ksrk
12-10 04:36 PM
Just EB1 through EB3 adds to 149579.
Wonder how this tallies with numbers discussed especially during Aug and Sept. 2008...
Wonder how this tallies with numbers discussed especially during Aug and Sept. 2008...
wallpaper Royalty-free clipart picture
indyanguy
02-23 06:37 PM
I already finished 14month 8days and still pending in NSC
14 months 8 days!!! I am already getting frustrated after waiting for 7 months (NSC) :mad::mad::mad:
14 months 8 days!!! I am already getting frustrated after waiting for 7 months (NSC) :mad::mad::mad:
brb2
04-02 11:43 PM
Some of the figures looked a bit too unbelievable so I checked out. A particular one that was hard to believe - in the US Science and Engineering undergraduates is 32% (page 1 of IV report). On checking with the referenced document (Executive summary) at:
http://darwin.nap.edu/execsumm_pdf/11463.pdf
Page 12 quotes a figure of 15% for US undergraduates in Science/Engineering.
IV core members can you please clarify? If it is incorrect then we need to correct the document before some one points out the flaw.
http://darwin.nap.edu/execsumm_pdf/11463.pdf
Page 12 quotes a figure of 15% for US undergraduates in Science/Engineering.
IV core members can you please clarify? If it is incorrect then we need to correct the document before some one points out the flaw.
2011 Volleyball Net
immi_seeker
07-12 11:57 PM
Hi,
Just wanted to know about your EAD: Which Center you have applied ? NSC/TSC. What date they have received. My EAD Renewal is pending, and I wish to change job. :confused:
Appreciate your reply. Anyways, You should not be worrying too much on EAD, as your PD is current now, and youshoudlget the Card in coming months. :)
Thanks.
Center is NSC. They recieved the Application on june 19th
Just wanted to know about your EAD: Which Center you have applied ? NSC/TSC. What date they have received. My EAD Renewal is pending, and I wish to change job. :confused:
Appreciate your reply. Anyways, You should not be worrying too much on EAD, as your PD is current now, and youshoudlget the Card in coming months. :)
Thanks.
Center is NSC. They recieved the Application on june 19th
more...
gcnirvana
04-27 08:25 PM
Yep, true. But, sounds like there's just too many Bills floating around, this year!
This one is from Mathew Oh:
04/27/2007: Disappointing News of Sponsor's No Immediate Push for Hagel High-Tech Temporary Relief Bill
The Senator from Nebraska introduced earlier High-Tech Worker Relief bill. The employment-based immigrant community and the businesses and academic institutions had some level of hope and expectation that this bill might be acted upon as separate from the CIR. However, there is a report that Senator Hagel stated that the Senator introduced the bill intended to be handled as part of the CIR legislation process. It thus appears that all the bills which have been introduced recently were also intended by the bill sponsors to be debated and reflected in the CIR legislation process in May in the form of amendments. There we go. The Senator yesterday introduced S.1225 for the illegal immigration reform part of his own comprehensive immigration reform scheme under the name of Immigrant Accountability Act of 2007. Probably more immigration reforms bills may be introduced by other legislators before and during the Comprehensive Immigration Reform debate in the Senate next month. As we summarized on 04/22/2007, there have been developing compromises along the lines of key issues which we highlighted in the posting and media start predicting that because of these compromises, the CIR may have a better chance to pass this year than last year.
Well, we are only inches away from the door steps of May 2007. After all, we should just focus on the upcoming CIR process rather than these piecemeal legislative bills.
This one is from Mathew Oh:
04/27/2007: Disappointing News of Sponsor's No Immediate Push for Hagel High-Tech Temporary Relief Bill
The Senator from Nebraska introduced earlier High-Tech Worker Relief bill. The employment-based immigrant community and the businesses and academic institutions had some level of hope and expectation that this bill might be acted upon as separate from the CIR. However, there is a report that Senator Hagel stated that the Senator introduced the bill intended to be handled as part of the CIR legislation process. It thus appears that all the bills which have been introduced recently were also intended by the bill sponsors to be debated and reflected in the CIR legislation process in May in the form of amendments. There we go. The Senator yesterday introduced S.1225 for the illegal immigration reform part of his own comprehensive immigration reform scheme under the name of Immigrant Accountability Act of 2007. Probably more immigration reforms bills may be introduced by other legislators before and during the Comprehensive Immigration Reform debate in the Senate next month. As we summarized on 04/22/2007, there have been developing compromises along the lines of key issues which we highlighted in the posting and media start predicting that because of these compromises, the CIR may have a better chance to pass this year than last year.
Well, we are only inches away from the door steps of May 2007. After all, we should just focus on the upcoming CIR process rather than these piecemeal legislative bills.
FUNTIMES
08-25 02:17 PM
I am still waiting.
more...
BharatPremi
07-11 11:18 PM
Thanks to the person who posted the link to the Ombundsman report earlier - this is beginning to make sense now.
