Reply #5: Shorter Mandrake: "I guess it's necessary and appropriate"

[jpgray]

Which is all we can really do. We can only guess if underwear inspection is necessary and appropriate for ensuring safety. There is no politically workable argument for lessening security, or even declaring some combination of procedures sufficient--the instant an attack happens, those who called for less, or called what we have enough, will be vulnerable. No one wants to be vulnerable. So we will band-aid over the latest attempts as they come in, and tell ourselves "I guess it's necessary and appropriate."

There will be no sober discussion on how many attacks over a given period of time is acceptable, even though such a number is built into any set of procedures. No amount of attacks is acceptable, so the standard of security will always be a floating one. After each attempt, it will be time for another added ritual. No addition will carry with it the claim that it will defeat all attempts, just that it will defeat the last variety. And if there are endless varieties?

We are engaged in adding a variety of locks to the barn door--each would bar passage for the latest escaped animal. To lock the door utterly for all animals would upset too many, and to keep the animals from wanting to escape lies not in our power. Not if we want to maintain our influence, anyway.

God that was a terrible metaphor.