gcdreamer05
03-27 12:13 PM
One idiot without giving him name in comments started abusing in Hindi language.
Dude when you have guts to put comments then put your name in it. So that I know who has issues with my comments to thread.
And just don't give red " just for the sake of giving it make you feel happy ".
Hey how/where do you see the comments?
Dude when you have guts to put comments then put your name in it. So that I know who has issues with my comments to thread.
And just don't give red " just for the sake of giving it make you feel happy ".
Hey how/where do you see the comments?
wallpaper Panetta, former White House
gopalkrishan
08-03 03:17 PM
Hi All,
First of all .. I am not an IBO or anything, but after being approached many a times, I decided to look up what the hell it was .. Attended a couple of their business meetings, researched and found out that upline groups like BWW had subverted the original business model..
Amway business model is that 1) you sell products to others you get the difference between the IBO price you get and the price you sell the product at... 2) Based on total volume you get a specific share.
In above model the share you get from volume is not major unless you have a lot of People under you. The main money comes from retailing the product.
BWW model: The uplines put a lot of pressure not only on getting the folks in, but stress the importance of books/cds, motivational products. They want you to have standing(recurring) order for books/cds and want you to pressure people under you to do that too .. The bulk "profit" comes from these. Amway has nothing to do with these books/cds. Amway has nothing to do with the seminars or business meetings, but your uplines push you to attend "as many meetings as possible" because profits from these also go to them .. Based on the consumption and volume of these additional items under you, a share of these profits may trickle down ..
When Uplines talk about making money they don't tell you that you are expected to do more than Amway model .. With Amway model, if you simply retail the products (NOT RECRUIT) then that should be enough (difference between IBO and retail price is YOURS).. People do buy stuff; couple of my friends have a repeat order with an Amway guy, for some vitamins sold through amway.. Anyways, Uplines force people to recruit so they have more people to target their motivational products to.
The red flag for me was (i may have misunderstood) .. The checks don't come directly to you .. Comes to top chain, they take their share and write out checks for lower down the line and so on and so forth (PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG)..
Anyways .. Amway for me is a subverted business by corrupt people.. Big Lies and false promises :)
Cheers
First of all .. I am not an IBO or anything, but after being approached many a times, I decided to look up what the hell it was .. Attended a couple of their business meetings, researched and found out that upline groups like BWW had subverted the original business model..
Amway business model is that 1) you sell products to others you get the difference between the IBO price you get and the price you sell the product at... 2) Based on total volume you get a specific share.
In above model the share you get from volume is not major unless you have a lot of People under you. The main money comes from retailing the product.
BWW model: The uplines put a lot of pressure not only on getting the folks in, but stress the importance of books/cds, motivational products. They want you to have standing(recurring) order for books/cds and want you to pressure people under you to do that too .. The bulk "profit" comes from these. Amway has nothing to do with these books/cds. Amway has nothing to do with the seminars or business meetings, but your uplines push you to attend "as many meetings as possible" because profits from these also go to them .. Based on the consumption and volume of these additional items under you, a share of these profits may trickle down ..
When Uplines talk about making money they don't tell you that you are expected to do more than Amway model .. With Amway model, if you simply retail the products (NOT RECRUIT) then that should be enough (difference between IBO and retail price is YOURS).. People do buy stuff; couple of my friends have a repeat order with an Amway guy, for some vitamins sold through amway.. Anyways, Uplines force people to recruit so they have more people to target their motivational products to.
The red flag for me was (i may have misunderstood) .. The checks don't come directly to you .. Comes to top chain, they take their share and write out checks for lower down the line and so on and so forth (PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG)..
Anyways .. Amway for me is a subverted business by corrupt people.. Big Lies and false promises :)
Cheers
krishna.ahd
02-14 04:11 PM
Hi Unitednations
I am reading your current and past posts recently.
Seems like you have enough information ( may be insider info also) regarding Retro and Gc process.
What is the practical solution short term and long term , Not what we like to have , i am looking for what should be ??
Out of Goal from IV , what is practically achievable ??
Thanks in advance for your comments
I am reading your current and past posts recently.
Seems like you have enough information ( may be insider info also) regarding Retro and Gc process.
What is the practical solution short term and long term , Not what we like to have , i am looking for what should be ??
Out of Goal from IV , what is practically achievable ??
