Some months ago, I started an argument on this forum about America's actual witch-hunt of any people who could remotely not be on their side, and I compared it with McCarthy's commi hunt.
People argued back that nobody has lossed their job over it, but I pointed them many cases of people working in Canadian business who have contract with the American Army who could not work, and lossed their job because they have dual-citizenship with Venezuela, Iran, Syria, etc... (in the Article I cited, it was Venezuela. But the list of forbidden countries is much more long)
I replied saying that it is their right to have dual-citizenship, and America should not question Canada's choice about it. They replied that if they wanted to be "true canadian", they would not hesitate to reject their previous citizenship.
Isn't that a little stupid to think that asking people to reject their previous citizenship will make them safer to work on sensitive equipment?
I mean.. let me quote Dr Sidney Freedman, in M*A*S*H:
Cnl Flagg: I warn you, Freedman, I can blow the whistle on you: you never signed your oath of allegiance
Dr Freedman: Let me ask you something.. If I really was a commi spy, do you think I'd hesitate a second signing it?
The point being, if a Venezuellan agent really manage to get into Canada, to study to become an aeronautic or electronic specialist, manage to get hired by Bell Helicopter, and manage to get assigned on American's equipement (on which he could do nothing more than minor damage), he will consider for a second ruining 15 years of his assignement because he doesn't want to renounce dual-citizenship?
If that is the extent of your security, no wonder Americans doesn't feel safe. But that kind of security is superflous, and make good people loose their job over a stupid rule that won't do the job it's intended to do.
Would a terrorist announce that he come from Iran, simply because he's still proud of his country?
