Marphad
03-31 05:09 PM
Sanjay, just ignore them. These are the very same people who are taught from childhood to stab in back. They will not dare to put a post rather they type bad words in comments.
Here are the comments I got from people when I asked Marphad to add Modi name to the list.
* you racist hindu bastard...
* take this nonsense elsewhere
* xxxxxxx
* xxxx xxx.
* You get what you deserve. What's so "non-annonymous" about "sanjay"? You are now a minority in this country. Maybe Americans should treat you like Modi treats minorities. Maybe then you will understand the value of life. All life.
* ??
HUH ! ! ! Long live Democracy. And 18 people had polled for Modi as of now.
Here are the comments I got from people when I asked Marphad to add Modi name to the list.
* you racist hindu bastard...
* take this nonsense elsewhere
* xxxxxxx
* xxxx xxx.
* You get what you deserve. What's so "non-annonymous" about "sanjay"? You are now a minority in this country. Maybe Americans should treat you like Modi treats minorities. Maybe then you will understand the value of life. All life.
* ??
HUH ! ! ! Long live Democracy. And 18 people had polled for Modi as of now.
wallpaper Columbo Actor Peter Falk Dies
sledge_hammer
02-16 08:27 AM
Great find!
I guess all the talk about suing USCIS will go down the toilet based on this excerpt from the article -
"Assuming that under the plenary power doctrine noncitizens possess few, if any, constitutional protections with respect to entering the country, the implications of racial and national origin exclusions on citizens must be considered. Because the Constitution unquestionably protects the rights of citizens, citizens claiming injury have a better chance at successfully challenging the immigration laws than noncitizens directly affected by their operation. Courts have recognized that citizens in certain circumstances may challenge the lawfulness of immigration laws because of the impact on their rights."
oguinan,
Paragraph 1 of Article 1 establishes the definition of racial discrimination for the purpose of the document. Paragraphs 2 and 3 limit the operation of the convention. As to why paragraphs 2 & 3 were included, perhaps they were required to get countries to sign on to the convention.
Here's a better link. Read under Modern Racial Exclusion, excerpts of which I have posted below.
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/immigr09.htm
...similarly situated persons (e.g., siblings and children of U.S. citizens) may face radically different waits for immigration depending on their country of origin, with accompanying racial impacts.
The law created a new immigrant visa program that effectively represents affirmative action for white immigrants, a group that benefitted from preferential treatment under the national origins quota system until 1965. Congress, in an ironic twist of political jargon, established the "diversity" visa program, which though facially neutral prefers immigrants from nations populated primarily by white people.
The link to the CERD report is here. The convention does not address the country limit directly as the convention expressly does not apply in that area, but it does show that there is awareness about the discrimination faced by immigrants. http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/6d8aee7e356e6498c1256d4e00557f3b?Opendocument
You can see that the UN panel is aware of the fact that racial discrimination manifests itself in disproportional representation (note the reference to the composition of the Supreme Court). It can be argued that the 7% country limit provides a pretext to discriminate against India/China/Mexico on the basis of ethnic or racial origin, and as such would run afoul of the convention.
I guess all the talk about suing USCIS will go down the toilet based on this excerpt from the article -
"Assuming that under the plenary power doctrine noncitizens possess few, if any, constitutional protections with respect to entering the country, the implications of racial and national origin exclusions on citizens must be considered. Because the Constitution unquestionably protects the rights of citizens, citizens claiming injury have a better chance at successfully challenging the immigration laws than noncitizens directly affected by their operation. Courts have recognized that citizens in certain circumstances may challenge the lawfulness of immigration laws because of the impact on their rights."
oguinan,
Paragraph 1 of Article 1 establishes the definition of racial discrimination for the purpose of the document. Paragraphs 2 and 3 limit the operation of the convention. As to why paragraphs 2 & 3 were included, perhaps they were required to get countries to sign on to the convention.
Here's a better link. Read under Modern Racial Exclusion, excerpts of which I have posted below.
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/immigr09.htm
...similarly situated persons (e.g., siblings and children of U.S. citizens) may face radically different waits for immigration depending on their country of origin, with accompanying racial impacts.
The law created a new immigrant visa program that effectively represents affirmative action for white immigrants, a group that benefitted from preferential treatment under the national origins quota system until 1965. Congress, in an ironic twist of political jargon, established the "diversity" visa program, which though facially neutral prefers immigrants from nations populated primarily by white people.