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
"For example, when employment-based visas are not used during the year they are authorized, they are lost and are not available for future use without special legislation. In FY 06, over 10,000 employment-based visas were lost, even though USCIS had an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 pending applications for employment-based green cards.36 - Based on USCIS use of visa numbers as of May 2007, at present consumption rates approximately 40,000 visas will be lost in FY 07 without a dramatic increase in USCIS requests of visa numbers.37
- As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Dept of State: Sees visa numbers not being used, chances of visas going unutilized/unused/wasted/lost again this year. Makes July visa bulletin CURRENT for all countries & categories.
USCIS: Scrambles to approve as many visas as possible to 1) Prove they're working hard, in light of the Ombundsman Report from June 2) Save themselves from the avalanche of I-485s, EADs and AP filings in June, knowing 3) Filing fees go up like crazy on 30th July.
End Result: More visa numbers requested (but they didn't complete issuing all of them, even over the weekend).
As things stand, if they approved stuff on 1st July, it means visa numbers were in fact available on 1st July.
If they approved without completing FBI check - that's going to raise a stink and isn't entirely legal anyways.
If they *still had visa numbers available on July 2* - request from DoS but not approved, they're in bigger trouble, imho.
Anybody thinks the above makes sense?
jazz
When you were Jazzing, everybody already spent time to know this...a month ago.. Anyway welcome to the party... "Der se aye Durast Aye... welcome :) :)
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
"For example, when employment-based visas are not used during the year they are authorized, they are lost and are not available for future use without special legislation. In FY 06, over 10,000 employment-based visas were lost, even though USCIS had an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 pending applications for employment-based green cards.36 - Based on USCIS use of visa numbers as of May 2007, at present consumption rates approximately 40,000 visas will be lost in FY 07 without a dramatic increase in USCIS requests of visa numbers.37
- As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Dept of State: Sees visa numbers not being used, chances of visas going unutilized/unused/wasted/lost again this year. Makes July visa bulletin CURRENT for all countries & categories.
USCIS: Scrambles to approve as many visas as possible to 1) Prove they're working hard, in light of the Ombundsman Report from June 2) Save themselves from the avalanche of I-485s, EADs and AP filings in June, knowing 3) Filing fees go up like crazy on 30th July.
End Result: More visa numbers requested (but they didn't complete issuing all of them, even over the weekend).
As things stand, if they approved stuff on 1st July, it means visa numbers were in fact available on 1st July.
If they approved without completing FBI check - that's going to raise a stink and isn't entirely legal anyways.
If they *still had visa numbers available on July 2* - request from DoS but not approved, they're in bigger trouble, imho.
Anybody thinks the above makes sense?
jazz
When you were Jazzing, everybody already spent time to know this...a month ago.. Anyway welcome to the party... "Der se aye Durast Aye... welcome :) :)
2010 Free hockey clipart of player
_pictogram.svg.hi.png "Olympic Sports Volleyball")
pappu
11-06 10:13 AM
I see that for EB2 the PD is 01 APR 2004 now. I want to know if I-485 approvals is linked to this PD date or they will work independent to these days.
Thanks,
Sury
-------------------------------
PD : Feb'07
I-140 - Pending
I-131 - Approved
I-485 - Pending
Center: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER
Recieved EAD Card and FP done.
-------------------------------
with a PD of Feb'07, be prepared for a several years of wait time. Unless any law passes.
However there is a silver lining:
You should thank IV members whose hard work enabled the I485 filing for everyone. Even people with PD of 2007, could file their AOS. You can enjoy your EAD and its benefits.
Thanks,
Sury
-------------------------------
PD : Feb'07
I-140 - Pending
I-131 - Approved
I-485 - Pending
Center: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER
Recieved EAD Card and FP done.
-------------------------------
with a PD of Feb'07, be prepared for a several years of wait time. Unless any law passes.
However there is a silver lining:
You should thank IV members whose hard work enabled the I485 filing for everyone. Even people with PD of 2007, could file their AOS. You can enjoy your EAD and its benefits.
more...
pappu
04-19 11:06 AM
Janakp, you are now probably on their crosshairs. Their members on our site will hate you for spying!!:D
hair of volleyball clipart for
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
more...
paskal
12-19 04:55 PM
midwest folks- where are you
please post your availability
the more the merrier....
please post your availability
the more the merrier....
hot on a volleyball net
frostrated
10-26 01:41 PM
Is there is any way can we see the data.
is this what you are asking for?
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/3rd%20Level%20(Left%20Nav%20Children)/Green%20Card%20-%203rd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I485%20Reports.pdf
is this what you are asking for?
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/3rd%20Level%20(Left%20Nav%20Children)/Green%20Card%20-%203rd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I485%20Reports.pdf
more...
house Search Results: Volleyball Net
TeddyKoochu
02-04 08:10 PM
Hi EveryOne,
I got my Green card in mail yesterday. I want to thank IV and everyone for all the support during this GC journey. I wish everyone all the best for their green card process. I wish everyone gets to file 485 irrespective of priority dates and ultimately get their green cards. This is a question to Admin, i have a recursive donation going on, I would like to make a one time donation and stop the recursive donation.
