andy garcia
06-27 09:01 AM
According to Ombudsmn report a documentarily qualified applicant is an applicant with approved I-485. The ombudsman report is a must read; most of the threads will not pop up if everyone reads them.
In the same bulletin they use this defunition for Documentarily Qualified
Documentarily Qualified
The applicant has informed the consular processing office that they have obtained (after being requested to do so) all of the documents which are required to meet the formal visa application requirements
I think that the ombudsman is going one step further by saying approved it should be applied or properly filed
In the same bulletin they use this defunition for Documentarily Qualified
Documentarily Qualified
The applicant has informed the consular processing office that they have obtained (after being requested to do so) all of the documents which are required to meet the formal visa application requirements
I think that the ombudsman is going one step further by saying approved it should be applied or properly filed
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
Wendyzhu77
07-30 11:22 AM
Apparently this guy has and aganda and is purposefully twisting the fact to facilite his own benefits. With the consulate interview list out, it's absurb to suggest CP can in anyway use even "moderate" number of visa numbers. Also, considering the fact that uscis must approve 140k EB applications each year, it is obvious they must have the capability to process at least 10k each month, or , 20k for two months. There is absolutely no reason why uscis can not use at least 20k visa numbers in the following 2 months from AOS cases.
This Ron Gotcher guy does not seem to get it.... he has an agenda, I dont buy his logic. It is unlikely that ~ 50 cases at consular posts are enough motivation to move dates forward by two years.
It took roughly one year for EB2-I dates to advance beyond April04 from the time it first got to April 04.
We know 2005 is a lean year.
It is likely that it will take almost a year before EB2-I dates advance beyond June06.
Those with PD < June06 that do not get a GC by Sep08 can expect to get it by Sep 09. Until then we will see some short term swings between 2003 and 2006.
This Ron Gotcher guy does not seem to get it.... he has an agenda, I dont buy his logic. It is unlikely that ~ 50 cases at consular posts are enough motivation to move dates forward by two years.
It took roughly one year for EB2-I dates to advance beyond April04 from the time it first got to April 04.
We know 2005 is a lean year.
It is likely that it will take almost a year before EB2-I dates advance beyond June06.
Those with PD < June06 that do not get a GC by Sep08 can expect to get it by Sep 09. Until then we will see some short term swings between 2003 and 2006.
ramus
07-03 09:24 PM
Please give input to Mecaca on this so he can come with good template that we can use to send email to reporters..
Every one please give your thoughts/input on this.
I am trying an outline for sending to media + lawmakers + ...
The following is a very rough draft without reading some of the letters posted in the thread. I will read the posts tomorrow and polish it by tomorrow evening. I will need everyone's input since I don't know all the issues.
What happened
USCIS announced at the time the forms were due.
Applicants started filling forms 2-3 weeks before July 2.
Applicants changed their schedules to submit forms.
Advantages of EAD + AP
Don't know all!
Travel without visa -> saves Embassy overhead.
Spouse can work.
Can switch job.
Why does it hurt
Medical will not be valid after 1 year.
Rejected June filers can not file.
June filers did not file because they thought they will file in July.
Fees more then doubling
Name checking (which can take 1+ year) done in parallel with waiting for GC #.
Load balancing for USCIS.
USCIS which is supported 90% by application fee needs to care for applicants.
Very little chance of legislative relief for a looong time.
Every one please give your thoughts/input on this.
I am trying an outline for sending to media + lawmakers + ...
The following is a very rough draft without reading some of the letters posted in the thread. I will read the posts tomorrow and polish it by tomorrow evening. I will need everyone's input since I don't know all the issues.
What happened
USCIS announced at the time the forms were due.
Applicants started filling forms 2-3 weeks before July 2.
Applicants changed their schedules to submit forms.
Advantages of EAD + AP
Don't know all!
Travel without visa -> saves Embassy overhead.
Spouse can work.
Can switch job.
Why does it hurt
Medical will not be valid after 1 year.
Rejected June filers can not file.
June filers did not file because they thought they will file in July.
Fees more then doubling
Name checking (which can take 1+ year) done in parallel with waiting for GC #.
Load balancing for USCIS.