The link to the CERD report is here. The convention does not address the country limit directly as the convention expressly does not apply in that area, but it does show that there is awareness about the discrimination faced by immigrants. http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/6d8aee7e356e6498c1256d4e00557f3b?Opendocument
You can see that the UN panel is aware of the fact that racial discrimination manifests itself in disproportional representation (note the reference to the composition of the Supreme Court). It can be argued that the 7% country limit provides a pretext to discriminate against India/China/Mexico on the basis of ethnic or racial origin, and as such would run afoul of the convention.
smuggymba
01-15 04:08 PM
Body shops aka desi dallas have bad business practices as someone just mentioned - all they do is provide a TAX ID.....nothing else.
You have to find a project on your own, no pay on bench, no proper office space - renting 2 rooms doesn't make a company, no benefits or medical insurance. Since an H1-B person requires an employer to do paper work - that is all what they do.
As someone just mentioned, this rule is not against H1-Bs but against such ppl who have bad business practices. Not all desi dallas are bad - 10-15% are good also.
You have to find a project on your own, no pay on bench, no proper office space - renting 2 rooms doesn't make a company, no benefits or medical insurance. Since an H1-B person requires an employer to do paper work - that is all what they do.
As someone just mentioned, this rule is not against H1-Bs but against such ppl who have bad business practices. Not all desi dallas are bad - 10-15% are good also.
2011 Rest in Peace, Peter Falk.
immi_enthu
07-26 05:34 PM
I am not with Amway or Quixtar but I think the folks with Amway/Quixtar are under represented on this thread and it's not fair :-)
Just to add another dimention to this thread I will play the devil's advocate :D
Here I go ...
You guys are all wasting your free time bitching on this thread where as we are spending all our free time growing our business. We will retire early as we would make $xxxx/month for nothing when we turn 40 and dont need to work anymore where as all you guys bitching about Amway / Quixtar will still be working hard at your jobs till 60.
What's your response ?
:D:D:D:D
Just to add another dimention to this thread I will play the devil's advocate :D
Here I go ...
You guys are all wasting your free time bitching on this thread where as we are spending all our free time growing our business. We will retire early as we would make $xxxx/month for nothing when we turn 40 and dont need to work anymore where as all you guys bitching about Amway / Quixtar will still be working hard at your jobs till 60.
What's your response ?
:D:D:D:D
more...
pmat
05-09 03:46 PM
Thanks for your answers, dan19. I have started the process by requesting FBI police clearances... I hope that I will get Canadian PR by end of next year if I apply by June 07.
I have decided to enroll in a full-time MBA program by Fall 2009... In US, it is tedious if I don't get a GC. Even if I change to F1 status, getting H1 after that will be an uphill battle. Univ of Toronto seems to be a better option in this scenario.
Dont worry, just foolow intructions on cic.ga.ca and you will be fine.
If you miss any document, they will send all ur paperwork back. If they accept it they will send a letter with a Tracking/case number.
Its much better and streamlined for people who reside in US. Just apply, lets all go to Canada..I think thats what US of A wants and deserves.
I have decided to enroll in a full-time MBA program by Fall 2009... In US, it is tedious if I don't get a GC. Even if I change to F1 status, getting H1 after that will be an uphill battle. Univ of Toronto seems to be a better option in this scenario.
Dont worry, just foolow intructions on cic.ga.ca and you will be fine.
If you miss any document, they will send all ur paperwork back. If they accept it they will send a letter with a Tracking/case number.
Its much better and streamlined for people who reside in US. Just apply, lets all go to Canada..I think thats what US of A wants and deserves.
bfadlia
02-15 02:22 PM
u r missing my point..
Again you are saying it's a SKILL cap. We can agree business may hire whoever they please but don't pretend that they only hire based on SKILL..
when someone says let business hire the "best and brightest", that's my problem, he implies the best and brightest are concentrated in only two countries so that's what's insane, that's why he won't be taken seriously.
cheers.
Yes skills don't need a cap. If I am a business owner, I have all rights to hire best and brightest in the world. It is my choice whom I hire not Government tells me where to go for hiring. Business may hire from India or Antartica, it should not be anyone's damn concern. Let the free markets work !!! This is insane
Again you are saying it's a SKILL cap. We can agree business may hire whoever they please but don't pretend that they only hire based on SKILL..
when someone says let business hire the "best and brightest", that's my problem, he implies the best and brightest are concentrated in only two countries so that's what's insane, that's why he won't be taken seriously.
cheers.
Yes skills don't need a cap. If I am a business owner, I have all rights to hire best and brightest in the world. It is my choice whom I hire not Government tells me where to go for hiring. Business may hire from India or Antartica, it should not be anyone's damn concern. Let the free markets work !!! This is insane
more...
chi_shark
01-25 03:06 PM
so you are saying your benefits are not worth $12000? Then whose mistake is it that you parted with it?
From the day I came to this country , I have spent around $12,000 on immigration including H1-Bs, filing GC, APs, EADs extra. Not to mention the traveling for visa stamps and whole other shit load of expenses. I guess most of people who paid for filing GC did spent same amount of money.
Hell ya, Some one got to be benefiting from my $12000.
From the day I came to this country , I have spent around $12,000 on immigration including H1-Bs, filing GC, APs, EADs extra. Not to mention the traveling for visa stamps and whole other shit load of expenses. I guess most of people who paid for filing GC did spent same amount of money.
Hell ya, Some one got to be benefiting from my $12000.
2010 girlfriend peter falk dead
eb3_nepa
10-23 02:08 PM
Thanks eb3India.
How does the current company obtain a pre-approved labor? Does it buy the pre-app labour? Or is it SOLELY because someone in the company left (whose labor was approved)?
I was reading a lot about the controversy about why it should be stopped etc so i was wondering if someone had any documentation on why it was started in the first place and how it works
Thanks
How does the current company obtain a pre-approved labor? Does it buy the pre-app labour? Or is it SOLELY because someone in the company left (whose labor was approved)?
I was reading a lot about the controversy about why it should be stopped etc so i was wondering if someone had any documentation on why it was started in the first place and how it works
Thanks
more...
villamonte6100
12-14 02:09 PM
Could you please tell us the problem on this law that can be changed to help us.
Federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Laws
The Federal laws prohibiting job discrimination are:
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin;
the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA), which protects men and women who perform substantially equal work in the same establishment from sex-based wage discrimination;
the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), which protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older;
Title I and Title V of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), which prohibit employment discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in the private sector, and in state and local governments;
Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibit discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities who work in the federal government;
and
the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which, among other things, provides monetary damages in cases of intentional employment discrimination.
Federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Laws
The Federal laws prohibiting job discrimination are:
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin;
the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA), which protects men and women who perform substantially equal work in the same establishment from sex-based wage discrimination;
the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), which protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older;
Title I and Title V of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), which prohibit employment discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in the private sector, and in state and local governments;
Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibit discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities who work in the federal government;
and
the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which, among other things, provides monetary damages in cases of intentional employment discrimination.
hair peter falk dead.
chanduv23
06-27 07:29 AM
It doesnt say anywhere that they can change PDs in the middle of the month. What they are saying is that based on data collected from the "total number of files at point of approval" they can change PDs. But it doesnt say that they can change PDs in the middle of the month.
If anyone has a URL or source of information that shows the USCIS stopped accepting petitions in the middle of the month even when the dates were current, PLEASE POST THE URL OR SOURCE.
Otherwise this is bogus information coming out of certain law firms.
And this community is so scared that they have started seeing what they believe rather than believing what they see. The cynicism and psychosis has reached such alarming levels that people are seeing things even in Ombudsman report that dont exist.
:D :D :D :D The most successful people in the world are cynics.
People who initiate this kind of news - have been popular Attorneys. No idea why they do it - maybe to get more people to file and more money etc...
If anyone has a URL or source of information that shows the USCIS stopped accepting petitions in the middle of the month even when the dates were current, PLEASE POST THE URL OR SOURCE.
Otherwise this is bogus information coming out of certain law firms.
And this community is so scared that they have started seeing what they believe rather than believing what they see. The cynicism and psychosis has reached such alarming levels that people are seeing things even in Ombudsman report that dont exist.
:D :D :D :D The most successful people in the world are cynics.
People who initiate this kind of news - have been popular Attorneys. No idea why they do it - maybe to get more people to file and more money etc...
more...
485_spouse
07-08 08:53 AM
Hi,
I (EB3-India, PD Nov 2002) got approved last year. We were only able to file my wife;s I-484 days before my approval. We are still waiting for her GC as my PD is no longer current. Is there any way she can get her GC quickly?
Thanks,
485_spouse
I (EB3-India, PD Nov 2002) got approved last year. We were only able to file my wife;s I-484 days before my approval. We are still waiting for her GC as my PD is no longer current. Is there any way she can get her GC quickly?
Thanks,
485_spouse
hot Emmy-winning actor Peter Falk,
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.........
more...
house Falk died Thursday in his
vkrishn
07-28 03:16 AM
Can't make a a statement without getting personal eh? and people are getting under your skin..:D.. no wonder you can take the fact.. and probably the only thing you learnt from being in the Amway gang is to make these rants.. I am much better off than the begging the Amway guys (or rather WIMPS) do and get behind us everywhere so that they can show us how to become millioinaires..What a joke! :D
Sure with dead bobhead braincells of yours, nobody expects your self image to be high enough. Its not for wimps wearing zippers to the side like you. If you are man enough come and talk to me, and will see who gets handcuffed.
Sure with dead bobhead braincells of yours, nobody expects your self image to be high enough. Its not for wimps wearing zippers to the side like you. If you are man enough come and talk to me, and will see who gets handcuffed.
tattoo Peter Falk on set of his
Pineapple
12-14 02:16 PM
I agree with alterego.
There is another compelling argument against taking the lawsuit way, even if assuming there is a case to be made, and we have plenty of money. (The first is unclear, the second is a firm no, but let us assume anyway for the sake or argument)
One of the reasons why Roe v Wade, 34 years on, is still a controversial decision today is the fact that the US is probably unique in the world in the sense that a constitutionality argument was used to decide public policy.
In Europe, as in other parts of the world, abortion was considered as a health issue, and handled via legislation and health care guidelines.
But because it was a constitutionality issue in US, and enforced from the bench, a significant portion of the populace felt left out of the decision making process, which stimulated a simmering opposition and entrenched the main actors of the "culture wars", which persist to this day.
There is significant debate even among liberals whether Roe V Wade has helped or harmed the liberal cause, and if knowing what we know, there could have been another approach to achieve the same end.
In a nutshell, approaching the courts is a double edged sword. There may be some strategic gains in the short term, but the long term impact is unclear and unpredictable. A legislative approach might be slower and incremental, but it is less risky.
Think of lobbying as polite negotiation.
Think of Supreme court case as picking a fist fight, in which we are badly out numbered.
Once you have started a fist fight it is much harder to negotiate, especially from a loosing position.
This is exactly correct. It is not the question of right or wrong here. That is what gets folks so upset on this thread, they feel since their viewpoint s right then.......... Most neutral observers like mbartosik can see this as unjust and there may be many in the US as well, however certainly not the majority. However, there are many ways in which this could backfire. One example is the recently seen debate over illegal immigration and the turn in public sentiment. Truth be told, if someone did something wrong 12 yrs ago(crossed the fence), now is married to a US citizen and has 3 US children, what do you do with them? What about the 3yr old who was brought to the USA by their parents and knows no other system? Perhaps a few years ago joe public would have given them a pass, no more, the debate has become so nasty that positions have been hardened to the point that reason does not prevail. Another reason has something to do with the perceived sense of entitlement Americans sensed in the illegal immigrant community(of course fanned by Lou Dobbs and his ilk). These are complex issues and generally you will get a lot further appealing to someones sense of fairness than explaining how you are entitled to something and will take it from them if it is not given to you.
There is another compelling argument against taking the lawsuit way, even if assuming there is a case to be made, and we have plenty of money. (The first is unclear, the second is a firm no, but let us assume anyway for the sake or argument)
One of the reasons why Roe v Wade, 34 years on, is still a controversial decision today is the fact that the US is probably unique in the world in the sense that a constitutionality argument was used to decide public policy.
In Europe, as in other parts of the world, abortion was considered as a health issue, and handled via legislation and health care guidelines.
But because it was a constitutionality issue in US, and enforced from the bench, a significant portion of the populace felt left out of the decision making process, which stimulated a simmering opposition and entrenched the main actors of the "culture wars", which persist to this day.
There is significant debate even among liberals whether Roe V Wade has helped or harmed the liberal cause, and if knowing what we know, there could have been another approach to achieve the same end.
In a nutshell, approaching the courts is a double edged sword. There may be some strategic gains in the short term, but the long term impact is unclear and unpredictable. A legislative approach might be slower and incremental, but it is less risky.
Think of lobbying as polite negotiation.
Think of Supreme court case as picking a fist fight, in which we are badly out numbered.
Once you have started a fist fight it is much harder to negotiate, especially from a loosing position.
This is exactly correct. It is not the question of right or wrong here. That is what gets folks so upset on this thread, they feel since their viewpoint s right then.......... Most neutral observers like mbartosik can see this as unjust and there may be many in the US as well, however certainly not the majority. However, there are many ways in which this could backfire. One example is the recently seen debate over illegal immigration and the turn in public sentiment. Truth be told, if someone did something wrong 12 yrs ago(crossed the fence), now is married to a US citizen and has 3 US children, what do you do with them? What about the 3yr old who was brought to the USA by their parents and knows no other system? Perhaps a few years ago joe public would have given them a pass, no more, the debate has become so nasty that positions have been hardened to the point that reason does not prevail. Another reason has something to do with the perceived sense of entitlement Americans sensed in the illegal immigrant community(of course fanned by Lou Dobbs and his ilk). These are complex issues and generally you will get a lot further appealing to someones sense of fairness than explaining how you are entitled to something and will take it from them if it is not given to you.
more...
pictures Falk died Thursday night at
srkamath
07-24 08:18 PM
Some lawyers (like the one mentioned here) like to advocate Consular Processing. At the risk of sounding cynical i'll say it..
Lawyers are always trying to make money. During last July, several people self-filed I-485s, therefore lawyers lost business.
Now if they create enough noise about long EB2 backlogs for AOS via USCIS, people might be scared enough to opt for consular processing, which is complicated enough that you'd need a lawyer !.
I'm gonna ignore this lawyer's posts ..
Lawyers are always trying to make money. During last July, several people self-filed I-485s, therefore lawyers lost business.
Now if they create enough noise about long EB2 backlogs for AOS via USCIS, people might be scared enough to opt for consular processing, which is complicated enough that you'd need a lawyer !.
I'm gonna ignore this lawyer's posts ..
dresses Falk is survived by his wife
gagbag
07-11 12:55 PM
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2007,0710-lee.shtm
more...
makeup #39;Columbo#39; Star Peter Falk Dead
alterego
06-27 07:00 AM
Visa number retrogression has no basis in the number of I 485s received. It is based on the number approved.
In the current melee, it will be a huge number of 485s applied, it does not mean the 485s will be approved any quicker.
Hence I am not sure where you all are getting these rumors from.
In the current melee, it will be a huge number of 485s applied, it does not mean the 485s will be approved any quicker.
Hence I am not sure where you all are getting these rumors from.
girlfriend Famous actor Peter Falk died
gc_lover
06-28 12:45 PM
"expecting retrogresson ....in first wk of July... " ??
I thought logiclife already clarified that can not and will not happen!!
Yes, he did clarify. But, when rumors like that make it to reputed attorney's website it will surely cause panic among people.
I thought logiclife already clarified that can not and will not happen!!
Yes, he did clarify. But, when rumors like that make it to reputed attorney's website it will surely cause panic among people.
hairstyles Actor Peter Falk, who walked
Lasantha
02-12 02:08 PM
Yeah, Tell me about it!!!
Just two more months and mine would have been current!!!!
correction: EB3 ROW = 01JAN05 !!!!!!!!!!!!!
OMG!!!
Just 1.25 more year and I would have been current! Damn!!!!
Just two more months and mine would have been current!!!!
correction: EB3 ROW = 01JAN05 !!!!!!!!!!!!!
OMG!!!
Just 1.25 more year and I would have been current! Damn!!!!
rajsenthil
09-04 12:24 PM
1. Rasu Devan
2. Kenkai ammal
3. Gandhi mathi (lady only).
Please all do pray for the poor souls.
My condolence to them. But I beg to differ that people dying unnecessarily is not a good sign of development.
Let their soul rest in peace.
Edited: Ooops, I think misread your post.
2. Kenkai ammal
3. Gandhi mathi (lady only).
Please all do pray for the poor souls.
My condolence to them. But I beg to differ that people dying unnecessarily is not a good sign of development.
Let their soul rest in peace.
Edited: Ooops, I think misread your post.
venky321
01-13 08:52 PM
Can USCIS face legal challenges on this? It was just a memo, no law has been changed by the Government; the laws are just the same they were when they let it about a million people or so through these IT consulting companies.
Now they go back and say that was a misinterpretation of existing laws :eek:
Now they go back and say that was a misinterpretation of existing laws :eek:
