Letters to the editor.

Your Job May Be Next!

I wish to congratulate William F. Jasper for the insightful articles regarding the losses of American jobs ("Your Job May Be Next!," "Chinagate All Over Again," and "Why the Race to the Bottom?") in your March 10th issue. THE NEW AMERICAN articles addressed two critical points that haven't been touched in the establishment media: identifying the cause of the problem by tracing it back to legislation establishing the H1 and L1 programs; and proposing a realistic solution (repealing the H1 and L1 programs).

I do wish the articles had also dealt with another government-caused exacerbation of the problem--affirmative action. Being an IT professional, I have participated in numerous interviews with job candidates, and I have seen how affirmative action pressure frequently gives foreigners an unfair advantage over Americans for American jobs. No other country gives foreigners employment advantages over its own citizens. For example, when I worked for a Silicon Valley company and was sent to Canada on a troubleshooting assignment, I needed to carry documentation with me as I entered explaining that the companies that brought me there had searched unsuccessfully for a Canadian who could do what I did in Montreal that week.

I would also warn all Americans that the H1 and L1 programs are causing national security problems. Many computer security professionals are taking seriously the threat of a coordinated E-attack on our country's computer systems by terrorists. A coordinated E-attack with deliberate destruction of databases--preceded by worm programs ensuring that the databases, once restored, would still contain unreliable data--would do more damage to our economy than the 9-11 airliner kamikaze attacks did. Many of the foreign countries where our IT jobs are going have terrorist problems far worse than our own. Also, because the Internet is used by the off-shore IT teams for long-distance administration of American computer systems and databases, the inherent insecurity of the Internet only makes matters worse.

KURT HYDE

Corinth, Texas 

The three cover story articles from the March 10th issue have been combined in a 16-page reprint under the title "Your Job May Be Next!" To order, see page 25.

Guns and Police

I read with interest "Police and Guns" (April 7th issue). It correctly points out that law enforcement and military personnel are not immune from the issues that gun advocates cite as justification for disarming citizens. In the past 20 years I have seen reports of, and sometimes been witness to, thoughtlessness and recklessness resulting in the accidental discharge of weapons. I witnessed a shotgun discharged into the floorboard of a police car, and I saw the aftermath of an ornamental cactus decimated by a firearm inside a law enforcement officer's home. The list goes on.

The bottom line is that the police (and military) are comprised of human beings prone to error. However, I would wager that the rate of incidence per hour of handling firearms among law enforcement officers is drastically lower than that of the public as a whole, just as people who drive for a living have fewer automobile accidents per mile driven than does the public as a whole. (It may appear to be different only because of the time spent on the road or handling a gun.) Training and experience do count for something.

Regarding the "monopoly" the police and military would have on firearms, the threat goes much further. Federal legislation that would grant police officers the ability to carry guns nationwide has already been introduced. If it passes, this would effectively create two citizenship classes--those who can carry a concealed firearm nationwide, and those who cannot. Because as a law enforcement officer I personally would reap the benefit if this becomes a reality, many of my colleagues are perplexed at why I am opposed to it.

It is very clear, as you continue to point out, that our Constitution and the balance of powers are being carelessly tossed about. The 10th Amendment is largely for convenience. Only when it suits the powers that be is there any reliance on the Founding documents and the writings of its authors. We live in a time where people want no absolutes, moral or otherwise.

JOHN SLATER 

Sandston, Virginia 

Send your letters to: THE NEW AMERICAN, P.O. Box 8040, Appleton, WI 54912. Or e-mail: [e-mail]. Due to volume received, not all letters can be answered. Letters may be edited for space and clarity.