USCIS which is supported 90% by application fee needs to care for applicants.
Very little chance of legislative relief for a looong time.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
nfinity
07-03 04:41 PM
Dear Senator,
After having spent thousands of dollars in legal counsel, medical tests, documentations, affidavits and many days of hurried preparation to file adjustment of status (AOS) for my green card application, USCIS has pulled a fast one me and the legal high skilled community.
On June 13th 2007, Department Of State indicated visa availability for all applicants starting July 1st causing thousands of prospective legal high skilled immigrants to prepare their applications only to be surprised on the very first day (July 2nd) with rejections due to apparent exhaustion of existing visas.
This unprecented and possibly illegal action on part of USCIS, has left high skilled immigrants like myself in a limbo. We are wondering what we have done to be wronged in this way. I am a law abiding, tax paying resident contributing to the economy.
Please help us in overcoming this situation. We definetly do not deserve such treatment for having followed the law in the land of opportunity on the eve of independence day.
Thank You,
Sincerely,
After having spent thousands of dollars in legal counsel, medical tests, documentations, affidavits and many days of hurried preparation to file adjustment of status (AOS) for my green card application, USCIS has pulled a fast one me and the legal high skilled community.
On June 13th 2007, Department Of State indicated visa availability for all applicants starting July 1st causing thousands of prospective legal high skilled immigrants to prepare their applications only to be surprised on the very first day (July 2nd) with rejections due to apparent exhaustion of existing visas.
This unprecented and possibly illegal action on part of USCIS, has left high skilled immigrants like myself in a limbo. We are wondering what we have done to be wronged in this way. I am a law abiding, tax paying resident contributing to the economy.
Please help us in overcoming this situation. We definetly do not deserve such treatment for having followed the law in the land of opportunity on the eve of independence day.
Thank You,
Sincerely,
more...
meridiani.planum
07-30 06:31 AM
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5766
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
this makes no sense (with all due respect to Mr Gotcher). He basically claims that PD has been moved to allow CP cases to be processed faster to avoid visa number wastage.. However he also says that there is a huge backlog of AOS cases. Looking at how many CP cases are being called for interview in mumbai and delhi (low hundreds) I dont see how CP alone can help avoid a big wastage of visas. If USCIS is still 20k short, then its the massive pile of AOS cases they should be using, just like they did last year.
Also, if they waste visa numbers this year, it would be really gross incompetence. EB2-India has gone all the way from 2000 to 2006 this year. They slack off at the start of the year, then scramble in the end. I dont know why they follow this approach knowing full well that right at the end it puts them in a soup.
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
this makes no sense (with all due respect to Mr Gotcher). He basically claims that PD has been moved to allow CP cases to be processed faster to avoid visa number wastage.. However he also says that there is a huge backlog of AOS cases. Looking at how many CP cases are being called for interview in mumbai and delhi (low hundreds) I dont see how CP alone can help avoid a big wastage of visas. If USCIS is still 20k short, then its the massive pile of AOS cases they should be using, just like they did last year.
Also, if they waste visa numbers this year, it would be really gross incompetence. EB2-India has gone all the way from 2000 to 2006 this year. They slack off at the start of the year, then scramble in the end. I dont know why they follow this approach knowing full well that right at the end it puts them in a soup.
newbee7
07-04 07:45 AM
Under the section "Why does it hurt?
Lawyers who charged upwards of $2000 for filing will not refund the service fee, so candidates have to pay again when dates become current in future.
The biggest loss is the trust, coz, next time people will not believe these mid month bulletins at all as they can come around anytime and revise the dates. So, applicants will always have to live in fear untill they receive the receipt.
Macacca,
Fantastic job!
Can you please add to why does it hurt:
Many had to take MMR vaccine and hence postpone their plans to have kids by 3-6 months as recommended by NIH.
For "Spouse can work" we might want to word it such that it just does not look like one job less for Americans. Something like spouse can excersise the freedom to get out of the house and contribute to the emarican economy.
Lawyers who charged upwards of $2000 for filing will not refund the service fee, so candidates have to pay again when dates become current in future.
The biggest loss is the trust, coz, next time people will not believe these mid month bulletins at all as they can come around anytime and revise the dates. So, applicants will always have to live in fear untill they receive the receipt.
Macacca,
Fantastic job!
Can you please add to why does it hurt:
Many had to take MMR vaccine and hence postpone their plans to have kids by 3-6 months as recommended by NIH.
For "Spouse can work" we might want to word it such that it just does not look like one job less for Americans. Something like spouse can excersise the freedom to get out of the house and contribute to the emarican economy.
more...
NolaIndian32
09-23 01:12 PM
Nixtor,
I like your idea, but please consider current homeowners as well in your proposal. I understand that if new homeowners are removed from the queue I am standing in, it will benefit me. But seriously, I will not get immediate relief. I will have to continue to wait in some queue for another decade. I have been in the US since 1994, completed 6 years of education and have been employed since 2000. My PD was current for 2 months, I am still sitting here looking at a dismal October Visa Bulletin. Yes, I bought my house 4 years ago. Why can't I be included in this list?
Should I promise to buy a second home? Will that put me in the category you are proposing?
I like your idea, but please consider current homeowners as well in your proposal. I understand that if new homeowners are removed from the queue I am standing in, it will benefit me. But seriously, I will not get immediate relief. I will have to continue to wait in some queue for another decade. I have been in the US since 1994, completed 6 years of education and have been employed since 2000. My PD was current for 2 months, I am still sitting here looking at a dismal October Visa Bulletin. Yes, I bought my house 4 years ago. Why can't I be included in this list?
Should I promise to buy a second home? Will that put me in the category you are proposing?
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
msp1976
02-13 04:04 PM
This is why I mean USCIS/DOS was lazy. If there is total visas for the year (hypothetical 160,000). then only 40,000 are available by quarter. If there is 50,000 applications in the que then there is retrogression. Remember if there is more demand then what can be approved by quarter then retrogression.
So what this means is that if there is 400,000 approved I-140's but only 300,000 greencards then 7% limit would apply because there are more people in the que then what can be approved by quarter. Therefore, ROW people would still be able to file throughout the year and then whatever is left in the fourth quarter that ROW hasn't used then it would spillover. Therefore, it would still give ROW people to continue filing and taking the visas while the 7% countires have to sit and wait for breadcrumbs until the fourth quarter.
In the first three quarter the 'heavy' countries(India/China) would get numbers until the 7% caps hits and in the fourth quarter they would get the big chunck...
If the law contains a 'continous recapture' provision( anything not used this year get recaptured again immediately for next year...) then it would not be long befor e all categories become current....By the way 'continous recapture' is one of the IV goals...
Pl. Correct me if I am wrong....
Now I have really started to appreciate the IV goals listed on the front page.....
IV core team have gone through all this junk long before we got started and the goals take care of every point raised until now....
So what this means is that if there is 400,000 approved I-140's but only 300,000 greencards then 7% limit would apply because there are more people in the que then what can be approved by quarter. Therefore, ROW people would still be able to file throughout the year and then whatever is left in the fourth quarter that ROW hasn't used then it would spillover. Therefore, it would still give ROW people to continue filing and taking the visas while the 7% countires have to sit and wait for breadcrumbs until the fourth quarter.
In the first three quarter the 'heavy' countries(India/China) would get numbers until the 7% caps hits and in the fourth quarter they would get the big chunck...
If the law contains a 'continous recapture' provision( anything not used this year get recaptured again immediately for next year...) then it would not be long befor e all categories become current....By the way 'continous recapture' is one of the IV goals...
Pl. Correct me if I am wrong....
Now I have really started to appreciate the IV goals listed on the front page.....
IV core team have gone through all this junk long before we got started and the goals take care of every point raised until now....
more...
hopefulgc
02-16 01:00 PM
Any word on the following two issues i posted:
----1----I think there is definitely someone else here better than me at leading this issue & getting people together. So if the moderators can allow members willing to step forward and help out with this, to have edit permissions on this thread, that would be help
----2---Can the moderators please modify the poll to be the following or add another poll to this thread. I don't seem to have the requisite permissions.
Q) Do you commit to participate in a class action lawsuit against USCIS
Options:
1) I am willing to commit $10-$20 needed for the initial consultation ($600-$1000)
2) Yes. I am willing to commit $500
3) Yes. I'm willing to be a plaintiff ( full name and full contact info required)
4) Yes. I'm willing to commit $500 and become a plaintiff as well
5) No. I don't think it will work
----1----I think there is definitely someone else here better than me at leading this issue & getting people together. So if the moderators can allow members willing to step forward and help out with this, to have edit permissions on this thread, that would be help
----2---Can the moderators please modify the poll to be the following or add another poll to this thread. I don't seem to have the requisite permissions.
Q) Do you commit to participate in a class action lawsuit against USCIS
Options:
1) I am willing to commit $10-$20 needed for the initial consultation ($600-$1000)
2) Yes. I am willing to commit $500
3) Yes. I'm willing to be a plaintiff ( full name and full contact info required)
4) Yes. I'm willing to commit $500 and become a plaintiff as well
5) No. I don't think it will work
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
kuhelica2000
02-12 08:21 PM
Per country limit applies to every country in exactly the same way. It doesn't discriminate between Chad or China. So, how is it discrimination? And think about it- in Olympics soccer/basketball every country can send only one team. Should China and India be allowed to send more teams since they have a larger population? We should try to increase the number of GCs.
No matter which side you are on, the quota system sucks. Period.
1) Once you start receiving benefits out of being born in a particular country/ race/ sex/ religion, a notion of "entitlement" quickly builds up within you. This adversely affects your ability to perform, for you just don't have to work hard enough!
2) If you are punished for being born in a particular country/ race/ sex/ religion, you have no incentive to perform, as you won't get what you deserve no matter how hard you work!
How about this... during every Olympics, most number of Gold Medals are won by Americans. Now imagine a rule that prevents more than 7% of all Gold Medals going to people born in any one country. How does that sound?
I will myself hate it if athletes from India (who haven't won anything in the Olympics till date) started winning gold medals simply because other countries cannot receive more than 7%!
Of course, removing country caps will face opposition, but it should still happen, just because it is the right thing!
No matter which side you are on, the quota system sucks. Period.
1) Once you start receiving benefits out of being born in a particular country/ race/ sex/ religion, a notion of "entitlement" quickly builds up within you. This adversely affects your ability to perform, for you just don't have to work hard enough!
2) If you are punished for being born in a particular country/ race/ sex/ religion, you have no incentive to perform, as you won't get what you deserve no matter how hard you work!
How about this... during every Olympics, most number of Gold Medals are won by Americans. Now imagine a rule that prevents more than 7% of all Gold Medals going to people born in any one country. How does that sound?
I will myself hate it if athletes from India (who haven't won anything in the Olympics till date) started winning gold medals simply because other countries cannot receive more than 7%!
Of course, removing country caps will face opposition, but it should still happen, just because it is the right thing!
more...
snathan
08-16 01:09 AM
Don�€™t make a big deal of Shah Rukh�€™s detention:One For The Road:Anand Soondas's blog-The Times Of India (http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/onefortheroad/entry/don-t-make-a-big)
One For The RoadDon’t make a big deal of Shah Rukh’s detention
After a long time actor Salman Khan has come up with a real gem. On hearing about Shah Rukh Khan being questioned by US security at Newark, New Jersey, he said it’s good that the country has such a tight set-up. And that ``there has been no attack after 9/11 because of this.’’
Salman has a point. SRK might be an icon to Indians and many in the subcontinent, even to the desi diaspora spread across the globe, but to America he’s just a visitor. We may be convinced he cannot be involved in anything that’s remotely violent, but the guard given the responsibility of stopping something like 9/11 from happening in his country again will want to take no chances. And what is the possibility that he’s a die hard fan of the Khan and Bollywood? Very slim.
Interestingly, the same day that SRK was detained in Newark, there came news that the great Bob Dylan, who was wandering around Long Branch, near New York City, sometime back, was asked for an ID by two cops too young to know who he really was. When he couldn’t furnish one, he was taken right back to the resort where he was putting up and staff there vouched for him. And America is Dylan’s own country.
Was there a furore? Not that I know of. Not even a little blowin' in the wind.
SRK says he’s ``upset and angry’’ because it was his Muslim name that caused all this. Thousands of Muslims are made to go through extra security checks everyday in America and a host of Western countries. Is he equally upset at that? He's probably just pissed that it happened to him, India's mega star. We all know how a lot of Muslims have been subjected to prejudice around the world because many countries see terrorism as an Islamic phenomenon. Yes, it is uncalled for, unjust and maybe wrong. But America is a country that takes the killings of its people with the seriousness it deserves, unlike India whose record on this is shameful, to say the least.
Also, because most of the perpetrators of 9/11 were Muslims, America thinks it has to be doubly careful where they are concerned. Had the terrorists been Jews, perhaps it would have looked at Jews with similar suspicion. I was much more aggrieved at President Kalam being frisked. But that’s a dated debate.
There are two layers to the SRK incident and we must peel them off with care. One, it is quite ridiculous that Indians feel their icons and superstars are everybody’s icons and superstars. What the heck? If Jet Li came to India tomorrow, the man on the street here would probably call him ‘`Chinky’’ and not give a second look. For that matter, what if G�rard Depardieu came travelling. How many would know him? Matt Damon was here recently and there wasn’t a traffic jam in Delhi. These guys are huge back home.
Moreover, America doesn’t have a culture of fawning the way India has. Mike Tyson was treated like a common rapist and spent most part of his youth in the slammer. Winona Ryder was sentenced to a three-year probation for shoplifting. Chinese born Hollywood actress Bai Ling was fined US 200 dollars for petty theft.
More importantly, we are actually aggrieved because we are ``not like them’’. Well, guess what. It isn’t a virtue. We should be like them and take the security of our country and its people with solemn, no-nonsense professionalism. Frisk Brad Pitt when he lands in India next. Give Tom Cruise the same dose. Don’t spare Bill Clinton either. Isn’t he an ex-prez just like Kalam? Who’s stopping you and what’s stopping you? Colonial hangover? Or is it plain lethargy and callousness. Looks like both.
We are just whimpering over here like hurt puppies because we feel, ``Oh, but we don’t do it to them’’. Oh no, we don’t. And it’s a scandal. We should. I’ve seen white men – and women – get away in India with murder. Indian women can’t get into some discos wearing a sari. And bouncers will frown at you if you are dressed in a kurta. Have you seen what some of these firangs have on them? No one bats a eyelid.
So instead of making SRK’s detention an issue, we should think of upgrading our own security set-up.
There’s a lesson in this. And it is a positive one. A day after our own 26/11, there was hardly any security at CST in Mumbai. It can’t get worse than that. The bottom line: Stop fawning, shed the colonial hangover and make no compromise where the country’s safety is concerned. Can we do that or is it too much to ask from a country that’s been free for 62 years but was ruled by white sahibs for 200?
One For The RoadDon’t make a big deal of Shah Rukh’s detention
After a long time actor Salman Khan has come up with a real gem. On hearing about Shah Rukh Khan being questioned by US security at Newark, New Jersey, he said it’s good that the country has such a tight set-up. And that ``there has been no attack after 9/11 because of this.’’
Salman has a point. SRK might be an icon to Indians and many in the subcontinent, even to the desi diaspora spread across the globe, but to America he’s just a visitor. We may be convinced he cannot be involved in anything that’s remotely violent, but the guard given the responsibility of stopping something like 9/11 from happening in his country again will want to take no chances. And what is the possibility that he’s a die hard fan of the Khan and Bollywood? Very slim.
Interestingly, the same day that SRK was detained in Newark, there came news that the great Bob Dylan, who was wandering around Long Branch, near New York City, sometime back, was asked for an ID by two cops too young to know who he really was. When he couldn’t furnish one, he was taken right back to the resort where he was putting up and staff there vouched for him. And America is Dylan’s own country.
Was there a furore? Not that I know of. Not even a little blowin' in the wind.
