that would respond to such an attack wouldn't be needlessly occupied, while the harmless little firework is disposed of by a white house rent-a-cop. If we go by what actually went down half the fucking army descends on a firework while the only thing seperating terrorists/angry mobs/anti-SOPA mobs/whatever your flavor of malcontent is and the Oval Office is Paul Blart. Which scenario better protects the safety of those in the white house? [editline]18th January 2012[/editline] There's nothing badass about sending a normal security guard out there to toss it in a bin and see if someone snuck in. I don't know where you got that idea. It's also not an unnecessary risk, it's not difficult to tell a firework thrown over the fence by bored Occupiers and an actual threatening device. You don't even have to get the head of security out of his office chair, the security cameras there are sufficiently high res to tell a pipe bomb/grenade/whatever from a smoke bomb.[/QUOTE] They had no way of knowing for sure if it wasn't an actual bomb. It's always best to assume the worst, especially when you're dealing with the safety of the most important man in the U.S

[QUOTE=TestECull;34274369] , while the harmless little firework is disposed of by a white house rent-a-cop. If we go by what actually went down half the fucking army descends on a firework while the only thing seperating terrorists/angry mobs/anti-SOPA mobs/whatever your flavor of malcontent is and the Oval Office is Paul Blart.[/QUOTE] Uh. No. The individuals protecting the white house are uniformed police officers. Not Security Officers. They have full arrest powers and it is difficult to even get into the Secret Service's uniformed police division. I've seen people apply that would be damned good at it and get denied. Calling them "Rent-a-cops" and "Paul Blart" is just ignorant, but then again, your complaint tied into this just proves you are ignorant to begin with... I would not even call normal Security Officers Rent-a-cops or Paul Blart. That is insulting, in my opinion. But then again, I am a little biased. My first job was a security officer position.