Thanks in advance for your comments
2011 house CIA Chief Leon Panetta
soljabhai
12-13 10:43 AM
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
more...
franklin
02-13 01:45 AM
Do not evade the question, is it okay to limit the number of gold medals per country to 7% of all? Talk about athletics or swimming, not soccer. Do you believe there are "too many" swimmers from Australia or the USA in every Olympics? It just does not seem right... the quota system kills competitive spirit.
Ethnicity has nothing to do with skill level. Consider this also, if no other countries come close to the 7% limit, but India and China are maxed out. Guess who loses just because of an arbitrary limit? Guess where those unused greencards go?
They go to a pile of greencards, left unused and wasted. Wash, rinse, repeat the same cycle year on year. June 07 will be a looooooong way away (if you are from a severely retrogressed country), don't kid yourself.
btw... i was agreeing with abhijitp.
Ethnicity has nothing to do with skill level. Consider this also, if no other countries come close to the 7% limit, but India and China are maxed out. Guess who loses just because of an arbitrary limit? Guess where those unused greencards go?
They go to a pile of greencards, left unused and wasted. Wash, rinse, repeat the same cycle year on year. June 07 will be a looooooong way away (if you are from a severely retrogressed country), don't kid yourself.
btw... i was agreeing with abhijitp.
pathiren
09-28 08:46 PM
Thanks for the response in advance.
The question is:
1) Can a husband (on H1) own a business and sponsor (H1 and greencard) his wife to work for the same business?
2) Can an Indian company start LLC or any other kind of firm and own a business and sponsor someone- more specifically my dad (a major stake holder in Indian company) and this indian company starts some kind of LLC or inc (whichever is feasible) and sponsor my wife for H1 and greencard?
I know its kind of confusing, but would appreciate if you can try and explore this.
Thanks a lot!
The question is:
1) Can a husband (on H1) own a business and sponsor (H1 and greencard) his wife to work for the same business?
2) Can an Indian company start LLC or any other kind of firm and own a business and sponsor someone- more specifically my dad (a major stake holder in Indian company) and this indian company starts some kind of LLC or inc (whichever is feasible) and sponsor my wife for H1 and greencard?
I know its kind of confusing, but would appreciate if you can try and explore this.
Thanks a lot!
more...
at0474
12-13 01:05 PM
"If you read the history of immigration this country you will see that such measures are typically taken with restriction in mind not diversity."
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
"Diversity is the nice sounding cloak."
--True. Every concept has been used and abused.
"There is a definite fear that FB will bring in many mexican migrants ( "chain migration") and the country quota holds that back imho. you think it's because of indian programmers? It was made long before those existed. remember we are a minuscule number- don't feel so important- the programmers are about 2% of all immigrants. 11% is all EB, half are families, half again are techies- not all those are programmers. do the math."
--I did not say EB quota system was framed due to high influx of indian programmers. You missed the whole point.
"Also remember that 50,000 Gc are given a year by lottery for "diversity". as a result more bangladeshis get Gc in a year than indians on EB. so why do we need the country quota in EB again?"
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
"To the person bringing up caste system and fences, here is my proposal.
i am a physician, i am being held behind hoardes of techies who can easily have PD's much before mine since i am training and working longer and the J1 holds me back. 12 years here and no where in the line...so i should get a fast track too. let's have a cap for the techies...hey it looks great from my side of the fence...i'm sure you will agree that i should be pushed up the line."
--Precisely why I said your viewpoint would differ depending on which side of the fence you are.
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact.
"none of this is an argument for a legal approach. just responding to stuff here."
--Same here. I appreciate your response though.
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
"Diversity is the nice sounding cloak."
--True. Every concept has been used and abused.
"There is a definite fear that FB will bring in many mexican migrants ( "chain migration") and the country quota holds that back imho. you think it's because of indian programmers? It was made long before those existed. remember we are a minuscule number- don't feel so important- the programmers are about 2% of all immigrants. 11% is all EB, half are families, half again are techies- not all those are programmers. do the math."
--I did not say EB quota system was framed due to high influx of indian programmers. You missed the whole point.
"Also remember that 50,000 Gc are given a year by lottery for "diversity". as a result more bangladeshis get Gc in a year than indians on EB. so why do we need the country quota in EB again?"
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
"To the person bringing up caste system and fences, here is my proposal.
i am a physician, i am being held behind hoardes of techies who can easily have PD's much before mine since i am training and working longer and the J1 holds me back. 12 years here and no where in the line...so i should get a fast track too. let's have a cap for the techies...hey it looks great from my side of the fence...i'm sure you will agree that i should be pushed up the line."
--Precisely why I said your viewpoint would differ depending on which side of the fence you are.
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact.
"none of this is an argument for a legal approach. just responding to stuff here."
--Same here. I appreciate your response though.
2010 CIA Director Leon Panetta
bayarea07
07-26 11:44 PM
Good One !!!
I was approached by a Quixtar "Business Owner" in Ikea. I had fallen in their trap once before and had to listen to the whole business plan and how I was wasting my life working for someone else etc. etc.
He used his signature opening line: Are you Indian?
I replied: NO
Poor fellow didn't know what to say next.
I was approached by a Quixtar "Business Owner" in Ikea. I had fallen in their trap once before and had to listen to the whole business plan and how I was wasting my life working for someone else etc. etc.
He used his signature opening line: Are you Indian?
I replied: NO
Poor fellow didn't know what to say next.
more...
vdlrao
07-25 07:55 PM
See we came to know from our calculations there are about 10 times increase in EB2 India visas. So that means we are getting visas of 10 years in a single year!!!!!. But theres not much change in the demand of EB2. The demand is amost same as of the previous years. But the supply has increased to 10 times. So in two years, 2008 and 2009, we are getting of 20 years visas. So assuming there were no spill overs, and 20 years from now means in 2028 , wouldn't it be possible to clear off all the EB2s (with out spill overs) with the PDs on or before 2008. So does it make any sense of EB2 getting close to current very soon with the spill overs.
hair leon panetta signature.
Macaca
07-04 12:30 PM
$170 - Fees for I-131 / Application for Advance Parole / Travel Document.
$180 - Fees for I-765 / Application for Employment Authorization.
$ 325 - Fees for I-485 / Application for Adjustment of Status to register as Permanent Resident. ($225 for applicaiton below 14 and over 80 (Should check on this))
$70 - Biometric Recording Fees. (Finger Printing, etc)
Which of the above are not needed for dependents?
$180 - Fees for I-765 / Application for Employment Authorization.
$ 325 - Fees for I-485 / Application for Adjustment of Status to register as Permanent Resident. ($225 for applicaiton below 14 and over 80 (Should check on this))
$70 - Biometric Recording Fees. (Finger Printing, etc)
Which of the above are not needed for dependents?
more...
abhijitp
02-13 01:25 AM
I am not saying "C" nor am I saying "July 2007 VB". I am talking about "June 2007 VB". It is just a matter of time when we can see the VB back to June 2007 figure again.
I can assure you that I have done my part without telling anyone. I am a silent doer.
But even that is not a possibility this year, IMHO.
Thanks for your efforts!
I can assure you that I have done my part without telling anyone. I am a silent doer.
But even that is not a possibility this year, IMHO.
Thanks for your efforts!
hot leon panetta signature. cia chief leon panetta. CIA Director Leon Panetta;
Pineapple
12-14 03:37 PM
To summarize the discussions on this thread:
Yes, it is 7 % for all countries.
Now it is manifestly obvious that the 7 % figure is arbitrary, and not fair. That much we can all agree on.
The real question, as raised in the first post of the thread by soljabhai is:
(A) Is that constitutional?
(B) (And this is the real question): If it is, what should we do about it?
Intelligent questions, both.
The answer to (A) is not clear. We need a competent constitutional expert to opine on the matter.
For (B), (which is what the thread is really all about), there are lively discussions with differing views.
lazycis has presented good evidence that the case is not cut and dried legally. It might be unfair, but those are the laws.
mbartosik, alterego, me and others have argued (from different angles) in terms of pragmatism. (Cost is not worth the benefit)
garybanz, soljabhai, and others have argued that it is worth it (Cost is worth the benefit).
Anyway, agree or disagree, its an interesting thread with interesting posts..
Yes, it is 7 % for all countries.
Now it is manifestly obvious that the 7 % figure is arbitrary, and not fair. That much we can all agree on.
The real question, as raised in the first post of the thread by soljabhai is:
(A) Is that constitutional?
(B) (And this is the real question): If it is, what should we do about it?
Intelligent questions, both.
The answer to (A) is not clear. We need a competent constitutional expert to opine on the matter.
For (B), (which is what the thread is really all about), there are lively discussions with differing views.
lazycis has presented good evidence that the case is not cut and dried legally. It might be unfair, but those are the laws.
mbartosik, alterego, me and others have argued (from different angles) in terms of pragmatism. (Cost is not worth the benefit)
garybanz, soljabhai, and others have argued that it is worth it (Cost is worth the benefit).
Anyway, agree or disagree, its an interesting thread with interesting posts..
more...
house tattoo Leon Panetta Gives
bobby
07-04 11:39 AM
"The US govt. does a number on High Skilled Immigrants"
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5994&page=9
My suggestions:
"Door slams shut for highly skilled LEGAL immigrants in the US"
"US closes the door for highly skilled LEGAL immigrants"
"US isolates highly skilled legal immigrants"
"Broken Legal immigration system harmful to US competitiveness"
"Legal Immigration system in shambles"
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5994&page=9
My suggestions:
"Door slams shut for highly skilled LEGAL immigrants in the US"
"US closes the door for highly skilled LEGAL immigrants"
"US isolates highly skilled legal immigrants"
"Broken Legal immigration system harmful to US competitiveness"
"Legal Immigration system in shambles"
tattoo leon panetta signature.
needhelp!
09-26 12:42 PM
This is something IV wants to pursue and needs our support!
more...
pictures girlfriend leon panetta photo.
andy007
07-04 11:11 AM
Please post good reliable estimate of cost for applying with ALL possible break ups. I know the following only!
Cost of applying = application fee ($795 ??) + Lawyer fee + others (= medical + pictures + ...)
Also, which parts are lost if we have to re-apply!
Application Fee : Main Applicant : $375.00 (Application Fee) + $70.00 (Finger Print) + $50.00 (Fedex) + Medical Exam ($250.00) + Photos ($40.00) + Lawer Fee ($1500.00) and if we have any dependent same thing except Application fee and Lawer fess ($325.00 (Application Fee) + 500$ Lawer Fee)
All Togther : $2285.00 and calling here and there almost $2500.00 Per Person .... any other information please ask us........ thanks
Cost of applying = application fee ($795 ??) + Lawyer fee + others (= medical + pictures + ...)
Also, which parts are lost if we have to re-apply!
Application Fee : Main Applicant : $375.00 (Application Fee) + $70.00 (Finger Print) + $50.00 (Fedex) + Medical Exam ($250.00) + Photos ($40.00) + Lawer Fee ($1500.00) and if we have any dependent same thing except Application fee and Lawer fess ($325.00 (Application Fee) + 500$ Lawer Fee)
All Togther : $2285.00 and calling here and there almost $2500.00 Per Person .... any other information please ask us........ thanks
dresses church#39;s signature events:
swo
07-11 11:32 AM
You can find some bad things about Canada here -
www.notcanada.com
The criticisms of this website are LAUGHABLE. The Economist's quality of life index has rated Canada and Australia the top countries on earth to live in, overwhelming, year after year after year after year!
Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Melbourne, Sydney and Perth consistently dominate the top 10 cities in the world to live. 6 of the top 10?
Having spent enormous amounts of time in both those countries I can tell you they are wonderful, sensible places to live.
The index takes into account, cost of living, earnings capacity, safety, etc.
Canada probably has one of the most rosey futures on earth. It has an abundance of resources, a tiny population and ironically, global warming is adding to its opportunities. Both countries have avoided a single year of recession since 2000, are likely to benefit for ever-higher walls to migrants in the US, and on top of that, both governments continue to operate under surplus budgets.
Cost of living is actually far below that in places like NY and California.
Health care, while not top notch, provides better care on average to more people than is likely to be found in places like the US. Particularly for people that are older and more likely to need it.
Education is infinitely better. US Public schools are atrocious.
As for the weather, well duh! :) The weather in Minnesota, Chicago, New York and Detroit wasn't that much better last time I looked! And Vancouver is mild and stunning.
Yes, taxes are higher. How do you think these things are paid for? If you think it's a dog eat dog and you think that the state shouldn't provide education and healthcare, then that's fine. Canada and Australia just aren't for you!
Anyway, both countries have advantages. I love the U.S. and that's why I'm here. But don't let an inarticulate and unfounded set of ridiculous statements turn you off. Do you own research and make the choice that is right for you!
www.notcanada.com
The criticisms of this website are LAUGHABLE. The Economist's quality of life index has rated Canada and Australia the top countries on earth to live in, overwhelming, year after year after year after year!
Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Melbourne, Sydney and Perth consistently dominate the top 10 cities in the world to live. 6 of the top 10?
Having spent enormous amounts of time in both those countries I can tell you they are wonderful, sensible places to live.
The index takes into account, cost of living, earnings capacity, safety, etc.
Canada probably has one of the most rosey futures on earth. It has an abundance of resources, a tiny population and ironically, global warming is adding to its opportunities. Both countries have avoided a single year of recession since 2000, are likely to benefit for ever-higher walls to migrants in the US, and on top of that, both governments continue to operate under surplus budgets.
Cost of living is actually far below that in places like NY and California.
Health care, while not top notch, provides better care on average to more people than is likely to be found in places like the US. Particularly for people that are older and more likely to need it.
Education is infinitely better. US Public schools are atrocious.
As for the weather, well duh! :) The weather in Minnesota, Chicago, New York and Detroit wasn't that much better last time I looked! And Vancouver is mild and stunning.
Yes, taxes are higher. How do you think these things are paid for? If you think it's a dog eat dog and you think that the state shouldn't provide education and healthcare, then that's fine. Canada and Australia just aren't for you!
Anyway, both countries have advantages. I love the U.S. and that's why I'm here. But don't let an inarticulate and unfounded set of ridiculous statements turn you off. Do you own research and make the choice that is right for you!
more...
makeup images Leon Panetta is shown
chantu
05-01 04:18 PM
Guys do not get deceive by CON/UPA govt raising voice for Sikhs in Pak. They raised it because the next phase of elections will be held in Punjab, Himachal, Delhi and Haryana where there are significant Sikh population. CON/UPA govt does not care about Sikhs. They want to cover up for the mess they created because of Tytler issue.
Also, why did CON/UPA govt did not raise voice when homes and temples of Hindus in Kazakhstan were destroyed.
Also, why did CON/UPA govt did not raise voice when homes and temples of Hindus in Kazakhstan were destroyed.
girlfriend leon panetta signature.
nandakumar
05-11 07:39 PM
I never said that I'm disloyal to India or anything derogatory about India.
My statement "shame to hold Indian passport" is to express my resentment and to protest against the polices of the govt of India towards the Sri Lankan Tamil issue. I believe in freedom of expression and I have every right to protest what I deemed to be injustice.
I saying it again, in this country even burning of the national flag is considered a form of protest.
I'm expressing my feelings, if you or your so called "Tamil friends" are not matured enough to understand freedom expression and genuine protesting, I don't care and i don't owe any explanation to any one. Also I don't care what judgments other make about me.
Dude
you are such a contradicting personality. If I take the above oath, at least I will be loyal to the country of my citizenship. somebody washed your brain with too much of what it is not in reality. You have to put your country before your race, color, ethnicity and religion. That is what I learnt as definition for citizenship. I have very good tamil friends and even showed your statement. I am glad that they just hate your personality and you are an atypical Indian tamil.
My statement "shame to hold Indian passport" is to express my resentment and to protest against the polices of the govt of India towards the Sri Lankan Tamil issue. I believe in freedom of expression and I have every right to protest what I deemed to be injustice.
I saying it again, in this country even burning of the national flag is considered a form of protest.
I'm expressing my feelings, if you or your so called "Tamil friends" are not matured enough to understand freedom expression and genuine protesting, I don't care and i don't owe any explanation to any one. Also I don't care what judgments other make about me.
Dude
you are such a contradicting personality. If I take the above oath, at least I will be loyal to the country of my citizenship. somebody washed your brain with too much of what it is not in reality. You have to put your country before your race, color, ethnicity and religion. That is what I learnt as definition for citizenship. I have very good tamil friends and even showed your statement. I am glad that they just hate your personality and you are an atypical Indian tamil.
hairstyles Leon Panetta arrives on
snathan
01-13 06:10 PM
Will there be a problem at time of 485 adjudication? Like, if USCIS investigates whether there was valid employer-employee relationship through out H1 period..even though this memo is released only now.
GC is for future employment....this memo is only for H1B. Otherwise you can sue them.
GC is for future employment....this memo is only for H1B. Otherwise you can sue them.
hopefulgc
02-13 03:03 PM
GUYS GUYS GUYS...read what lazy cis has posted..
50 broke ass asylees can do it..
why can't we ?
...i'd like to think we are a community of very resourceful people
http://www.ailf.org/lac/lac_lit_030402a.asp
WASHINGTON, D.C.- Immigrant advocates filed a national class action lawsuit in federal court today challenging the Immigration and Naturalization Service's (INS) misadministration of a law that provides persons granted asylum the right to live and work in the United States permanently. The suit, filed by the American Immigration Law Foundation and Dorsey & Whitney LLP, seeks to compel the INS to issue all allotted "green cards" fairly on a first-come, first-served basis.
Some 50 named plaintiffs represent tens of thousands of asylees throughout the country. The plaintiffs are all refugees who fled persecution in their home countries and were granted asylum in the United States. Under U.S. law, they may apply to become permanent residents, or so-called green card holders, of the United States. Congress has imposed a cap of 10,000 on the number of asylees who can attain permanent resident status each year.
The lawsuit alleges that the government failed to distribute more than 18,000 green cards in the last eight years while more than 60,000 asylees wait in legal limbo; failed to process applications on a first-come, first-served basis as required by law; and kept thousands of asylees on the wait list who are exempt from the cap. The lawsuit also challenges the government's practice of requiring asylees to obtain a new employment authorization card each year-at a cost that presents a hardship for many families-while they wait for their permanent status.
If 50 asylees managed to get enough money for action, 50 high-skilled immigrants can do it too. Otherwise I'll be greatly dissappointed. Lack of action is a killer. I was shoked to read walking_dude's post that nobody from MI volunteered to be a plaintiff in DL case. If people do not want to help themselves, IV won't be able to help them.
50 broke ass asylees can do it..
why can't we ?
...i'd like to think we are a community of very resourceful people
http://www.ailf.org/lac/lac_lit_030402a.asp
WASHINGTON, D.C.- Immigrant advocates filed a national class action lawsuit in federal court today challenging the Immigration and Naturalization Service's (INS) misadministration of a law that provides persons granted asylum the right to live and work in the United States permanently. The suit, filed by the American Immigration Law Foundation and Dorsey & Whitney LLP, seeks to compel the INS to issue all allotted "green cards" fairly on a first-come, first-served basis.
Some 50 named plaintiffs represent tens of thousands of asylees throughout the country. The plaintiffs are all refugees who fled persecution in their home countries and were granted asylum in the United States. Under U.S. law, they may apply to become permanent residents, or so-called green card holders, of the United States. Congress has imposed a cap of 10,000 on the number of asylees who can attain permanent resident status each year.
The lawsuit alleges that the government failed to distribute more than 18,000 green cards in the last eight years while more than 60,000 asylees wait in legal limbo; failed to process applications on a first-come, first-served basis as required by law; and kept thousands of asylees on the wait list who are exempt from the cap. The lawsuit also challenges the government's practice of requiring asylees to obtain a new employment authorization card each year-at a cost that presents a hardship for many families-while they wait for their permanent status.
If 50 asylees managed to get enough money for action, 50 high-skilled immigrants can do it too. Otherwise I'll be greatly dissappointed. Lack of action is a killer. I was shoked to read walking_dude's post that nobody from MI volunteered to be a plaintiff in DL case. If people do not want to help themselves, IV won't be able to help them.
michellezbb
07-03 06:37 PM
please at least send out to your state's senator.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Dear Mr. Senator,
My name is xxx, and I’m working as an xx in xx,xx.
I am sending this letter in strong protest of the outrageous bait-and-switch melodrama that the US Department of State and the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) have put on recently. Specifically, on June 13, 2007, the State Department announced that people seeking permanent residence based on employment would be allowed to proceed to file their applications starting on July 2, 2007
As a result, I took immediate action, spending a huge amount of time and effort preparing all the required documents and having them sent out to my attorney ASAP. However, on the very morning of July 2, the US Department of State announced that they just changed their mind and decided to reject all applications. This is such a ridiculous hoax, and it’s particularly shocking when you realize that such nonsensical and willy-nilly decisions came from the US Department of State!
As a hard-working student, I got my graduate education in this great country and was fortunate enough to get a job upon graduation. As a law-abiding individual, I have been waiting patiently in line for years to file my application for permanent residence. Yet what I’ve just seen and experienced is more than disappointing not only to me, but to thousands upon thousands of legal immigrants just like me who have struggled so hard to deal with all kinds of difficulties for years and have been doing it the right way.
I have below questions needed to be clarified:
1. How many applications have USCIS received during the period 6/14/2007 through 6/30/2007? This number is critical because apparently this number has changed the US Department of State’s opinion about the visa availability from available to unavailable in 15 days. And a more interesting question is that is this number predictable? In another word, did the US Department of US take this number in consideration when they determine that the visa will be available to all employment-based immigrants on June 13, 2007?
2. The announcement of the revised July visa availability was made in the earlier morning of July 2, 2007. Apparently, the decision was made before but not in the morning of July 2, 2007. Then, why didn’t the US Department of State release the news as soon as the decision was made in a good faith effort to inform all potential applicants at the first time? It should be anticipated that a lot of applicants would their application at the very beginning of the month. As you can imagine, all those effort are just wasted. And the worst of all is the feeling of being cheated and being fooled around.
3. My application was prepared to send to USCIS on July based on the best information available at that point of time. However, the application will be rejected/returned in accordance with the sudden announcement made in the morning of 7/2/2007. Does the US Department of State have the legal right to revise the cut-off date without going through certain procedures? Can we still trust and rely on the visa bulletin issued by the US Department of State to prepare our change of status application in the future?
Again, this is such a ridiculous hoax and it’s hard to believe the US Department of State just ate its own word like that. That is why I would like to take the liberty of writing to you about my outrage. I sincerely hope that you can take some precious time looking into this, and also at the current immigration system, which I believe is seriously flawed and patently unfair.
Thanks and best regards,
xx
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Dear Mr. Senator,
My name is xxx, and I’m working as an xx in xx,xx.
I am sending this letter in strong protest of the outrageous bait-and-switch melodrama that the US Department of State and the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) have put on recently. Specifically, on June 13, 2007, the State Department announced that people seeking permanent residence based on employment would be allowed to proceed to file their applications starting on July 2, 2007
As a result, I took immediate action, spending a huge amount of time and effort preparing all the required documents and having them sent out to my attorney ASAP. However, on the very morning of July 2, the US Department of State announced that they just changed their mind and decided to reject all applications. This is such a ridiculous hoax, and it’s particularly shocking when you realize that such nonsensical and willy-nilly decisions came from the US Department of State!
As a hard-working student, I got my graduate education in this great country and was fortunate enough to get a job upon graduation. As a law-abiding individual, I have been waiting patiently in line for years to file my application for permanent residence. Yet what I’ve just seen and experienced is more than disappointing not only to me, but to thousands upon thousands of legal immigrants just like me who have struggled so hard to deal with all kinds of difficulties for years and have been doing it the right way.
I have below questions needed to be clarified:
1. How many applications have USCIS received during the period 6/14/2007 through 6/30/2007? This number is critical because apparently this number has changed the US Department of State’s opinion about the visa availability from available to unavailable in 15 days. And a more interesting question is that is this number predictable? In another word, did the US Department of US take this number in consideration when they determine that the visa will be available to all employment-based immigrants on June 13, 2007?
2. The announcement of the revised July visa availability was made in the earlier morning of July 2, 2007. Apparently, the decision was made before but not in the morning of July 2, 2007. Then, why didn’t the US Department of State release the news as soon as the decision was made in a good faith effort to inform all potential applicants at the first time? It should be anticipated that a lot of applicants would their application at the very beginning of the month. As you can imagine, all those effort are just wasted. And the worst of all is the feeling of being cheated and being fooled around.
3. My application was prepared to send to USCIS on July based on the best information available at that point of time. However, the application will be rejected/returned in accordance with the sudden announcement made in the morning of 7/2/2007. Does the US Department of State have the legal right to revise the cut-off date without going through certain procedures? Can we still trust and rely on the visa bulletin issued by the US Department of State to prepare our change of status application in the future?
Again, this is such a ridiculous hoax and it’s hard to believe the US Department of State just ate its own word like that. That is why I would like to take the liberty of writing to you about my outrage. I sincerely hope that you can take some precious time looking into this, and also at the current immigration system, which I believe is seriously flawed and patently unfair.
Thanks and best regards,
xx
