sledge_hammer
02-12 04:07 PM
So you basically want a piece of the discussion no matter you are involved in it or not. The OP asked for advice/opinion, and I had the right to respond because it is �asked�. Whereas you chose not to give your opinion, but just decided you wanted a beef with me, which proves that you have too much time on your hands for things that is not asked of you.
After page 2, I went after only those who attacked me for being who I am, that is trying to be morally right. And today I went after gvenkat who wanted me to "grow brains", and also asked me if I think the OP should go back home, to which I provided my answer.
So unless you were totally jobless, you had no business commenting. You only want to be a part of this discussion because somewhere inside you there is a conscience that is very guilty for not being what a person really should be. And what better way to kill that feeling than to shoot down anyone else that wants to hold people responsible morally.
I understand where you're coming from. And the fact that you are still coming after me proves to me even more how your conscience is eating you from the inside.
You have reading comprehension issues as well...if you get over yourself then you can comprehend things (let me be clear, I am referring here to my own posts and none of the other ones). You made your point on page 2 about the moral/ethical/legal perils of what the OP has done/proposing to do. You were fine with me. Continuously pointing out at other people as to how morally bankrupt they are (including your latest post) or how bad there comm skills are (written or otherwise) will certainly expose you to shots from others (like me). When you continuously point out others' morals then the presumption here is that you are squeaky clean. I pointed out, you are not. That is all. It does not mean, OPs post is morally/ethically/legally on the right side or I hold that opinion (actually I do not).
After page 2, I went after only those who attacked me for being who I am, that is trying to be morally right. And today I went after gvenkat who wanted me to "grow brains", and also asked me if I think the OP should go back home, to which I provided my answer.
So unless you were totally jobless, you had no business commenting. You only want to be a part of this discussion because somewhere inside you there is a conscience that is very guilty for not being what a person really should be. And what better way to kill that feeling than to shoot down anyone else that wants to hold people responsible morally.
I understand where you're coming from. And the fact that you are still coming after me proves to me even more how your conscience is eating you from the inside.
You have reading comprehension issues as well...if you get over yourself then you can comprehend things (let me be clear, I am referring here to my own posts and none of the other ones). You made your point on page 2 about the moral/ethical/legal perils of what the OP has done/proposing to do. You were fine with me. Continuously pointing out at other people as to how morally bankrupt they are (including your latest post) or how bad there comm skills are (written or otherwise) will certainly expose you to shots from others (like me). When you continuously point out others' morals then the presumption here is that you are squeaky clean. I pointed out, you are not. That is all. It does not mean, OPs post is morally/ethically/legally on the right side or I hold that opinion (actually I do not).
wallpaper Naruto Shippuuden Jiraiya v
neelu
05-23 10:49 PM
Sent emails to each of the senators listed on the first page of this thread using the forms on senators' websites.
Guys, it barely takes any time to do these simple tasks.
Look forward to more participation in all IV campaigns.
Guys, it barely takes any time to do these simple tasks.
Look forward to more participation in all IV campaigns.
rahulp
09-10 06:20 PM
In my opinion, we need to have separate efforts for EB3 (now that EB3 I and EB3 ROW are in the same boat). If we have someone with leadership qualities and wants to use some social networking site for discussing EB3 issues and identifying approaches to solve the EB3 issues, there will be many EB3 folks willing to support the effort. Immivoice is just useless portal, it doesn't have open forums and the core folks here don't care for EB3. In fact, their lobbying efforts were behind USCIS changing the rule for spilling over the unused visa numbers to EB2 first. Just my 2 cents.
2011 2010 naruto démont renard vs sasuke naruto shippuden vs pain.
ArunAntonio
07-09 03:01 PM
I think we have list of email ids of the reporters of various newspapers somewhere in the threads, if we post that list here people can mail them about this effort. Any one have that list?
more...
shantak
02-03 05:23 PM
I have been waiting for the FP in the hope that they will be issuing it soon, its already Feb and I have not received it yet. Im the only one who has not recieved the notice yet in my friends circle, I have opened an SR last week. Mine is TSC application. Are there any TSC guys yet to receive the FP notices. Overall are there a significant number of people still waiting or is it just a few of us
Thanks
Thanks
h1techSlave
05-01 09:43 AM
One of my friends was a plaintiff in the lawsuit that you mention. As you mention, USCIS quickly approved all cases. So didn't the plaintiffs won the case?
I hope our potential lawsuit will have a similar effect. We file a lawsuit saying we are discriminated based on country of birth. USCIS opposes the lawsuit, but quickly approves all our 485s. We both win in that situation.
I would be happy if EB2 India gets upto Dec04. Forget EB3. Also any lawsuit is only sustainable only if its properly funded, well represented and there is wide public support if you expect the class action status. Mr Rajiv Khanna filed a lawsuit for 485 backlogs and its class action status was denied by the judge which I personally think was a biased judge and later USCIS quickly approved 485s of plaintiffs making lawsuit moot.
I hope our potential lawsuit will have a similar effect. We file a lawsuit saying we are discriminated based on country of birth. USCIS opposes the lawsuit, but quickly approves all our 485s. We both win in that situation.
I would be happy if EB2 India gets upto Dec04. Forget EB3. Also any lawsuit is only sustainable only if its properly funded, well represented and there is wide public support if you expect the class action status. Mr Rajiv Khanna filed a lawsuit for 485 backlogs and its class action status was denied by the judge which I personally think was a biased judge and later USCIS quickly approved 485s of plaintiffs making lawsuit moot.
more...
Siddharta
03-23 06:31 PM
...... because my AOS got filed last year, I made the decision to let go of my canadian GC.
How did you let go of it. Did you have to tell the canadian consulate and send in your passport for them to remove your visa. I will be hitting the 3 year mark end of this year.
How did you let go of it. Did you have to tell the canadian consulate and send in your passport for them to remove your visa. I will be hitting the 3 year mark end of this year.
2010 naruto shippuden vs pain.
ramus
07-03 12:56 PM
With your flowers, I think USCIS will be happy thinking that they did very good job in approving 60,000 visa in June.
more...
delax
07-27 10:43 AM
LEGAL AND STUCK IN - 7 YRS. ILLEGAL AND SNUCK IN - 7 MINS. CHOOSE!
It is a fact that EB3 India is a FORGOTTEN category. There appears to be a sense of intra-category elitism within the larger community that comes together at IV. EB3 I's make feeble attempts to be heard and some take a shot at innovative marketing campaigns to call attention to the plight of being stuck for over 6 ot 7 years in some cases. EB2 I's immediately respond with a self protectionist attitude and preach a higher calling that focuses on comprehensive solutions instead of piecemeal solutions. EB1 I's obviously choose to remain outside the fray, since these are matter of concern to vox populi, not them.
Some EB2's and EB3's then analyse the hell out of USCIS logic, to the extent that they could become full time spin meisters for ANY public organization. With very little fact, a healthy dose of opinion and a mish mash of 'logic', they piece together their 'strong' arguments -one way or the other.
Lost in this useless din of irrelevant analysis paralysis is the real misery of thousands of EB3 I's (such as myself) that have been stuck for years for no fault of ours. By the way, I happen to be a highly educated (for those that care) Executive that went to Top Private Universities in the US that happens to be stuck in EB3 ONLY because the company HR rep and lawyer at the time, chose to go down this path. POint being, there is no reason for EB2 I's to pontificate from a sense of elitist protectionism because there are EB3 I's like me that can outsmart a bunch of you in no time. Seriously. (This is for those that preach that if you are 'smart' you should be in EB2. Go read those threads).
So bottomline, let us stop behaving like CIS vs Anti CIS camps and instead UNITE towards the common cause. Let EB3I's air their frustrations. If you can come to help, do so. If not, stay out of it completely. No more half ass 'logic', please.