SRK says he’s ``upset and angry’’ because it was his Muslim name that caused all this. Thousands of Muslims are made to go through extra security checks everyday in America and a host of Western countries. Is he equally upset at that? He's probably just pissed that it happened to him, India's mega star. We all know how a lot of Muslims have been subjected to prejudice around the world because many countries see terrorism as an Islamic phenomenon. Yes, it is uncalled for, unjust and maybe wrong. But America is a country that takes the killings of its people with the seriousness it deserves, unlike India whose record on this is shameful, to say the least.
Also, because most of the perpetrators of 9/11 were Muslims, America thinks it has to be doubly careful where they are concerned. Had the terrorists been Jews, perhaps it would have looked at Jews with similar suspicion. I was much more aggrieved at President Kalam being frisked. But that’s a dated debate.
There are two layers to the SRK incident and we must peel them off with care. One, it is quite ridiculous that Indians feel their icons and superstars are everybody’s icons and superstars. What the heck? If Jet Li came to India tomorrow, the man on the street here would probably call him ‘`Chinky’’ and not give a second look. For that matter, what if G�rard Depardieu came travelling. How many would know him? Matt Damon was here recently and there wasn’t a traffic jam in Delhi. These guys are huge back home.
Moreover, America doesn’t have a culture of fawning the way India has. Mike Tyson was treated like a common rapist and spent most part of his youth in the slammer. Winona Ryder was sentenced to a three-year probation for shoplifting. Chinese born Hollywood actress Bai Ling was fined US 200 dollars for petty theft.
More importantly, we are actually aggrieved because we are ``not like them’’. Well, guess what. It isn’t a virtue. We should be like them and take the security of our country and its people with solemn, no-nonsense professionalism. Frisk Brad Pitt when he lands in India next. Give Tom Cruise the same dose. Don’t spare Bill Clinton either. Isn’t he an ex-prez just like Kalam? Who’s stopping you and what’s stopping you? Colonial hangover? Or is it plain lethargy and callousness. Looks like both.
We are just whimpering over here like hurt puppies because we feel, ``Oh, but we don’t do it to them’’. Oh no, we don’t. And it’s a scandal. We should. I’ve seen white men – and women – get away in India with murder. Indian women can’t get into some discos wearing a sari. And bouncers will frown at you if you are dressed in a kurta. Have you seen what some of these firangs have on them? No one bats a eyelid.
So instead of making SRK’s detention an issue, we should think of upgrading our own security set-up.
There’s a lesson in this. And it is a positive one. A day after our own 26/11, there was hardly any security at CST in Mumbai. It can’t get worse than that. The bottom line: Stop fawning, shed the colonial hangover and make no compromise where the country’s safety is concerned. Can we do that or is it too much to ask from a country that’s been free for 62 years but was ruled by white sahibs for 200?
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
gcvision2010
09-03 10:57 AM
May his soul rest in Peace!
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
gcgoingon
06-14 05:33 PM
I guess my 9 months old prediction is coming true (off by a month).
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1049939-post209.html
I hope your predictions for the coming months also come true..
I do not know why the bulletin is so conservative about the EB2-I estimates for the year 2010 (March/April 2006)?
The reason I am saying this is the initial estimate they gave for EB2-I in Jan '10 bulletin is Feb/March 2005.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1049939-post209.html
I hope your predictions for the coming months also come true..
I do not know why the bulletin is so conservative about the EB2-I estimates for the year 2010 (March/April 2006)?
The reason I am saying this is the initial estimate they gave for EB2-I in Jan '10 bulletin is Feb/March 2005.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
Subst_labor
03-17 10:32 PM
Subst_labor, you became an annonymous member today only to post this question. I am sure you must be a regular member of IV but created a new profile just for this question.
Why don't you tell us how much you bought your labor for? Show us a proof that you have not bought it.
I think I made a mistake of answering your post and apologize for that to all members. I also urge people not to answer anyone with substitute labor on this forum.
such people cut in line in front of us and don't even bother paying money to IV. Why should we give them free advice. If they can spend money buying labor for 20K they can spend hundred dollars and consult a lawyer and ask their question. It is with such mentaility they are brought up with in their country- Currption and getting things done with money. But never paying anyone for a just cause. In my country people contribute only when they fear god in temples, for medical treatment or to astrologers!!
I also urge moderators to close such threads on this forum whenever someone is diagnosed with a substitute labor cancer. Yes it is a cancer that is worsening retrogression further.
At least on this forum we can have the resolve to fight such people who are hurting most of us.
Now if someone argues with me on this post, then it will mean that either that person has himself bought a substitute labor or is looking for one. So don't even bother because a lot of members after reading this post will come hard on people who are ok with substitute labor on this forum.
Mr. Janak,
Do you understand English? First of all, i had mentioned, i am BEING offered, meaning i havent gone for the labor yet and even if i do there will be no buying or selling involved.
Second of all, i am sick and tired of stereotype Indians like you, who ASSUME everything without knowing anything and come out with your own theories from the bizzarro world [i know, pathetic loosers like to vent at any and every opportunities they get. Spare me your crap, if u dont know anything and cant help, then just stay quiet.]
Why don't you tell us how much you bought your labor for? Show us a proof that you have not bought it.
I think I made a mistake of answering your post and apologize for that to all members. I also urge people not to answer anyone with substitute labor on this forum.
such people cut in line in front of us and don't even bother paying money to IV. Why should we give them free advice. If they can spend money buying labor for 20K they can spend hundred dollars and consult a lawyer and ask their question. It is with such mentaility they are brought up with in their country- Currption and getting things done with money. But never paying anyone for a just cause. In my country people contribute only when they fear god in temples, for medical treatment or to astrologers!!
I also urge moderators to close such threads on this forum whenever someone is diagnosed with a substitute labor cancer. Yes it is a cancer that is worsening retrogression further.
At least on this forum we can have the resolve to fight such people who are hurting most of us.
Now if someone argues with me on this post, then it will mean that either that person has himself bought a substitute labor or is looking for one. So don't even bother because a lot of members after reading this post will come hard on people who are ok with substitute labor on this forum.
Mr. Janak,
Do you understand English? First of all, i had mentioned, i am BEING offered, meaning i havent gone for the labor yet and even if i do there will be no buying or selling involved.
Second of all, i am sick and tired of stereotype Indians like you, who ASSUME everything without knowing anything and come out with your own theories from the bizzarro world [i know, pathetic loosers like to vent at any and every opportunities they get. Spare me your crap, if u dont know anything and cant help, then just stay quiet.]
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
hibworker
09-15 02:57 PM
Since EB2-I is slowly catching up with EB2-C, future spill overs will be split between the two categories and not all will go to EB2-I.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
onemorecame
06-26 04:53 PM
I heard this group of people - from anti immigrant organizations, plan to intercept fedex trucks going into USCIS next month sort out 485 petitions and steal them and hide them in an undisclosed location.
These people have only one aim in life. Not to allow 485 applications to reach USCIS.
When USCIS does not recieve any 485 applications, they will retrogress. Then this group of people will stop stealing the petitions.
:confused:
These people have only one aim in life. Not to allow 485 applications to reach USCIS.
When USCIS does not recieve any 485 applications, they will retrogress. Then this group of people will stop stealing the petitions.
:confused:
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
GotGC??
05-17 06:30 PM
Or did you mean the other way around?
I personally know of 2 friends - live within half a mile of where I do, who got their GCs using labor substitution. If the lawyer and sponsoring company are good, go for it. Keep in mind that this is going to go away soon.........
I personally know of 2 friends - live within half a mile of where I do, who got their GCs using labor substitution. If the lawyer and sponsoring company are good, go for it. Keep in mind that this is going to go away soon.........
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
NKR
02-15 06:52 PM
For the most part I think you're right. When I did my master's we were less than 10 white people in 200 in that major. Most of the indian people in there (about half of the 190) were H4s studying while the spouse came on H1 directly from India. And while I had to pay international tuition they got the in state resident tuition.
When I finished my degree might I add in the top 5 of those 200 I had a hard time finding a job while my colleagues each knew someone who helped them land a job a lot easier. I did ok for myself in the end and I have many Indian friends so don't take this as an anti-indian post. But there are definitely advantages to be part of a big group that is concentrated in an industry.
That being said, I don't think that we would be having this discussion in a normal world in which the GC numbers are enough. So stop the bickering and work towards increasing those numbers. That will make life easier for everybody.
If the spouses are allowed to work, then their one or two years salary is more than the international fee that you paid. Who is the biggest loser.
H4 people going to college is just a miniscule compared to the number of desi students who come here with a good GRE and GMAT scores.
When I finished my degree might I add in the top 5 of those 200 I had a hard time finding a job while my colleagues each knew someone who helped them land a job a lot easier. I did ok for myself in the end and I have many Indian friends so don't take this as an anti-indian post. But there are definitely advantages to be part of a big group that is concentrated in an industry.
That being said, I don't think that we would be having this discussion in a normal world in which the GC numbers are enough. So stop the bickering and work towards increasing those numbers. That will make life easier for everybody.
If the spouses are allowed to work, then their one or two years salary is more than the international fee that you paid. Who is the biggest loser.
H4 people going to college is just a miniscule compared to the number of desi students who come here with a good GRE and GMAT scores.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
Picasa
07-27 03:58 PM
Did he run away with tail between his legs.
Kishmunn .... you take the bull by the horns.
Kishmunn .... you take the bull by the horns.
deepakd
07-11 01:43 PM
Guys
On the sameline, I think no one is crazy about anything but material wealth for self.
Take my example, GOV of India spent lot of money on me so that I get a degree from IIT and here I am in USA salivating over GC dreams.
If I would be kicked out of USA, I may move to Canada, if I kicked out of Canada then to Australia and it would continue............
Aptly quoted fot this situation ( sorry for hindi language)
GC ne jalim Kutta banaa diya
Warna hum bhi the addme izzat ke
On the sameline, I think no one is crazy about anything but material wealth for self.
Take my example, GOV of India spent lot of money on me so that I get a degree from IIT and here I am in USA salivating over GC dreams.
If I would be kicked out of USA, I may move to Canada, if I kicked out of Canada then to Australia and it would continue............
Aptly quoted fot this situation ( sorry for hindi language)
GC ne jalim Kutta banaa diya
Warna hum bhi the addme izzat ke
grimreaper
07-21 05:10 PM
I've also been approached by Amway people both in the Bay Area and beyond. I despise their tactics and their deception as much as (or more than!) anyone.
But let's not let it affect our community. Let's not let a few bad apples ruin that unmistakable bond we feel in America when we spot a fellow desi from afar. Now, any time I approach a desi to make a friend, I state in a jovial-yet-serious way, "don't worry, I'm not one of those Amway guys!" That's obviously not the first thing I say, but I make sure to throw that line in during the first minute or so of the conversation. If the fellow desi knows Amway, it gets a laugh, "oh, phew, that's a relief!" Once at an IKEA, I saw a desi who seemed to be following me. Turned out he wasn't following me at all. I asked him in a clearly joking tone, "Please tell me you're not with Amway!" He burst out laughing and we became friends (needless to say, he was not with Amway!).
So why don't we all agree on a similar approach? If we meet each other in public, let's simply state that we're not with Amway. And if you're accosted, simply ask that person if they're affiliated with Amway. Plain and simple.
How does this sound to others?
Sounds like a good approach. I am going to use this line as a greeter in the future.
But let's not let it affect our community. Let's not let a few bad apples ruin that unmistakable bond we feel in America when we spot a fellow desi from afar. Now, any time I approach a desi to make a friend, I state in a jovial-yet-serious way, "don't worry, I'm not one of those Amway guys!" That's obviously not the first thing I say, but I make sure to throw that line in during the first minute or so of the conversation. If the fellow desi knows Amway, it gets a laugh, "oh, phew, that's a relief!" Once at an IKEA, I saw a desi who seemed to be following me. Turned out he wasn't following me at all. I asked him in a clearly joking tone, "Please tell me you're not with Amway!" He burst out laughing and we became friends (needless to say, he was not with Amway!).
So why don't we all agree on a similar approach? If we meet each other in public, let's simply state that we're not with Amway. And if you're accosted, simply ask that person if they're affiliated with Amway. Plain and simple.
How does this sound to others?
Sounds like a good approach. I am going to use this line as a greeter in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment