surabhi
07-28 12:56 PM
The corporates know what they are doing. They want to create controversy and rake in sales.
I consider myself liberal as in live and let live. This depiction pushes envelope big time. Along with rights comes the responsibilites.
I guess the marketing honchos at this company couldnt care less
For those who hasnt seen the image, I tried attaching here. Not sure if it'd come thru.
http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/lost-ipa.jpg
I consider myself liberal as in live and let live. This depiction pushes envelope big time. Along with rights comes the responsibilites.
I guess the marketing honchos at this company couldnt care less
For those who hasnt seen the image, I tried attaching here. Not sure if it'd come thru.
http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/lost-ipa.jpg
wallpaper life and love quotes for tattoos. famous tattoo quotes; life
StarSun
09-10 11:01 AM
One of the main things that could help us to make a correct guess is number of approved and pending I-140s per country per year of priority.
USCIs shouldn't say they don't have this data and we shouldn't say we never requested this
While there is nothing wrong in knowing the correct pending numbers, there is nothing to gain actually from it. If the goal is to guess correctly when you will be current, then this is worthwhile!!
USCIs shouldn't say they don't have this data and we shouldn't say we never requested this
While there is nothing wrong in knowing the correct pending numbers, there is nothing to gain actually from it. If the goal is to guess correctly when you will be current, then this is worthwhile!!
neelu
12-13 01:01 PM
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Our dear Pappu,
I understand how difficult it must be to respond to so many questions directed towards core members, and can understand how frustrating it can be to answer repetitive questions.
So thanks for clarifying this again for many of us who thought an easy route was available (but half knew that it was there, it would have been taken).
But can I please add that if this question has been asked repetitively, I think it warrants to be added to the "The Employment-Based Green Card: Process and Problems" section on the home page, so people can find the answer easily that searching our huge forum database. I understand that each of you are very busy and feel bad that I am adding additional work.
Thank you.
Neelu
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Our dear Pappu,
I understand how difficult it must be to respond to so many questions directed towards core members, and can understand how frustrating it can be to answer repetitive questions.
So thanks for clarifying this again for many of us who thought an easy route was available (but half knew that it was there, it would have been taken).
But can I please add that if this question has been asked repetitively, I think it warrants to be added to the "The Employment-Based Green Card: Process and Problems" section on the home page, so people can find the answer easily that searching our huge forum database. I understand that each of you are very busy and feel bad that I am adding additional work.
Thank you.
Neelu
2011 love life quotes to live by.
ajju
01-18 08:01 PM
Based on your state law, you may be required to carry your original DL and not copies.
I was talking about copy of EAD instead of original card.. But you made a valid point that EAD is not proof of immigration status... But then what is proof of Legal Status?? If you are on EAD.. you may not've H1...
Also carrying original EAD all the time is not a good idea... If you lose it.. it will take months to replace it... Not sure if during this.. you can work or not... Personally I was asked to show passport only once.. when driving through Texas by US Army... Within your state it may be okay if your DL is close to real ID... But still this is a confusing topic...
I was talking about copy of EAD instead of original card.. But you made a valid point that EAD is not proof of immigration status... But then what is proof of Legal Status?? If you are on EAD.. you may not've H1...
Also carrying original EAD all the time is not a good idea... If you lose it.. it will take months to replace it... Not sure if during this.. you can work or not... Personally I was asked to show passport only once.. when driving through Texas by US Army... Within your state it may be okay if your DL is close to real ID... But still this is a confusing topic...
more...
ezee
10-16 04:37 PM
Don't you think we should be more clear in requesting information per specific country instead of lumping China and India together for EB-2 and others for EB-3? Also will it be too much to request pending applications by month/quarter instead of year?
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
|[indent]|EB2 - China |EB-2 India |EB-3 China |EB-3 India |EB-3 Mexico |EB-3 Phillipines |EB-3 Rest|
2001-Q1
2001-Q2
2001-Q3
2001-Q4
2002-Q1
2002-Q2
2002-Q3
2002-Q4
2003-Q1
2003-Q2
2003-Q3
2003-Q4
2004-Q1
2004-Q2
2004-Q3
2004-Q4
2005-Q1
2005-Q2
2005-Q3
2005-Q4
2006-Q1
2006-Q2
2006-Q3
2006-Q4
2007-Q1
2007-Q2
2007-Q3
2007-Q4
2008-Q1
2008-Q2
2008-Q3
2008-Q4
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
|[indent]|EB2 - China |EB-2 India |EB-3 China |EB-3 India |EB-3 Mexico |EB-3 Phillipines |EB-3 Rest|
2001-Q1
2001-Q2
2001-Q3
2001-Q4
2002-Q1
2002-Q2
2002-Q3
2002-Q4
2003-Q1
2003-Q2
2003-Q3
2003-Q4
2004-Q1
2004-Q2
2004-Q3
2004-Q4
2005-Q1
2005-Q2
2005-Q3
2005-Q4
2006-Q1
2006-Q2
2006-Q3
2006-Q4
2007-Q1
2007-Q2
2007-Q3
2007-Q4
2008-Q1
2008-Q2
2008-Q3
2008-Q4
frostrated
08-21 11:20 AM
I am NOT here illegally. I was told BY someone at USCIS when I submitted the first application that as long as I was submitting requested applications and the required fees, I was not considered an illegal alien. If that was the case, why has no one at USCIS ever told me that? They know where I live, who I live with and everything else they need to know, I have no secrets from them, but not once have I received a letter, phone call or anything else to request for me to leave. I guess those of you that are professionals or those who already have a green card, are better than people like myself who are considered blue collar. I don't receive a dime for what I do, room and board is it so therefore I am not taking away anything from Americans who were born in this country.
In 2003 when I arrived here, PASSPORTS WERE NOT REQUIRED. I had a birth certificate and valid driver's license, that is all customs asked for at the Toronto airport and that is all I gave them. IF passports were required, I would have gotten one, but since they were not, what was I to do? I am not from an overseas country and I have visited the US most of my life as a child and as an adult without any trouble and was never asked for a passport. All that changed in 2005 - not my fault.
I came here looking for some assistance but seem to have gotten a bunch of sarcastic comments that are really not helpful and weren't necessary.
It's funny how you make assumptions and you all are here for similar reasons and needed help at some point. As for not criticizing USCIS for doing their job right - I doubt you would say the same thing if you were my shoes. I do not appreciate the criticism or sarcasm, I thought this was supposed to be a place to get some help, I guess I was wrong.
I won't be back.
It is true that when you entered the country, passports were not required of Canadian citizens. But you overlook one aspect. Canadian citizens who are visitors to the United States need to leave at the end of 6 months. Any visitor who stays beyond six months is accuring illegal stay. If you came in 2005, either in late 2005 or early 2006 you started to accure illegal stay. This is not a fault of the USCIS, but yours in not finding out about the rule. Also, A visitor who intends to live, work or study in the U.S. may be permanently barred from the U.S. Please refer to Canadian Citizens • U.S. Consular Services in Canada (http://www.consular.canada.usembassy.gov/canadians.asp) for more details on your stay.
As for blaming the USCIS for not notifying you earlier, there are a plethora of applications pending before yours, so it will take time for them to look at your application. The additional forms that USCIS has asked you, were forms that you need to have sent when you applied your I-485. These were all suplments you would have found had you looked up the filing instructions. no I-485 can be approved without those forms. It has been law since the early 1990s when the law was made.
And, since you entered the country to marry your fiance, when that did not happen, you should have left and re-applied through another means. If the people you are looking after cannot afford to pay for your adjustment, and pay you only food and board, they are in fact breaking the law by hiring an illegal alien. Room and food is considered pay as far as USCIS is concerned.
In 2003 when I arrived here, PASSPORTS WERE NOT REQUIRED. I had a birth certificate and valid driver's license, that is all customs asked for at the Toronto airport and that is all I gave them. IF passports were required, I would have gotten one, but since they were not, what was I to do? I am not from an overseas country and I have visited the US most of my life as a child and as an adult without any trouble and was never asked for a passport. All that changed in 2005 - not my fault.
I came here looking for some assistance but seem to have gotten a bunch of sarcastic comments that are really not helpful and weren't necessary.
It's funny how you make assumptions and you all are here for similar reasons and needed help at some point. As for not criticizing USCIS for doing their job right - I doubt you would say the same thing if you were my shoes. I do not appreciate the criticism or sarcasm, I thought this was supposed to be a place to get some help, I guess I was wrong.
I won't be back.
It is true that when you entered the country, passports were not required of Canadian citizens. But you overlook one aspect. Canadian citizens who are visitors to the United States need to leave at the end of 6 months. Any visitor who stays beyond six months is accuring illegal stay. If you came in 2005, either in late 2005 or early 2006 you started to accure illegal stay. This is not a fault of the USCIS, but yours in not finding out about the rule. Also, A visitor who intends to live, work or study in the U.S. may be permanently barred from the U.S. Please refer to Canadian Citizens • U.S. Consular Services in Canada (http://www.consular.canada.usembassy.gov/canadians.asp) for more details on your stay.
As for blaming the USCIS for not notifying you earlier, there are a plethora of applications pending before yours, so it will take time for them to look at your application. The additional forms that USCIS has asked you, were forms that you need to have sent when you applied your I-485. These were all suplments you would have found had you looked up the filing instructions. no I-485 can be approved without those forms. It has been law since the early 1990s when the law was made.
And, since you entered the country to marry your fiance, when that did not happen, you should have left and re-applied through another means. If the people you are looking after cannot afford to pay for your adjustment, and pay you only food and board, they are in fact breaking the law by hiring an illegal alien. Room and food is considered pay as far as USCIS is concerned.
more...
rockstart
08-10 03:43 PM
10th is almost over and I thought we had this trend that when USCIS wants to maintain status quo they publish bulletin early in the month and if the bulletin is delayed there is strong probablity that there will be some positive movement
2010 makeup life and love quotes for tattoos. quotes on life tattoos life and
indianindian2006
07-14 05:56 PM
Should I send a AC21 letter to USCIS along with my new employment letter?
Who is the best attorney for such cases?
Is it possible that my prevous employer hasn't revoked 140? How can I know that? I have received RFE after one year after filing the case. Is there any way I can know the date when my previous employer did revoke the 140 ( in case he did)?
Ajthakur,
Is their any ways you could contact your previous employer and try to find answers if your 140 is cancelled by that employer as that would give you a good idea of how to reply on this RFE.As suggested by others you have to reply to this RFE or your 485 is in jeopardy.
Who is the best attorney for such cases?
Is it possible that my prevous employer hasn't revoked 140? How can I know that? I have received RFE after one year after filing the case. Is there any way I can know the date when my previous employer did revoke the 140 ( in case he did)?
Ajthakur,
Is their any ways you could contact your previous employer and try to find answers if your 140 is cancelled by that employer as that would give you a good idea of how to reply on this RFE.As suggested by others you have to reply to this RFE or your 485 is in jeopardy.
more...
kunkie
07-23 08:24 AM
Hi,
You can surely do so, and that too at your own convenience, that is until you get the project with your second employer you need not bother with leaving the first job. H1 Visa does not come in effect until you move to other employer's payroll.
What I write.. I know for a fact, you may still want to check for any latest changes with attorney or some one in legal world.
Regards,
kunkie
You can surely do so, and that too at your own convenience, that is until you get the project with your second employer you need not bother with leaving the first job. H1 Visa does not come in effect until you move to other employer's payroll.
What I write.. I know for a fact, you may still want to check for any latest changes with attorney or some one in legal world.
Regards,
kunkie
hair life and love quotes for tattoos.
jsb
08-20 10:05 AM
To understand the Visa bulletin, one must first understand that it is not the USCIS that computes or post VB, it is the DOS. DOS also considers those undergoing consular processing. In this case, the dates are in favor of those doing CP as we all know that most of those who are qualified to apply for AOS have already applied.
Retrogression is a CP-friendly event.
Can one initiate CP if so chosen in I-140, but already applied for AOS?
Retrogression is a CP-friendly event.
Can one initiate CP if so chosen in I-140, but already applied for AOS?
more...
sodh
07-24 06:02 PM
What i have heard is that the recent I140 approvals (2006/07) contains A#.
Only the ones who were on OPT.
Only the ones who were on OPT.
hot wallpaper love and life quotes
nixstor
07-18 12:58 AM
Applications already properly filed will be accepted, means all applications from the 2nd July to 16th July will be accepted if properly filed (Means: If they have the proper documents and are otherwise eligible, meaning filing fees and certified labor)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletinUpdate17Jul07.pdf
Exactly, I posted the same on Greg's blog as a response. How ever, you should be calling USCIS if you do not receive a Receipt number in 30 days or if your checks are not cashed. There are not many AOS applications filed after first week of July. 3 to 4 weeks time frame is common turn around time. Dont freak out until then.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletinUpdate17Jul07.pdf
Exactly, I posted the same on Greg's blog as a response. How ever, you should be calling USCIS if you do not receive a Receipt number in 30 days or if your checks are not cashed. There are not many AOS applications filed after first week of July. 3 to 4 weeks time frame is common turn around time. Dont freak out until then.
more...
house life quotes and sayings for
cool_guy_onnet1
02-20 03:29 PM
Dude. I am *so* not Ron Gotcher. :)
He was rushing and didn't give me any specifics for EB-3 India.
Just don't exhaust this resource and keep it down low.
Lets wait and watch- Go IV
He was rushing and didn't give me any specifics for EB-3 India.
Just don't exhaust this resource and keep it down low.
Lets wait and watch- Go IV
tattoo dresses house love and life
vandanaverdia
09-10 01:18 PM
Your spouse, inspite of being a professional, cannot work, as he/she is a dependent. You end up being the only earning member & supporting your family, while your spouse just has to wait endlessly.....
What is stopping you from coming to DC??? Need more reasons???
What is stopping you from coming to DC??? Need more reasons???
more...
pictures tattoo quotes about life
pdakwala
04-22 04:11 PM
First we would like to thank you everyone who took some time off on Saturday evening and attended the event in San Jose. We also thanks Jay who came to San Jose to attend this event from Reno. The event took approximatly one and half to two hour. Majority of the People from our community left after 45 to 60 minutes. Very few people had stayed for the entire event.
There are some members who were upset and had made statements on this forum saying that the entire event was for illegal immigrants and they don't know why they went. Please note that the STRIVE ACT does not have only our provisions. The STRIVE ACT is 700+ page bill and there are several provision for other immigrant community. It will be unfair if we expect every senator and congressman to mention legal immigration whenever they are giving a speech. If the senator or congressman does not say anything about the legal immigration in their speech, that does not mean that they does not support us. Immigration Voice core group is requesting everyone to be polite and have patience.
After the event was over (as per the plan) myself and Jay got an opportunity to speak with Congressman Gutierrez. Congressman and his Deputy Chief of Staff have asked us to convey to everyone that they appretiate the effort that all our members took by making themselves available for this event. Congressman have told us that he fully support legal immigration and his bill will solve the issues that we are facing.
There are some members who were upset and had made statements on this forum saying that the entire event was for illegal immigrants and they don't know why they went. Please note that the STRIVE ACT does not have only our provisions. The STRIVE ACT is 700+ page bill and there are several provision for other immigrant community. It will be unfair if we expect every senator and congressman to mention legal immigration whenever they are giving a speech. If the senator or congressman does not say anything about the legal immigration in their speech, that does not mean that they does not support us. Immigration Voice core group is requesting everyone to be polite and have patience.
After the event was over (as per the plan) myself and Jay got an opportunity to speak with Congressman Gutierrez. Congressman and his Deputy Chief of Staff have asked us to convey to everyone that they appretiate the effort that all our members took by making themselves available for this event. Congressman have told us that he fully support legal immigration and his bill will solve the issues that we are facing.
dresses hot tattoo love life quotes to
gc_lover
07-24 01:46 PM
Can anyone confirm if the files are actually being transferred from Nebraska to Texas? Why is the compliance date for Texas 10/26 and for Nebraska it's 8/1.
Why would files be transferred from NSC to TSC. Didn't USCIS issue instructions to file everything at NSC. Life is getting more complicated each day.
Why would files be transferred from NSC to TSC. Didn't USCIS issue instructions to file everything at NSC. Life is getting more complicated each day.
more...
makeup love quotes for tattoos. life
jkays94
07-10 02:39 AM
It seems several persons are already discrediting the lawsuit and from the comments I have seen, it is apparent that some have not read the entire complaint.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
girlfriend latin love quotes for tattoos.
paskal
03-16 02:01 PM
dont "warn" me..........you think i give a damn about your "warning"??
the right to speak is MINE. all YOU can do from your high horse is ban me from the forum.
i really dont care, i still think interfilers and substituters should get what they derserve. every single bit of it. may they really, truly, go to hell, and stay there indefinitely.
and NO, dont preach to me about trying to "fix" the system. the agenda here is mostly EB3, and mostly Indian, at best. the multitudes of diploma holders get pissed when i call them out for what they are...........why are THEY so sensitive and ashamed???
i have a RIGHT to be in the proper EB queue, which i EARNED, and did not employ cheap desi-employer tricks and other games to get into........if that does not answer your doubts my friend, then as i said earlier, ban me..........i dont really care either way.
i dont advertise what i have done or can do for IV. somehow, that is a little demeaning. sort of like going to a temple and offering some money and then coming out and proclaiming to one and all how generous a give you are....
so i will try one last time.
your issues are whatever they are, i did not ask you to change your mind on them, neither did i choose to debate you on them. we all acknowledge that this is a bad system, and we all we can do is try fix it. of course like you we could simply vent, curse and blame everyone as well. not that will change a thing.
now the issue with your posts is your language and your tenor. kindly fix that.
yes i can ban you, i choose not to at this time. and yes take it as another warning. if you are contributing to iv action that is wonderful. language like this will however not be tolerated on this forum. please read the posting guidelines if you have doubts. i have posted the link and a snippet for your reference below. now chill out a bit and don't have a "coronary". we are all frustrated. what you are doing is not helping.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/announcement.php?f=90
"Posts that denigrate members, potential members or even anti-immigrant groups not welcome - such posts are against Immigration Voice principles. Immigration Voice reserves the right to take action against such posts and posters. You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this Forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, disrespectful, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law."
the right to speak is MINE. all YOU can do from your high horse is ban me from the forum.
i really dont care, i still think interfilers and substituters should get what they derserve. every single bit of it. may they really, truly, go to hell, and stay there indefinitely.
and NO, dont preach to me about trying to "fix" the system. the agenda here is mostly EB3, and mostly Indian, at best. the multitudes of diploma holders get pissed when i call them out for what they are...........why are THEY so sensitive and ashamed???
i have a RIGHT to be in the proper EB queue, which i EARNED, and did not employ cheap desi-employer tricks and other games to get into........if that does not answer your doubts my friend, then as i said earlier, ban me..........i dont really care either way.
i dont advertise what i have done or can do for IV. somehow, that is a little demeaning. sort of like going to a temple and offering some money and then coming out and proclaiming to one and all how generous a give you are....
so i will try one last time.
your issues are whatever they are, i did not ask you to change your mind on them, neither did i choose to debate you on them. we all acknowledge that this is a bad system, and we all we can do is try fix it. of course like you we could simply vent, curse and blame everyone as well. not that will change a thing.
now the issue with your posts is your language and your tenor. kindly fix that.
yes i can ban you, i choose not to at this time. and yes take it as another warning. if you are contributing to iv action that is wonderful. language like this will however not be tolerated on this forum. please read the posting guidelines if you have doubts. i have posted the link and a snippet for your reference below. now chill out a bit and don't have a "coronary". we are all frustrated. what you are doing is not helping.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/announcement.php?f=90
"Posts that denigrate members, potential members or even anti-immigrant groups not welcome - such posts are against Immigration Voice principles. Immigration Voice reserves the right to take action against such posts and posters. You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this Forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, disrespectful, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law."
hairstyles love and life quotes for
BharatPremi
03-17 01:05 PM
42% of all EB3 Green Card has priority date before December 2003!!! Man I am in deep Sh.. hmm trouble.. :eek:
No 42% load is before June 2003 and before, in other words before July 2003.
No 42% load is before June 2003 and before, in other words before July 2003.
tejonidhi
09-10 01:31 PM
I am wondering when will they discuss about Humans ?:mad:
perm2gc
01-11 03:25 PM
http://www.laborlawtalk.com/showthread.php?p=850460#post850460
http://www.indiacause.com/services/advt/advt_lst_one.asp?srno=10394
http://www.indiacause.com/services/advt/advt_lst_one.asp?srno=10394
No comments:
Post a Comment