Thanks!
Its unfortunate that you ask us to UNITE and use 'EB2 elitist protectionism' in the same breath. I am not even going down the road of EB3 'smarter' than EB2 because a reverse argument is equally valid if not more. The law as stated above is what it is - there is a clear categorizaton established by law. If there is a level of frustration with it then a campaign to change it makes sense. However any proposed changes that arbitrarily assigns visa numbers just because 'my HR filed it the way it got filed' then you need to check with your HR and port over to EB2 - if you think your private US degree qualifies you for it. The position determines EB2 or EB3 and I'll leave it at that.
I have no problems in people expressing their opinion in an open forum and lobbying for change. The devil is in the detail. If the change means taking the EB2 excess visas to give to EB3 purely based on length of wait then I have every right to present another point of view - elitist protectionism or not.
I have only seen implications to this effect but nobody has come forward and said it plainly - yes we are EB3 and we want the EB2 excess visas because we have waited seven years. Everybody seems to imply it but nobody wants to call it as plainly as I stated it above. I am only presenting a counter to that.
It is a fact that EB3 India is a FORGOTTEN category. There appears to be a sense of intra-category elitism within the larger community that comes together at IV. EB3 I's make feeble attempts to be heard and some take a shot at innovative marketing campaigns to call attention to the plight of being stuck for over 6 ot 7 years in some cases. EB2 I's immediately respond with a self protectionist attitude and preach a higher calling that focuses on comprehensive solutions instead of piecemeal solutions. EB1 I's obviously choose to remain outside the fray, since these are matter of concern to vox populi, not them.
Some EB2's and EB3's then analyse the hell out of USCIS logic, to the extent that they could become full time spin meisters for ANY public organization. With very little fact, a healthy dose of opinion and a mish mash of 'logic', they piece together their 'strong' arguments -one way or the other.
Lost in this useless din of irrelevant analysis paralysis is the real misery of thousands of EB3 I's (such as myself) that have been stuck for years for no fault of ours. By the way, I happen to be a highly educated (for those that care) Executive that went to Top Private Universities in the US that happens to be stuck in EB3 ONLY because the company HR rep and lawyer at the time, chose to go down this path. POint being, there is no reason for EB2 I's to pontificate from a sense of elitist protectionism because there are EB3 I's like me that can outsmart a bunch of you in no time. Seriously. (This is for those that preach that if you are 'smart' you should be in EB2. Go read those threads).
So bottomline, let us stop behaving like CIS vs Anti CIS camps and instead UNITE towards the common cause. Let EB3I's air their frustrations. If you can come to help, do so. If not, stay out of it completely. No more half ass 'logic', please.
Thanks!
Its unfortunate that you ask us to UNITE and use 'EB2 elitist protectionism' in the same breath. I am not even going down the road of EB3 'smarter' than EB2 because a reverse argument is equally valid if not more. The law as stated above is what it is - there is a clear categorizaton established by law. If there is a level of frustration with it then a campaign to change it makes sense. However any proposed changes that arbitrarily assigns visa numbers just because 'my HR filed it the way it got filed' then you need to check with your HR and port over to EB2 - if you think your private US degree qualifies you for it. The position determines EB2 or EB3 and I'll leave it at that.
I have no problems in people expressing their opinion in an open forum and lobbying for change. The devil is in the detail. If the change means taking the EB2 excess visas to give to EB3 purely based on length of wait then I have every right to present another point of view - elitist protectionism or not.
I have only seen implications to this effect but nobody has come forward and said it plainly - yes we are EB3 and we want the EB2 excess visas because we have waited seven years. Everybody seems to imply it but nobody wants to call it as plainly as I stated it above. I am only presenting a counter to that.
hair makeup Jiraya Vs Six Paths of
mchundi
05-03 04:02 PM
:) sure you are otherwise you wouldn't be living here.
I am not againist H4 guys but i can't help but laugh when H4 guys complain that they were being treated bad by not allowing them to work.
One has to understand that US allows ppl on a certain basis and H4 is nothing but to join your spouse (or something like that for kids).
One can request them to make a provision for H4 ppl to work but blaming that they haven't done that simply by fogetting on what basis they entered US.... hmmm i don't know.
Questioning their speed of process and other irregular rules... yes i am with you but blaming them for above ... i don't think that is fair.
I wonder how many who come here on H4 know what complexities lay ahead in the G.C processing. unfortunately it is not easy to undo their marriage and go back.
They need a fair deal too just like the way those in EB-3 are waiting for a proposal that addresses their issues more directly rather than trickle down. I guess u r one of them.
I dont know how much u know about G.C before u came here. I am yet to understand it clearly.
--MC
I am not againist H4 guys but i can't help but laugh when H4 guys complain that they were being treated bad by not allowing them to work.
One has to understand that US allows ppl on a certain basis and H4 is nothing but to join your spouse (or something like that for kids).
One can request them to make a provision for H4 ppl to work but blaming that they haven't done that simply by fogetting on what basis they entered US.... hmmm i don't know.
Questioning their speed of process and other irregular rules... yes i am with you but blaming them for above ... i don't think that is fair.
I wonder how many who come here on H4 know what complexities lay ahead in the G.C processing. unfortunately it is not easy to undo their marriage and go back.
They need a fair deal too just like the way those in EB-3 are waiting for a proposal that addresses their issues more directly rather than trickle down. I guess u r one of them.
I dont know how much u know about G.C before u came here. I am yet to understand it clearly.
--MC
more...
felix31
11-21 01:46 PM
Dear Mehul,
please, dont give up hope!! Faith and hope can do miracles. Seek proper care and definately a second docotor's opinion, preferably from your home country.
We will pray for you and your family!
please, dont give up hope!! Faith and hope can do miracles. Seek proper care and definately a second docotor's opinion, preferably from your home country.
We will pray for you and your family!
hot Jiraiya VS Pain Wallpapers »
ArkBird
03-25 05:35 PM
There is no base for it. It's all gut feeling as USCIS defies all the logic hence the title "Predictions"
more...
house 2011 Naruto Shippuden Pain Vs
Libra
09-04 10:12 AM
congrats heathere3, and welcome to IV. there is a rally on sep 18th in DC if you dont know about it. please participate in rally and contribute in whatever way you can. thanks.
I received my receipts from the lawyer this morning. July 2nd applicaiton to NSC, transfered to TSC, labour approved TSC in Aug 2006.
Heather
EB-3 ROW
PD: Aug 2006
RD: July 2, 2007
ND: Aug. 24, 2007
EAD: ??
AP ??
I received my receipts from the lawyer this morning. July 2nd applicaiton to NSC, transfered to TSC, labour approved TSC in Aug 2006.
Heather
EB-3 ROW
PD: Aug 2006
RD: July 2, 2007
ND: Aug. 24, 2007
EAD: ??
AP ??
tattoo Sensei ~ (Naruto VS Pain /
Lasantha
02-06 10:30 AM
Actually You have to PHYSICALLY present in Canda for 2 years in a 5 year period since the date landed.
You have to PHYSICALLY present in Canda for 3 years in a 5 year period since the date your became PR.
You have to PHYSICALLY present in Canda for 3 years in a 5 year period since the date your became PR.
more...
pictures Naruto Shippuuden 129 130 eng
June05
08-13 09:43 AM
I and my wife received our cards yesterday.
dresses naruto shippuden vs pain.
nozerd
05-04 07:32 AM
Khodalmd
Read carefully
Its says either
Masters degree or higher from US Univ
or
Masters in STEM with 3 yrs experience.
So Im interpreting it as - if you have Masters degree from US university it doesnt matter what field it is in.
However if you have Masters from a foreign Univ it has to be STEM and you must have 3 yrs exp.
