Meaning: The quote by Otto Schily, a German politician and public servant, addresses the issue of security measures in response to terrorist attacks. It highlights the limitations of attempting to achieve complete security and challenges the effectiveness of implementing extensive security checkpoints in public transportation systems. Schily's statement suggests that the pursuit of absolute security is futile and that unrealistic expectations of complete protection should not drive policy decisions.

In the aftermath of the London attacks referenced in the quote, there was a widespread call for increased security measures in public transportation systems. The notion of adding security checkpoints to subway and bus systems gained traction as a proposed solution to prevent similar attacks in the future. However, Schily dismisses this approach as "nonsense," emphasizing the unattainability of 100 percent security.

The quote encapsulates a broader debate surrounding security measures in response to terrorist threats. It brings into focus the tension between the desire for safety and the practical limitations of ensuring absolute security. Schily's perspective challenges the prevailing narrative that more security measures equate to better protection, and prompts a critical examination of the efficacy and feasibility of such approaches.

Schily's assertion that "no one can guarantee 100 percent security" reflects a sobering reality that permeates discussions on counterterrorism and public safety. It acknowledges the inherent unpredictability and complexity of security threats, emphasizing the need for a balanced and realistic approach to risk mitigation. By rejecting the notion of absolute security, Schily advocates for a nuanced understanding of the challenges posed by terrorism and the need for multifaceted strategies that go beyond simplistic, reactionary measures.

The quote also raises questions about the trade-offs involved in implementing extensive security measures. While the intention behind such measures is to enhance public safety, they can also have unintended consequences, such as infringing on individual liberties, causing disruptions to public transportation systems, and imposing financial burdens on authorities and commuters. Schily's stance underscores the importance of considering the broader implications of security policies and avoiding knee-jerk reactions that may have limited effectiveness in addressing the root causes of terrorism.

In the context of public discourse on security, Schily's perspective serves as a reminder of the need for rational, evidence-based decision-making in formulating security policies. It urges policymakers and the public to exercise critical thinking and avoid succumbing to fear-driven impulses that may lead to the adoption of superficial security measures. Instead, Schily encourages a more thoughtful and holistic approach that acknowledges the inherent uncertainties and limitations of security efforts while striving for pragmatic and effective solutions.

Overall, Otto Schily's quote captures the essence of a contentious issue in contemporary security discourse – the pursuit of absolute security in the face of terrorist threats. By challenging the feasibility of achieving 100 percent security and cautioning against knee-jerk reactions, Schily's perspective contributes to a more nuanced and informed discussion on the complexities of security policy and the need for a balanced, realistic approach to addressing security challenges.