Thanks.
IVAR congratulations once again to you and your family, enjoy the green and free life to the fullest now.
I got my Green card in mail yesterday. I want to thank IV and everyone for all the support during this GC journey. I wish everyone all the best for their green card process. I wish everyone gets to file 485 irrespective of priority dates and ultimately get their green cards. This is a question to Admin, i have a recursive donation going on, I would like to make a one time donation and stop the recursive donation.
Thanks.
IVAR congratulations once again to you and your family, enjoy the green and free life to the fullest now.
tattoo quot;volleyball net clipartquot;
aknynd
05-21 01:12 PM
how to start a new thread?
more...
pictures wallpaper Volleyball Clipart
anindya1234
06-01 02:39 PM
I dont know about others but for me stuck with the same compay for 5 years. I really want to move on !!
Everybody has the same problem buddy
Everybody has the same problem buddy
dresses at the Volleyball Clipart
neodyn55
07-30 11:45 PM
If you don't know the answer, please don't reply. Just because this person asked about getting GC through his/ her baby, it does not mean the person is here illegally or if even this person is in the US. I friend of mine died in an accident in Mumbai and he is survived by his wife and two kids (the kids were born here in the US). His wife asked me the same question and after asking my lawyer, I had to tell her that there is no way she can apply for GC through her children unless her children turn 21.
Oh don't be such a sourpuss. This is an internet forum, and the last I checked, there was no forum rule stating replies had to be relevant, to the point, and incredibly boring. What are you, a Hitler wannabe? No one's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read the replies anyway. If it's that important, then the OP should ask a lawyer instead of posting in a free internet forum.
Lighten up.
Oh don't be such a sourpuss. This is an internet forum, and the last I checked, there was no forum rule stating replies had to be relevant, to the point, and incredibly boring. What are you, a Hitler wannabe? No one's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read the replies anyway. If it's that important, then the OP should ask a lawyer instead of posting in a free internet forum.
Lighten up.
more...
makeup The clip art of the body was
leoindiano
07-09 01:34 PM
looks like TSC is the one worked so hard to drain 485 apps and taking rest now....:)
girlfriend Volleyball and net
immidude
07-13 10:36 AM
ppl respond i think it is very important
hairstyles 25 Jan Volleyball Net Clipart
saravanaraj.sathya
08-22 03:34 PM
Yes. I will share the bus ride from Buffalo, NY.
saravanaraj -
Would you consider riding a bus?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12567
Please vote!
saravanaraj -
Would you consider riding a bus?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12567
Please vote!
h1techSlave
09-27 10:25 AM
This is very much correct. And it is also the reason to position fixing immigration system as a remedy for both legal and illegal immigration. If you propose a help for legal immigrants, lawmakers are not going to listen to you as much as if you proposed something that fixes both legal immigration and encourages less illegal immigration in the future. It is that simple.
"Aligning with illegals will be benefitial to us." That was the philosophy that we have been following all along. The result - you talk to an average American and he thinks we are illegals. You talk to lawmakers (IV's lawmaker meeting attendees can confirm this) and the lawmakers think we are illegals. That is why we may have start thinking of another strategy.
Now, amnesty bills are not the only bills that congress wants to pass. There are many other bills, that the general US population is interested in. Universal health care or defence related bills. Why not we latch on to one of those things?
I perfectly understand that we need support from some one else to pass our provisions. What I am saying is - illegal bus is NOT the only bus out there. Let's look around, there might be other buses to carry us to our destination.
"Aligning with illegals will be benefitial to us." That was the philosophy that we have been following all along. The result - you talk to an average American and he thinks we are illegals. You talk to lawmakers (IV's lawmaker meeting attendees can confirm this) and the lawmakers think we are illegals. That is why we may have start thinking of another strategy.
Now, amnesty bills are not the only bills that congress wants to pass. There are many other bills, that the general US population is interested in. Universal health care or defence related bills. Why not we latch on to one of those things?
I perfectly understand that we need support from some one else to pass our provisions. What I am saying is - illegal bus is NOT the only bus out there. Let's look around, there might be other buses to carry us to our destination.
mammoy2k
11-12 05:56 PM
I wouldappreciate if any of you could shed light on the following scenario:
If485 i spending for over six months and someone switched the job using AC21 for a position which would require extended stay [upto 2-3 years] outside the US. Would it any way impact the GC process? Given that priority date is 2007, it is unlikely(?) that 485 would be adjusted in that time.
Thanks
If485 i spending for over six months and someone switched the job using AC21 for a position which would require extended stay [upto 2-3 years] outside the US. Would it any way impact the GC process? Given that priority date is 2007, it is unlikely(?) that 485 would be adjusted in that time.
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment