eatpavbhaji
04-22 02:20 PM
I lost my major young life on green card (around 9 years) and I can just am pray that my labor will be used only for myself and not others.
LABOR SUBSTITUTION SHOULD BE ELIMINTED RIGHT AWAY.
ALL OF THEM WHO USED OTHER'S LABOR SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED COMPLETELY AND SHOULD BE GIVEN VISA NUMBERS LAST.
LABOR SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE FROM COMPANY TO COMPANY OTHERWISE COMPANY CAN PURPOSEFULLY FIRE EMPLOYEE TO GIVE OR SELL LABOR TO OTHERS.
Below comments have gone to comments for elimination of labor substitution.
TOP 10 reason to support rule to eliminate labor substitution.
1> So many years, labor applications were misused completely. Many Companies were filing fake labor and were using for anyone elsewith lower educated, lower experience people who wanted GC within 6 months instead of normal 4 to 6 years. It is like stealing someone's pocket.
2> One was waiting for years hoping his labor will get approved and after his labor was approved, company used for another person demonstrating complete exploitation of system.
3> Many company started selling labor applications as key business
4> Many companies were giving too less salary indicating that if employee joins with minimum salary and if they sign 6 years of bond then company will use USA's approved labor for anyone.
5> Most of the companies started asking money from employee. So if employee is saving $6000 per year, they have to work for free for entire year if they want GC.
6> Why one need to substitute labor when they can file new labor for new person anyway.
7> Companies started threatening employees that if employee don't do what they say, they will use his/her labor for other and he will loose all 2 or 3 years of labor approval. Why not...it was legal to take labor back and use it like playing cards!!
8> Everyone knew that they can buy approved labor and get their GC in few months and original owner will loose years.
9> Who is going to audit whos labor was used how ? Nobody in past from government asked or audited as how come one's GC came so fast and others with better capabilities/education took 5 times. Nobody in past from government asked or audited as if employee was important then why company never filed labor for him and all of sudden used pre-approved labor to have that employee.
10> Companies used to stock labor applications like grocery (actually like
gold...can buy/sell anytime !)...after all labor application is cheap and shortcut to save 2 to 3 years and sell in blackmarket.
LABOR SUBSTITUTION SHOULD BE ELIMINTED RIGHT AWAY.
ALL OF THEM WHO USED OTHER'S LABOR SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED COMPLETELY AND SHOULD BE GIVEN VISA NUMBERS LAST.
LABOR SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE FROM COMPANY TO COMPANY OTHERWISE COMPANY CAN PURPOSEFULLY FIRE EMPLOYEE TO GIVE OR SELL LABOR TO OTHERS.
Below comments have gone to comments for elimination of labor substitution.
TOP 10 reason to support rule to eliminate labor substitution.
1> So many years, labor applications were misused completely. Many Companies were filing fake labor and were using for anyone elsewith lower educated, lower experience people who wanted GC within 6 months instead of normal 4 to 6 years. It is like stealing someone's pocket.
2> One was waiting for years hoping his labor will get approved and after his labor was approved, company used for another person demonstrating complete exploitation of system.
3> Many company started selling labor applications as key business
4> Many companies were giving too less salary indicating that if employee joins with minimum salary and if they sign 6 years of bond then company will use USA's approved labor for anyone.
5> Most of the companies started asking money from employee. So if employee is saving $6000 per year, they have to work for free for entire year if they want GC.
6> Why one need to substitute labor when they can file new labor for new person anyway.
7> Companies started threatening employees that if employee don't do what they say, they will use his/her labor for other and he will loose all 2 or 3 years of labor approval. Why not...it was legal to take labor back and use it like playing cards!!
8> Everyone knew that they can buy approved labor and get their GC in few months and original owner will loose years.
9> Who is going to audit whos labor was used how ? Nobody in past from government asked or audited as how come one's GC came so fast and others with better capabilities/education took 5 times. Nobody in past from government asked or audited as if employee was important then why company never filed labor for him and all of sudden used pre-approved labor to have that employee.
10> Companies used to stock labor applications like grocery (actually like
gold...can buy/sell anytime !)...after all labor application is cheap and shortcut to save 2 to 3 years and sell in blackmarket.
wallpaper Baby Photography
purgan
04-13 10:13 AM
USINPAC, for instance, promotes its role in the India-US nuclear deal.
It has also listed immigration as one of its issues, but all it cares about there is family immigration, so all those citizens can sponsor their own relatives. A bunch of A$^#^
himu73, why don't you try to contact these two oganizations + USINPAC to see what kind of traction you can get? The core is busy and needs all the help it can get. Are you upto it?
It has also listed immigration as one of its issues, but all it cares about there is family immigration, so all those citizens can sponsor their own relatives. A bunch of A$^#^
himu73, why don't you try to contact these two oganizations + USINPAC to see what kind of traction you can get? The core is busy and needs all the help it can get. Are you upto it?
rayen
02-05 03:47 PM
Chris,
Thanks a lot I will try to reach them now.
Thanks, again.
Cris,
I just called teh number and was able to talk to the officer.. he said the case under review.. means.. Any idea.
Thanks again.
Thanks a lot I will try to reach them now.
Thanks, again.
Cris,
I just called teh number and was able to talk to the officer.. he said the case under review.. means.. Any idea.
Thanks again.
2011 aby photography, lack and
bb20078
10-10 09:20 AM
I also want to know the answer to this question
Can you re enter USA on H4 after using EAD
On the immigration form at the port of entry, can you put H4 and say YES to do you work?
Can you re enter USA on H4 after using EAD
On the immigration form at the port of entry, can you put H4 and say YES to do you work?
more...
greencard_fever
09-08 08:51 PM
Cograts!! rb_248..
Did you notice any LUD's on your case in September?..i got an RFE for my Spouse in August and responded on September 2nd after that there is Soft LUD almost every day but no status change..on my case no LUD's or what so ever last LUD was on 08/19 the day when i did my FP that's it..Guys i am frustated and feeling some how that i will miss this bus... called USCIS IO told me that both the cases are with officer not sure how reliable inof that is..Opened SR on September 3rd..guys please suggest me what else i can do:confused::confused::mad::mad::mad:
Got the cards in the mail. My online case status says the application is still pending.
Folks (those whose PDs are current this month),
Check with your attorney, in your mail boxes along with the online USCIS case status. You may get the good news in your mail box or from your attorney's office before your status is updated online.
This is what my attorney had to say:
The USCIS online status system is maintained by contract workers and is often inaccurate.
Did you notice any LUD's on your case in September?..i got an RFE for my Spouse in August and responded on September 2nd after that there is Soft LUD almost every day but no status change..on my case no LUD's or what so ever last LUD was on 08/19 the day when i did my FP that's it..Guys i am frustated and feeling some how that i will miss this bus... called USCIS IO told me that both the cases are with officer not sure how reliable inof that is..Opened SR on September 3rd..guys please suggest me what else i can do:confused::confused::mad::mad::mad:
Got the cards in the mail. My online case status says the application is still pending.
Folks (those whose PDs are current this month),
Check with your attorney, in your mail boxes along with the online USCIS case status. You may get the good news in your mail box or from your attorney's office before your status is updated online.
This is what my attorney had to say:
The USCIS online status system is maintained by contract workers and is often inaccurate.
Bolt
04-23 11:48 AM
Hi Guys,
I got the good news to share every one. got the approval . its wonderful
Hi ,
congrats! did you get an approval i.e 797 with i-94 or without it ? am in the same situation, my previous h1b was denied on mar10th 2009 (which was filed on march 24th 2008). i had a transfer to another company thru premium processing on 30th of march 2009 and got approval on april 21st.
Please do reply.
I got the good news to share every one. got the approval . its wonderful
Hi ,
congrats! did you get an approval i.e 797 with i-94 or without it ? am in the same situation, my previous h1b was denied on mar10th 2009 (which was filed on march 24th 2008). i had a transfer to another company thru premium processing on 30th of march 2009 and got approval on april 21st.
Please do reply.
more...
kirupa
06-13 01:25 PM
The number at the bottom of the poll is the number of individual voters. Since people can vote for multiple entries, you adding up the total number votes is just that - the total number of votes. It isn't the total number of people who voted.
I voted for about 10 entries, but that doesn't mean that 10 people voted, for example ;)
I voted for about 10 entries, but that doesn't mean that 10 people voted, for example ;)
2010 and white photography,
evildead
04-24 04:18 PM
Anyone from Chicago near downtown? Not Napreville or Aurora. We are moving from (bay area) Santa Clara to Chicago. Office is in Downtown. Looking for a place closest to download. We are a family with small (1.5 year old) kid.
Please suggest.
we live in Chicagoland. PM me if you would like to talk.
Please suggest.
we live in Chicagoland. PM me if you would like to talk.
more...
alien2006
06-13 01:44 PM
My guess is you will be current in September 2006, may be October latest. But keep your fingers crossed. Logic does not apply too well with these things.
hair Discuss this photo
gcsucks
06-01 02:37 PM
I dont know about others but for me stuck with the same compay for 5 years. I really want to move on !!But it does increase the GC quota which will substantially hasten the process
more...
gimmemygreen
09-14 04:46 PM
Here is my story:
I work for Company A. Got an offer from Company B who is a consulting company. Got placed in a project which is like 1.5 hrs away from my home (I accepted this opportunity for my GC and everything was fine). Company B filed for my LCA for the H1-B transfer. They accepted to pay all the H1-B transfer fees.
Here is my problem:
1 week after my LCA was filed, I came to know that my wife was pregnant. As per the doctor she needs some close attention and care because of her health condition(atleast for 2 months). Also, I have to take her for tests minimum once per week at a hospital which is quite opposite in direction where company B placed me (2hrs ride).
I came to a conclusion not to take this opportunity because of my wife's health and also keeping in mind how the new job will treat me (in terms of flexibility. leaving early, WFH etc - for my wife's treatment). I felt this was a genuine reason from my side.
I informed Company B about this change of plan because I cannot commute such a long distance having these constraints in mind (not good for me as well as not good for the new project).
Company B is asking me pay $3000 for some damages and they say that it is as per the contract.
To my true knowledge I did not sign any kind of contract with them neither the recruiter told me anything. Now Company B is saying that minimum 3 months is required or I have to pay for H1-B transfer and all other fees.
The offer letter that I signed clearly stated that the employment is "At Will" in nature which when asked now, Company B is saying that is for GC and Citizens (which is not mentioned anywhere in the offer letter).
The thing is that they are threatening me and they were so rough and hard when I finally spoke to them. They said that they will be sending the vouchers for me to pay them back.
I thank God for not joining this company as I came to know about their true colors now, they are so money minded and the words they spoke were so harmful. I am pretty sure they would have created more problems for some other reasons if I had joined them.
Even though I did not sign any bond, I am really scared by the way they spoke to me. Any help or advice will be greatly appreciated.
There is a new memo out which will screw the life of these pimps. Rise up and name company B here. I will suggest you a way to file a complaint with DOL.
I work for Company A. Got an offer from Company B who is a consulting company. Got placed in a project which is like 1.5 hrs away from my home (I accepted this opportunity for my GC and everything was fine). Company B filed for my LCA for the H1-B transfer. They accepted to pay all the H1-B transfer fees.
Here is my problem:
1 week after my LCA was filed, I came to know that my wife was pregnant. As per the doctor she needs some close attention and care because of her health condition(atleast for 2 months). Also, I have to take her for tests minimum once per week at a hospital which is quite opposite in direction where company B placed me (2hrs ride).
I came to a conclusion not to take this opportunity because of my wife's health and also keeping in mind how the new job will treat me (in terms of flexibility. leaving early, WFH etc - for my wife's treatment). I felt this was a genuine reason from my side.
I informed Company B about this change of plan because I cannot commute such a long distance having these constraints in mind (not good for me as well as not good for the new project).
Company B is asking me pay $3000 for some damages and they say that it is as per the contract.
To my true knowledge I did not sign any kind of contract with them neither the recruiter told me anything. Now Company B is saying that minimum 3 months is required or I have to pay for H1-B transfer and all other fees.
The offer letter that I signed clearly stated that the employment is "At Will" in nature which when asked now, Company B is saying that is for GC and Citizens (which is not mentioned anywhere in the offer letter).
The thing is that they are threatening me and they were so rough and hard when I finally spoke to them. They said that they will be sending the vouchers for me to pay them back.
I thank God for not joining this company as I came to know about their true colors now, they are so money minded and the words they spoke were so harmful. I am pretty sure they would have created more problems for some other reasons if I had joined them.
Even though I did not sign any bond, I am really scared by the way they spoke to me. Any help or advice will be greatly appreciated.
There is a new memo out which will screw the life of these pimps. Rise up and name company B here. I will suggest you a way to file a complaint with DOL.
hot lack and white photos of
logiclife
02-01 12:29 AM
Everyone:
There has been enough discussion on this topic.
UnitedNations (Nadeem) is welcome to post on these forums and we would all be grateful if he can answer some questions related to 140 filing and other issues that he has expertise in.
However, there is no point in trying to prove to other people who do not know him as to whether or not he can contribute in any way, and how much. What is the point of that exercise?
Unitednations:
You are welcome here. However there is no point in this thread that debates your potential value.
Your help to members here is welcome and the community would be thankful to you for your contribution.
There has been enough discussion on this topic.
UnitedNations (Nadeem) is welcome to post on these forums and we would all be grateful if he can answer some questions related to 140 filing and other issues that he has expertise in.
However, there is no point in trying to prove to other people who do not know him as to whether or not he can contribute in any way, and how much. What is the point of that exercise?
Unitednations:
You are welcome here. However there is no point in this thread that debates your potential value.
Your help to members here is welcome and the community would be thankful to you for your contribution.
more...
house ~*~Black and White~*~
ash27
06-07 12:32 AM
Thanks Chandu! Reasons to relocate are family and weather. At this point, I've a decent job in Chicago. Do you think this may be the right time to relocate to an Atlanta area given the economic climate....Also, how r the overall job prospects..
tattoo my - Picture for Me
aa_ke_phas_gaya
06-24 06:13 PM
Remember you are bonded labor if you are on H1B or Work Permit. They will use you & your illegal brothers every election year and this is one of those years ..... everything is chatter until something heppens.
Don't get your hopes high.... just get your head down and work for them.
Don't get your hopes high.... just get your head down and work for them.
more...
pictures Posts tagged “lack and white”
blacktongue
01-26 03:30 PM
Waste of time. How many PhD's are there as compared to the others? There is already EB1/EB2-NIW for them
US needs EB1 and Ph.Ds
Others not contribute as much
US needs EB1 and Ph.Ds
Others not contribute as much
dresses BABY FOOT ON MANS HAND IN
mambarg
08-03 05:18 PM
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
B. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.
Question 12. Can the 180 days that an I-485 application must be pending for I-140 portability eligibility accrue during a period when visa numbers are unavailable?
Answer: Yes. The fact that a visa number becomes unavailable after the filing of the I-485 application does not stop the number of days required for I-140 portability eligibility from accruing.
Question 13. Does the alien�s priority date change as a result of porting under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer: No. The priority date continues to be determined at the time of the initial labor certification filing with the Department of Labor or at the time the initial I-140 immigrant petition is filed with USCIS (in cases where no labor certification is required).
Question 14. Must the alien have a new offer of employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the I-140 portability provisions?
Answer: Yes. The alien cannot still be looking for �same or similar� employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the adjustment portability provisions. The alien must be able to show there is a new valid offer of employment at the time the I-485 is adjudicated.
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
B. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.
Question 12. Can the 180 days that an I-485 application must be pending for I-140 portability eligibility accrue during a period when visa numbers are unavailable?
Answer: Yes. The fact that a visa number becomes unavailable after the filing of the I-485 application does not stop the number of days required for I-140 portability eligibility from accruing.
Question 13. Does the alien�s priority date change as a result of porting under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer: No. The priority date continues to be determined at the time of the initial labor certification filing with the Department of Labor or at the time the initial I-140 immigrant petition is filed with USCIS (in cases where no labor certification is required).
Question 14. Must the alien have a new offer of employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the I-140 portability provisions?
Answer: Yes. The alien cannot still be looking for �same or similar� employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the adjustment portability provisions. The alien must be able to show there is a new valid offer of employment at the time the I-485 is adjudicated.
more...
makeup Black and white cute aby girl
gcisadawg
04-28 01:04 AM
No TSC is not. TSC goes by priority date and not processing date. TSC I have seen follows different processing style. For e.g. if your namecheck/security check or some kind of check is pending they dont send you FP notice. Also they process applications if your PD is current/close to recent bulletin.
We got RFE for my wife's I-485 from TSC.
We got RFE for my wife's I-485 from TSC.
girlfriend Black amp; White Baby Portrait
GotGC??
01-08 12:03 AM
.
I wud just like to add that shud you travel and use your current visa your new I-94 will be stamped with date June 07. Then you have to extend you H-4 and your old approval will not be valid.
That's not true. I've done that many times, and I'm sure many other would have done the same without affecting the newly approved petition.
Yes, something about the "last action rule" (I don't know much about it) causes some problem when you are outside the US at the time your H1/H4 petition gets approved (in other words, you should be present in the US the day the H1/H4 gets approved) but this rule does not apply in this case because the petition has already been approved.
These are just my thoughts. And I am not a layer.
Do you have a basis for the statement you are making? Any references, rules, etc.?
Have a great trip
I wud just like to add that shud you travel and use your current visa your new I-94 will be stamped with date June 07. Then you have to extend you H-4 and your old approval will not be valid.
That's not true. I've done that many times, and I'm sure many other would have done the same without affecting the newly approved petition.
Yes, something about the "last action rule" (I don't know much about it) causes some problem when you are outside the US at the time your H1/H4 petition gets approved (in other words, you should be present in the US the day the H1/H4 gets approved) but this rule does not apply in this case because the petition has already been approved.
These are just my thoughts. And I am not a layer.
Do you have a basis for the statement you are making? Any references, rules, etc.?
Have a great trip
hairstyles Black and White Baby Photos
jgh_res
05-17 10:01 AM
Here is the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
ivar
02-07 09:43 AM
Congrats ivar - you are now a free man!!
My humble request - please do contribute to the cause that held you back for so long. If not financially, then through your efforts in advocacy & legislator meetings - every little bit counts.
GCHope2011, I haven't stopped contributing yet and planning to continue my contribution (Donation) for a while (maybe another 6 months). I have this habit of visiting IV everyday, so i am checking back today.
My humble request - please do contribute to the cause that held you back for so long. If not financially, then through your efforts in advocacy & legislator meetings - every little bit counts.
GCHope2011, I haven't stopped contributing yet and planning to continue my contribution (Donation) for a while (maybe another 6 months). I have this habit of visiting IV everyday, so i am checking back today.
a1b2c3
06-16 12:27 AM
I think your best bet would be that your parents apply for visa alone. I believe this will improve their chances of getting visa and once they get the visa then your siblings can apply. Good luck!
I think so too. I think its good to ask the immigration officer why the visa is being denied.
I think its best your parents apply by themselves and leave your brothers out.
When they see so many family members travelling all together for an extended period of time, they smell something. They feel your entire family wants to be out of Indonesia and will apply for asylum.
Another thing to do is to ask for a short duration visa like a month or so. It might help.
And forget abt the elderly granddad. No one will buy all that. Make sure the reasons for coming back are rock solid.
Sorry to hear about this and wish you the best luck next time. Don't give up hope and ask your folks to schedule another appt without delay.
I think so too. I think its good to ask the immigration officer why the visa is being denied.
I think its best your parents apply by themselves and leave your brothers out.
When they see so many family members travelling all together for an extended period of time, they smell something. They feel your entire family wants to be out of Indonesia and will apply for asylum.
Another thing to do is to ask for a short duration visa like a month or so. It might help.
And forget abt the elderly granddad. No one will buy all that. Make sure the reasons for coming back are rock solid.
Sorry to hear about this and wish you the best luck next time. Don't give up hope and ask your folks to schedule another appt without delay.
No comments:
Post a Comment