They havent specified STEM for US Univ educated applicants
Read carefully
Its says either
Masters degree or higher from US Univ
or
Masters in STEM with 3 yrs experience.
So Im interpreting it as - if you have Masters degree from US university it doesnt matter what field it is in.
However if you have Masters from a foreign Univ it has to be STEM and you must have 3 yrs exp.
They havent specified STEM for US Univ educated applicants
more...
makeup naruto shippuden pein.
dish
12-10 12:21 PM
Kennedy, McCain, 2 congressmen meet
By Jerry Kammer
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE
December 9, 2006
WASHINGTON � Two of the most liberal members of Congress met with two of their most conservative colleagues this week to revive immigration legislation that passed the Senate but was throttled by House Republican leaders who resisted its attempt to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants.
Sen. Edward Kennedy
�The plan is to bring the bill up in late winter,� said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a conservative stalwart who attended the meeting in the office of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. The other participants were Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill.
The strategy session Wednesday came amid speculation about how the dynamics of the immigration debate might change, if at all, when Democrats take control of the House and Senate next month.
Flake said that Kennedy, who will be chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee's immigration subcommittee, wants to let the new Congress deal first with issues such as the war in Iraq and proposals to raise the minimum wage.
�Then he'll be ready to go� with a new version of the bill that the Senate approved in April.
Sen. John McCain
Republicans ran the show in both houses of Congress then, and passionate divisions in their ranks over immigration policy became a dominant feature of the debate. Democrats, particularly in the House, were mostly content to sit back and enjoy the stalemate, even as they campaigned against the �do-nothing Republican Congress.�
Now Democrats face the hazards of immigration politics.
Immigration-law changes are conspicuously absent from the legislative agenda laid out by incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Observers here say it will be difficult for Pelosi, D-San Francisco, to honor her campaign-season pledge to work for a new comprehensive immigration law without splitting a caucus that includes freshly elected Democrats who vowed to secure the border and crack down on illegal immigration.
The November midterm elections seemed to send mixed messages.
Rep. Luis Gutierrez
In a cliffhanger contest, Arizona Rep. J.D. Hayworth, a conservative Republican and strident foe of illegal immigration, was defeated by Democrat Harry Mitchell.
Immigration advocates such as Ben Johnson of the Immigration Policy Center say Hayworth's defeat showed that immigration �did not turn out to be the firebrand issue that some people thought it could be.�
But immigration restrictionists point out that Mitchell made getting tough on immigration the centerpiece of his campaign. They also say Mitchell cleverly used the issue against Hayworth, saying his Republican opponent was part of a political regime that wasn't competent enough to stop the hundreds of thousands of immigrants that sweep across Arizona's southern border each year.
While Mitchell said he favored legal status for long-established immigrants, he insisted that immigration policy can be fixed only by �members of Congress who are willing to enforce the law, produce real immigration reform and stop playing politics with the issue.�
Rep. Jeff Flake
That enforcement-heavy approach is fine with immigration advocates as long as it is part of a package that provides permanent legal status to those who are beckoned across the border by agriculture, restaurant, construction, landscaping and janitorial jobs. The number of illegal immigrants in the United States is estimated to be at least 11 million.
Immigrant-rights advocates, along with their allies at the National Chamber of Commerce and other business organizations, also support a proposal to provide hundreds of thousands of low-wage workers every year for employers who demonstrate that they are unable to find Americans to fill the slots.
While McCain and Kennedy describe this as a �temporary-worker program,� the legislation they sponsored would put the workers on a path to citizenship.
At a time of anxiety about the loss of good-paying manufacturing jobs, the McCain-Kennedy bill's efforts to import low-wage labor has drawn the anger of critics across the political spectrum. That is why Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates immigration restrictions, predicts Pelosi will be reluctant to get behind a proposal that could endanger the new Democratic majority.
�Nancy Pelosi knows the Democrats are on probation for the next two years,� Krikorian said.
He predicted that Pelosi would back less ambitious immigration change, such as a plan to provide legal status to undocumented students, rather than take on the explosive issue of mass legalization, which critics condemn as an amnesty that would spawn more illegal immigration.
But Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, which advocates for immigrant rights, argues that next year will be pivotal because of the presidential race that follows.
Advertisement
�I think that once we hit primary (election) season, controversial issues get a lot harder to do,� Sharry said. �Everybody I talk to says 2007 is the window of opportunity.�
Pelosi was noncommittal this week on whether the House would take up immigration legislation. She sought to deflect some of the responsibility to the White House, suggesting that she expects President Bush to offer more specifics than his call to �match willing worker with willing employer.�
�That's up to the president,� Pelosi said. �We want to work closely with him because it has to be comprehensive and bipartisan.�
President Bush's political advisers, meanwhile, have acknowledged that revamping immigration law may be necessary to shore up sagging support for Republicans among Hispanics, the nation's fastest-growing ethnic group. Republicans received just 30 percent of the Hispanic vote this year, down from 44 percent in 2004.
By Jerry Kammer
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE
December 9, 2006
WASHINGTON � Two of the most liberal members of Congress met with two of their most conservative colleagues this week to revive immigration legislation that passed the Senate but was throttled by House Republican leaders who resisted its attempt to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants.
Sen. Edward Kennedy
�The plan is to bring the bill up in late winter,� said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a conservative stalwart who attended the meeting in the office of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. The other participants were Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill.
The strategy session Wednesday came amid speculation about how the dynamics of the immigration debate might change, if at all, when Democrats take control of the House and Senate next month.
Flake said that Kennedy, who will be chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee's immigration subcommittee, wants to let the new Congress deal first with issues such as the war in Iraq and proposals to raise the minimum wage.
�Then he'll be ready to go� with a new version of the bill that the Senate approved in April.
Sen. John McCain
Republicans ran the show in both houses of Congress then, and passionate divisions in their ranks over immigration policy became a dominant feature of the debate. Democrats, particularly in the House, were mostly content to sit back and enjoy the stalemate, even as they campaigned against the �do-nothing Republican Congress.�
Now Democrats face the hazards of immigration politics.
Immigration-law changes are conspicuously absent from the legislative agenda laid out by incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Observers here say it will be difficult for Pelosi, D-San Francisco, to honor her campaign-season pledge to work for a new comprehensive immigration law without splitting a caucus that includes freshly elected Democrats who vowed to secure the border and crack down on illegal immigration.
The November midterm elections seemed to send mixed messages.
Rep. Luis Gutierrez
In a cliffhanger contest, Arizona Rep. J.D. Hayworth, a conservative Republican and strident foe of illegal immigration, was defeated by Democrat Harry Mitchell.
Immigration advocates such as Ben Johnson of the Immigration Policy Center say Hayworth's defeat showed that immigration �did not turn out to be the firebrand issue that some people thought it could be.�
But immigration restrictionists point out that Mitchell made getting tough on immigration the centerpiece of his campaign. They also say Mitchell cleverly used the issue against Hayworth, saying his Republican opponent was part of a political regime that wasn't competent enough to stop the hundreds of thousands of immigrants that sweep across Arizona's southern border each year.
While Mitchell said he favored legal status for long-established immigrants, he insisted that immigration policy can be fixed only by �members of Congress who are willing to enforce the law, produce real immigration reform and stop playing politics with the issue.�
Rep. Jeff Flake
That enforcement-heavy approach is fine with immigration advocates as long as it is part of a package that provides permanent legal status to those who are beckoned across the border by agriculture, restaurant, construction, landscaping and janitorial jobs. The number of illegal immigrants in the United States is estimated to be at least 11 million.
Immigrant-rights advocates, along with their allies at the National Chamber of Commerce and other business organizations, also support a proposal to provide hundreds of thousands of low-wage workers every year for employers who demonstrate that they are unable to find Americans to fill the slots.
While McCain and Kennedy describe this as a �temporary-worker program,� the legislation they sponsored would put the workers on a path to citizenship.
At a time of anxiety about the loss of good-paying manufacturing jobs, the McCain-Kennedy bill's efforts to import low-wage labor has drawn the anger of critics across the political spectrum. That is why Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates immigration restrictions, predicts Pelosi will be reluctant to get behind a proposal that could endanger the new Democratic majority.
�Nancy Pelosi knows the Democrats are on probation for the next two years,� Krikorian said.
He predicted that Pelosi would back less ambitious immigration change, such as a plan to provide legal status to undocumented students, rather than take on the explosive issue of mass legalization, which critics condemn as an amnesty that would spawn more illegal immigration.
But Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, which advocates for immigrant rights, argues that next year will be pivotal because of the presidential race that follows.
Advertisement
�I think that once we hit primary (election) season, controversial issues get a lot harder to do,� Sharry said. �Everybody I talk to says 2007 is the window of opportunity.�
Pelosi was noncommittal this week on whether the House would take up immigration legislation. She sought to deflect some of the responsibility to the White House, suggesting that she expects President Bush to offer more specifics than his call to �match willing worker with willing employer.�
�That's up to the president,� Pelosi said. �We want to work closely with him because it has to be comprehensive and bipartisan.�
President Bush's political advisers, meanwhile, have acknowledged that revamping immigration law may be necessary to shore up sagging support for Republicans among Hispanics, the nation's fastest-growing ethnic group. Republicans received just 30 percent of the Hispanic vote this year, down from 44 percent in 2004.
girlfriend Naruto Shippuden AMV - J
smuggymba
07-20 11:25 AM
Don't make stupid statements like this. It goes to show your intelligence and that you are an instigator. With statements like that you will alienate EB3 more. BTW, I contributed to DC advocacy and many other EB3s also did the same. That money apparently seemed to have have helped EB2 and not EB3.
Regarding you comment on action, many IV leaders are EB3.
It's more of a motivation to get up and do something. How much was collected? I know many ppl contributed but the contribution was very less...so u shut up ur hole or whatever language u prefer to use at ur home. My point was to do rather than posting. If u didn't get that, sorry.
Regarding you comment on action, many IV leaders are EB3.
It's more of a motivation to get up and do something. How much was collected? I know many ppl contributed but the contribution was very less...so u shut up ur hole or whatever language u prefer to use at ur home. My point was to do rather than posting. If u didn't get that, sorry.
hairstyles Naruto+shippuden+akatsuki+
rpulipati
10-09 10:16 AM
I understand that you want to use experience before PD. However, there is no much gain and makes it more complex.
For example, the person who does not start PD for 5 years on work can get only 6 months earlier preference.
My thoughts.
For old PD, pending I-140 should not be bottleneck.
PD should be first criteria but US experience should not be ignored completely. US experience should be giving less point then PD.
10 points for each month for PD and 1 point for each month for being in US. GC priority should be created after calculating total points for PD and for being in US.
For example, the person who does not start PD for 5 years on work can get only 6 months earlier preference.
My thoughts.
For old PD, pending I-140 should not be bottleneck.
PD should be first criteria but US experience should not be ignored completely. US experience should be giving less point then PD.
10 points for each month for PD and 1 point for each month for being in US. GC priority should be created after calculating total points for PD and for being in US.
satishku_2000
05-23 12:47 PM
emailed to almost 20 senators ...
reddymjm
06-08 06:47 PM
So your LIN number should be like...
LIN-07-175-5-xxxx
can you confirm?
You are right. I was expecting it to happen on 6th or 7th. They did it on 5th.
LIN-07-175-5-xxxx
can you confirm?
You are right. I was expecting it to happen on 6th or 7th. They did it on 5th.
No comments:
Post a Comment