rmdsouza
06-24 04:21 PM
100% of anti-immigrant poll questions focus only on the Undocumented. We are only addressed as an afterthought.. mostly in the analysis nowhere else NADA. Here is a sampling of NumbersUSA poll questions..
Here is a sampling of the questions..
Public Opinion
NumbersUSA.com's goal of reducing annual legal and illegal immigration to more traditional numerical levels enjoys broad based public support. Virtually every major poll that has been conducted in the past decade finds that a majority of Americans support lower immigration numbers. As many of the following polls suggest, what we are for is the same thing a majority of Americans are for. CLICK HERE for our Public Opinion Archive.
Prefer Lower Numbers
Sixty-seven percent of Americans approve of the U.S. government deporting illegal immigrants to the country they came from.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Sixty-seven percent of Americans would you like to see the number of illegal immigrants currently in this country decreased.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of registered voters believe the illegal immigration situation in the United States is "very serious" and twenty-nine percent believe it is "somewhat serious."
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Fifty-five percent of registered voters "favor" trying to send as many illegal immigrants back to their home countries as possible.
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Seventy-seven percent of Americans think the United States is not doing enough to keep illegal immigrants from coming into this country.
ABC News/Washington Post Poll, May 11-15, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of Americans think the May 1, 2006 illegal alien solidarity protests did more to hurt their cause than help.
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll, April 21-24, 2006
Informed that U.S. population is projected to grow to 420 million by 2050, fifty-seven percent of respondents believed that the present U.S. population of 300 million or less would be best for the country in the long run.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Six of ten Americans, according to the poll, favor annual immigration (now one million yearly) of less than 600,000 a year. Forty-five percent of respondents favored annual immigration of less than 300,000. Overall, seventy-two percent of respondents favor an annual immigration level that is less than the current one million.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Fifty-six percent of Americans agree that a practical way to reduce to near zero the number of resident illegal aliens is legislation making penalties for illegal presence so severe that illegal immigrants would leave voluntarily rather than run the risk of being caught and penalized.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
They have effectively blocked our goals by muddying the issue of undocumented and legals. To the average Joe on the street.. immigrant == undocumented
Id like to see how many people will say No to the question " Do you support increase of Green Cards to immigrants already here playing by the rules, paying taxes, Soc Sec etc without benefits, and waiting in line for an average of 6-7 years"
Hell, quite a few of the poll questions say the "amnesty" is unfair to those people who play by the rules...
I say.. focus our efforts on us for the time being.. differentiate ourselves from the undocumented..
Here is a sampling of the questions..
Public Opinion
NumbersUSA.com's goal of reducing annual legal and illegal immigration to more traditional numerical levels enjoys broad based public support. Virtually every major poll that has been conducted in the past decade finds that a majority of Americans support lower immigration numbers. As many of the following polls suggest, what we are for is the same thing a majority of Americans are for. CLICK HERE for our Public Opinion Archive.
Prefer Lower Numbers
Sixty-seven percent of Americans approve of the U.S. government deporting illegal immigrants to the country they came from.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Sixty-seven percent of Americans would you like to see the number of illegal immigrants currently in this country decreased.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of registered voters believe the illegal immigration situation in the United States is "very serious" and twenty-nine percent believe it is "somewhat serious."
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Fifty-five percent of registered voters "favor" trying to send as many illegal immigrants back to their home countries as possible.
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Seventy-seven percent of Americans think the United States is not doing enough to keep illegal immigrants from coming into this country.
ABC News/Washington Post Poll, May 11-15, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of Americans think the May 1, 2006 illegal alien solidarity protests did more to hurt their cause than help.
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll, April 21-24, 2006
Informed that U.S. population is projected to grow to 420 million by 2050, fifty-seven percent of respondents believed that the present U.S. population of 300 million or less would be best for the country in the long run.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Six of ten Americans, according to the poll, favor annual immigration (now one million yearly) of less than 600,000 a year. Forty-five percent of respondents favored annual immigration of less than 300,000. Overall, seventy-two percent of respondents favor an annual immigration level that is less than the current one million.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Fifty-six percent of Americans agree that a practical way to reduce to near zero the number of resident illegal aliens is legislation making penalties for illegal presence so severe that illegal immigrants would leave voluntarily rather than run the risk of being caught and penalized.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
They have effectively blocked our goals by muddying the issue of undocumented and legals. To the average Joe on the street.. immigrant == undocumented
Id like to see how many people will say No to the question " Do you support increase of Green Cards to immigrants already here playing by the rules, paying taxes, Soc Sec etc without benefits, and waiting in line for an average of 6-7 years"
Hell, quite a few of the poll questions say the "amnesty" is unfair to those people who play by the rules...
I say.. focus our efforts on us for the time being.. differentiate ourselves from the undocumented..
wallpaper makeup hair Kelly Rowland
gkdgopi
07-04 07:01 PM
Just to make sure u cant file again when the dates become current again.
:rolleyes: may be to delay law suit.
I am not sure why we will they hold?
:rolleyes: may be to delay law suit.
I am not sure why we will they hold?
vinabath
04-23 04:38 PM
This is not a personal advice but general appeal to all would be employers.
I hope you have researched and understood obligations of an employer.
By virtue of owning the business and taking 100% of returns, the employer has to assume 100% risk.
If not on revenue sharing with employee ( 80-20 etc) , the employer has no business of NOT paying on bench. Either the employee is on rolls or has to be advised to take LOA or let go.
For other unprofessional tactics, there is simply no excuse. Employment is at will. If employers cant deal with that, too bad. They should not be starting the business.
I have worked with Desi employers who have consistently run on best practices and completely adhering to law of the land. It can be done and the cost of doing that has to be factored into the business plan. If it is too costly as per your financial numbers, then you are not ready for it financially.
There is moral obligation too. Whenever you hire H-1s make sure most of them have dreams to get GC and settle down. Dont take risks in such a ways their dreams get shattered because of poor business practices. just to hire people dont run in your businesses on losses and in turn force yourself to shut down the business.
I hope you have researched and understood obligations of an employer.
By virtue of owning the business and taking 100% of returns, the employer has to assume 100% risk.
If not on revenue sharing with employee ( 80-20 etc) , the employer has no business of NOT paying on bench. Either the employee is on rolls or has to be advised to take LOA or let go.
For other unprofessional tactics, there is simply no excuse. Employment is at will. If employers cant deal with that, too bad. They should not be starting the business.
I have worked with Desi employers who have consistently run on best practices and completely adhering to law of the land. It can be done and the cost of doing that has to be factored into the business plan. If it is too costly as per your financial numbers, then you are not ready for it financially.
There is moral obligation too. Whenever you hire H-1s make sure most of them have dreams to get GC and settle down. Dont take risks in such a ways their dreams get shattered because of poor business practices. just to hire people dont run in your businesses on losses and in turn force yourself to shut down the business.
2011 hair Kelly Rowland with her
PDOCT05
08-28 09:54 AM
I have only seen just one or two cases so far with receipts I mean filed on Jul 2. I myself am a Jul 2 filer NSC filer with TSC approved 140 and haven't gotten anything yet....I also had the LUd on 7/28/07.
I have counted my self from diff forums and seen around 10+ cases who got their RN's.
I have counted my self from diff forums and seen around 10+ cases who got their RN's.
more...
akkakarla
10-08 04:54 PM
Nobody is opposing it..it should be based on years of exp in US..I applied mine in 2001 and got laid off and now I have a priority date of jan 2007..is that FAIR?
So you are laid off so what is the big deal? You should be able to negotiate somehow or escape layoffs by doing something or the other. There are people in my company who survived 6 layoffs. Your layoff is your problem and nothing is fair in the globalization.
So you are laid off so what is the big deal? You should be able to negotiate somehow or escape layoffs by doing something or the other. There are people in my company who survived 6 layoffs. Your layoff is your problem and nothing is fair in the globalization.
cjain
11-01 03:59 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^
what happens if one changes job after 180 days but the I-140 has not been approved?
what happens if one changes job after 180 days but the I-140 has not been approved?
more...
sanhari
07-19 04:08 PM
how to use the spillover is purely an USCIS decision. Only to use the spillover to avoid wastage is a law, which is already in place. Infact USCIS was not doing this top down approach on spill over few years ago, this is a new practice they are following since last Fiscal Year, so I strongly believe if Congressmen/women puts pressure/more request it can be changed to a fair application of visa spillover to benefit all that are in the queue for a long wait.
Let's please not start EB2 and EB3 fight again.
What I understand (and I am not a lawyer), is to change the current situation, law must be changed. Congressman can be helpful here, but only if there is going to be a change in law. A congressman can not simply call USCIS to change the way they do things. They must come up with legislative change that can then be followed by USCIS.
Now for any legislative change, there is resistance from CHC to let it pass as a small piece, rather they want more comprehensive approach. This issue is so complex and no political party or politicians are interested in opeing the can of worms.
Did you see O'Riely interview Sarah Palin?? She could not answer the question that was "yes or no" (I am not much impressed with her IQ any way...but that was one example).
Under current circumstances, the only two hopes for EB3 India are:
1. Port over to EB2.
2. Legislative change which effectively will mean immigration reform with good provisions for EB immigration.
What can we relay to our congressmen? (and we all should do it):
- Employment based immigration is good for the economic health of this country: it creates jobs, EB immigrants pay taxes, buy houses, they are educated etc.
- EB immigration is only a small fraction of immigration currently (I forgot the exact %, I believe it is 12%). And it carries "country cap" in the name of "diversity". However no such control exist for the majority of rest of immigration (88%) and so there is no diversity clause there....why is it only on EB immigration.
- EB immigrants pay a major portion of income to USCIS. While data is not availabe from USCIS, if we do the math (based on filing fees), it pays for > 50% of income of USCIS while it constitutes only 12% of their workload.
Bottom line:
- Increasing EB immigration can only bring prosperity to this country. If at all immigration needs to be curbed, it should be other areas where rest of 88% of immigration is occuring which may not be good for the country's economy.
- Increase the annual quota of EB immigration, remove the country cap, make it simple to attract more talent from the rest of the world.
- In fact anyone who completes masters of higher degree in STEM, should be oferred immigration benefit automatically.
Let's please not start EB2 and EB3 fight again.
What I understand (and I am not a lawyer), is to change the current situation, law must be changed. Congressman can be helpful here, but only if there is going to be a change in law. A congressman can not simply call USCIS to change the way they do things. They must come up with legislative change that can then be followed by USCIS.
Now for any legislative change, there is resistance from CHC to let it pass as a small piece, rather they want more comprehensive approach. This issue is so complex and no political party or politicians are interested in opeing the can of worms.
Did you see O'Riely interview Sarah Palin?? She could not answer the question that was "yes or no" (I am not much impressed with her IQ any way...but that was one example).
Under current circumstances, the only two hopes for EB3 India are:
1. Port over to EB2.
2. Legislative change which effectively will mean immigration reform with good provisions for EB immigration.
What can we relay to our congressmen? (and we all should do it):
- Employment based immigration is good for the economic health of this country: it creates jobs, EB immigrants pay taxes, buy houses, they are educated etc.
- EB immigration is only a small fraction of immigration currently (I forgot the exact %, I believe it is 12%). And it carries "country cap" in the name of "diversity". However no such control exist for the majority of rest of immigration (88%) and so there is no diversity clause there....why is it only on EB immigration.
- EB immigrants pay a major portion of income to USCIS. While data is not availabe from USCIS, if we do the math (based on filing fees), it pays for > 50% of income of USCIS while it constitutes only 12% of their workload.
Bottom line:
- Increasing EB immigration can only bring prosperity to this country. If at all immigration needs to be curbed, it should be other areas where rest of 88% of immigration is occuring which may not be good for the country's economy.
- Increase the annual quota of EB immigration, remove the country cap, make it simple to attract more talent from the rest of the world.
- In fact anyone who completes masters of higher degree in STEM, should be oferred immigration benefit automatically.
2010 hair Kelly Rowland#39;s new
reddog
07-06 07:39 PM
I still havent received the date when my app was sent(lawyer sent it)
more...
jsb
12-20 10:23 AM
Hi All,
I would like to know if I will get in trouble if I do this:
First, switch to a completely unrelated job after 180 days of I485 filing,
then, switch back to similar job when my priority date becomes current or close to becoming current.
Does USCIS check what other jobs have I done during the entire adjustee period or it is only concerned about the job at the time of adjudication?
Thanks in advance!
Prior to getting your GC, you can work
(i) On any job using EAD
(ii) Job with a specific employer (which may or may not be your sponsor) using H1, L1, etc.
Until you get your GC, you are supposed to be a guest worker. USCIS only cares if sponsoring employer (or any other employer after 180 days of AOS pending) has a job offer for you on your getting GC.
If you are already working with the employer (prior to or at the time of getting GC) where you would work AFTER getting your GC, it only re-enforces your and your employers intentions.
So, in brief answer to your question is, no you will not be in trouble, as long as sponsoring employer (or any other employer after 180 days) is willing to confirm their intentions of hiring you if and when USCIS asks for it.
You can actually switch your job even prior to 180 days of filings AOS without impacting your case. You need not even have worked at all for the sponsoring emloyer. USCIS memos clarify these issues in detail.
I would like to know if I will get in trouble if I do this:
First, switch to a completely unrelated job after 180 days of I485 filing,
then, switch back to similar job when my priority date becomes current or close to becoming current.
Does USCIS check what other jobs have I done during the entire adjustee period or it is only concerned about the job at the time of adjudication?
Thanks in advance!
Prior to getting your GC, you can work
(i) On any job using EAD
(ii) Job with a specific employer (which may or may not be your sponsor) using H1, L1, etc.
Until you get your GC, you are supposed to be a guest worker. USCIS only cares if sponsoring employer (or any other employer after 180 days of AOS pending) has a job offer for you on your getting GC.
If you are already working with the employer (prior to or at the time of getting GC) where you would work AFTER getting your GC, it only re-enforces your and your employers intentions.
So, in brief answer to your question is, no you will not be in trouble, as long as sponsoring employer (or any other employer after 180 days) is willing to confirm their intentions of hiring you if and when USCIS asks for it.
You can actually switch your job even prior to 180 days of filings AOS without impacting your case. You need not even have worked at all for the sponsoring emloyer. USCIS memos clarify these issues in detail.
hair hair Kelly Rowland Hairstyles
a.j.2048
02-09 08:13 PM
Terrorists are banned from visiting USA.
Narenda Modi has been banned from visiting USA.
You do the reasoning :D
Ah, but terrorists targetting India are welcome in the USA. Musharraf is welcome to visit and Headley was welcome until he turned against the Europeans. Now see what Indian politicians are welcome in USA with reference to the original comment :p
Narenda Modi has been banned from visiting USA.
You do the reasoning :D
Ah, but terrorists targetting India are welcome in the USA. Musharraf is welcome to visit and Headley was welcome until he turned against the Europeans. Now see what Indian politicians are welcome in USA with reference to the original comment :p
more...
new_horizon
11-17 10:32 PM
Done. Also posted message to the MI IV chapter.
hot kelly rowland motivation album
metroparknj
02-15 03:40 PM
Contributed $100.
Receipt number for this payment is: 1383-9688-0638-3124
Receipt number for this payment is: 1383-9688-0638-3124
more...
house 2010 kelly rowland hair kelly
pappu
07-21 10:08 AM
IV will have more money to do advocacy events like the one that just happened. More media spending, more coverage.
This is correct. You not only need funds but also lot of warm sweaty bodies. !!
We need many people working everyday continuously over a period of time. It cannot be --"As and when I get time, i will try. Or I am already contributing by posting ideas on the forum. Or I am EB2 and my date will be current soon so I do not really care, I am not desperate for green card so do not bother me by contacting me. Or IV is for EB2 and I am EB3. Or IV is for Indians and I am ROW." Stop thinking IV just a forum like other forums of lawyers or trackers where the aim is to make money from the long wait and run a business. Here we want to fix the problem so that we no longer need Immigration Voice and all of us can move on in our lives and professional careers.
There have been times when we evaluated our decision of continuing this work after hearing lot of negative comments from our community or seeing lack of participation. A recent proof is the recent funding drive for advocacy day and our thousands of phone calls to members asking them to come to DC. It is not easy to organize any event and it takes lot of planning and funds. None of the members who used to write negative posts after every visa bulletin urging IV to do an event in DC came to DC event or even contributed. Many in the IV team are still involved with this effort even after getting their greencards only to succeed in what we all started out to do together. The commitment needs to be there so that many people can help out even during the day time. One option is for members to have their homemaker spouses volunteer for IV work. We have so many ideas we can work on if there are more sincere people who commit to helping out. Funds are also important. AILA has a budget of 13 million dollars/yr and they can do a lot in terms of advocacy, filing lawsuits, talking with offices on regular basis, organizing conferences each year where lawyers pay to hear USCIS officials, media outreach, meeting other organizations etc etc . They have people in DC to go and meet offices on daily basis. Likewise anti-immigrants too have millions of dollar budgets. You do not see their forums filled with posts of infighting. suspicion and baseless arguments that we have. Many of our posts do not even project us as well educated and mature individuals. We can blame whoever we want-- employers, government, lawyers, karma.... but the real reason why this retrogression problem still exists is because all of us in the community have allowed it to exist. Only we are responsible for the success and failure of our efforts. Nothing is impossible if we have strength and resolve to advocate our issues.
This is correct. You not only need funds but also lot of warm sweaty bodies. !!
We need many people working everyday continuously over a period of time. It cannot be --"As and when I get time, i will try. Or I am already contributing by posting ideas on the forum. Or I am EB2 and my date will be current soon so I do not really care, I am not desperate for green card so do not bother me by contacting me. Or IV is for EB2 and I am EB3. Or IV is for Indians and I am ROW." Stop thinking IV just a forum like other forums of lawyers or trackers where the aim is to make money from the long wait and run a business. Here we want to fix the problem so that we no longer need Immigration Voice and all of us can move on in our lives and professional careers.
There have been times when we evaluated our decision of continuing this work after hearing lot of negative comments from our community or seeing lack of participation. A recent proof is the recent funding drive for advocacy day and our thousands of phone calls to members asking them to come to DC. It is not easy to organize any event and it takes lot of planning and funds. None of the members who used to write negative posts after every visa bulletin urging IV to do an event in DC came to DC event or even contributed. Many in the IV team are still involved with this effort even after getting their greencards only to succeed in what we all started out to do together. The commitment needs to be there so that many people can help out even during the day time. One option is for members to have their homemaker spouses volunteer for IV work. We have so many ideas we can work on if there are more sincere people who commit to helping out. Funds are also important. AILA has a budget of 13 million dollars/yr and they can do a lot in terms of advocacy, filing lawsuits, talking with offices on regular basis, organizing conferences each year where lawyers pay to hear USCIS officials, media outreach, meeting other organizations etc etc . They have people in DC to go and meet offices on daily basis. Likewise anti-immigrants too have millions of dollar budgets. You do not see their forums filled with posts of infighting. suspicion and baseless arguments that we have. Many of our posts do not even project us as well educated and mature individuals. We can blame whoever we want-- employers, government, lawyers, karma.... but the real reason why this retrogression problem still exists is because all of us in the community have allowed it to exist. Only we are responsible for the success and failure of our efforts. Nothing is impossible if we have strength and resolve to advocate our issues.
tattoo hair Kelly Rowland What A
feedfront
08-26 01:18 PM
Is your case pending at TSC?
It is pending @TSC after transferred from NSC.
It is pending @TSC after transferred from NSC.
more...
pictures kelly rowland 2011 album cover
pappu
02-25 12:42 PM
Over the past 4 years, I have contributed to IV several times. I was also a monthly subscriber of $20 for over a year until my credit card expired and the payments stopped.
What pains me is that inspite of several requests, i have not been granted access to donor forms. Perhaps there is a waiting list for donor access or my priority date is not current for the same.:confused:
I will try my best to make it to DC events, but please accept my small contribution in case i am unable to make the trip.
Transaction ID # 44Y412702G964994U date 2/25/2011 $25. monthly contribution for 6 months.
Thanks for your contributions. We checked our records and did not receive any such request from you. Your past recurring contributions were in 2007 and 2008 when we did not have any donor forums. The phone number in your profile is incorrect. Could you please update your profile for us to reach out to you.
What pains me is that inspite of several requests, i have not been granted access to donor forms. Perhaps there is a waiting list for donor access or my priority date is not current for the same.:confused:
I will try my best to make it to DC events, but please accept my small contribution in case i am unable to make the trip.
Transaction ID # 44Y412702G964994U date 2/25/2011 $25. monthly contribution for 6 months.
Thanks for your contributions. We checked our records and did not receive any such request from you. Your past recurring contributions were in 2007 and 2008 when we did not have any donor forums. The phone number in your profile is incorrect. Could you please update your profile for us to reach out to you.
dresses How to Get the Look: Kelly#39;s
Macaca
07-08 07:57 PM
Condi's statement
Dr. RICE: Well, this was a case in which for--at a certain point in time, we'd not filled the entire quota for these special immigrant visas. And made an announcement of that. But when they were filled, we had to cut it off at that point. There's a ceiling that's set every year and when that ceiling was reached, then we couldn't issue the visas any longer.
From New York Times Editorial
On Monday, the State Department announced that all 140,000 employment-based green cards had been used and no applications would be accepted.
Citizenship and Immigration Services, the definition of a hangdog bureaucracy, says the law forbids it to accept the applications.
Based on the above, I undersand that there is a law that forbids acceptance of AOS applications when the 140K quota is exhausted.
The following is AILA's response in New York Times Editorial.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association says this interpretation is rubbish.
I am very curious to see the immigration law that AILA calls rubish and is ignoring while filing the class action suite!
Dr. RICE: Well, this was a case in which for--at a certain point in time, we'd not filled the entire quota for these special immigrant visas. And made an announcement of that. But when they were filled, we had to cut it off at that point. There's a ceiling that's set every year and when that ceiling was reached, then we couldn't issue the visas any longer.
From New York Times Editorial
On Monday, the State Department announced that all 140,000 employment-based green cards had been used and no applications would be accepted.
Citizenship and Immigration Services, the definition of a hangdog bureaucracy, says the law forbids it to accept the applications.
Based on the above, I undersand that there is a law that forbids acceptance of AOS applications when the 140K quota is exhausted.
The following is AILA's response in New York Times Editorial.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association says this interpretation is rubbish.
I am very curious to see the immigration law that AILA calls rubish and is ignoring while filing the class action suite!
more...
makeup hair New Music: Kelly Rowland
floridasun
02-03 08:47 PM
Well, culture has tremendous impact on people. Looking at the state of our country, what have we become in last 63+ years? Major percentage of population still live under poor living conditions. We are one of the most corrupted countries in the world. Some people want to live in denial. Boasting about greatness that doesn't exist is of no use to the current and future generations. We have to make our country great by changing the conditions. In order to do that, first we need to acknowledge that there are serioous issues. Unless we all unitedly agree that the conditions are pathetic and will worsen, nothing is going to change.
well said. I totally agree that the conditions in India - call it culture or problems, are pathetic. after 63+ years, rich have become filthy richer and still majority have poor quality of life. just see how much black money these filthy rich ppl hoarded in swiss banks. sure, India has great ancient history/achievements; to me, present and forseeable future matters most because that is the time I am alive ! I came to this Country on a Student Visa - This Country gave me decent paying job, much much better quality of life, low cost of living, Freedom of expression/speech, good amount of free time to invest for my personal interests.
well said. I totally agree that the conditions in India - call it culture or problems, are pathetic. after 63+ years, rich have become filthy richer and still majority have poor quality of life. just see how much black money these filthy rich ppl hoarded in swiss banks. sure, India has great ancient history/achievements; to me, present and forseeable future matters most because that is the time I am alive ! I came to this Country on a Student Visa - This Country gave me decent paying job, much much better quality of life, low cost of living, Freedom of expression/speech, good amount of free time to invest for my personal interests.
girlfriend hair Kelly Rowland New 2010
krustycat
10-01 01:41 PM
I'm still waiting.
Recd. by F. Heinauer at 11:07 AM on July 9... checks not cashed
Recd. by F. Heinauer at 11:07 AM on July 9... checks not cashed
hairstyles hair Kelly Rowland Unveils #39
fightnow
07-06 04:14 PM
Legal Immigrants Protest at San Jose on July 7
Location: City Hall
200 E Santa Clara St
San Jose, CA Yahoo Google Map
When: From Sat Jul 07, 2007 11:00 am to Sat Jul 07, 2007 2:30 pm
11:00 AM: Meet at San Jose City Hall (200 E Santa Clara St, meter and paid
parking lot)
11:30 AM: Go to the square in front of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Library (
150 E San Fernando St)
12:30 PM: Walk towards 635 N 1st St through S 4th St, E San Carlos St,
Markety Street and N 1St St.
1:15 PM: Arrive at 635 N 1st St and stay till 2:00 PM
2:30 PM: back to City Hall
Rule #1. Abide by law
Rule #2. Stay on sidewalks.
Rule #3. Follow traffic rules, show courtesy to other pedestrians. Do not
block building entrances
Rule #4. It might help if you dress professionally. Get your best attire out, suit or blazer and tie, and similar business attire if you're a lady.(Newly added by sertasheep)
What to bring: plenty of water, snack, sunblock and your SIGNS.
See google map for the route:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&hl=en&geocode=&saddr=200+E+Santa+Clara+St,+San+Jose,+CA&daddr=S+4th+St+%4037.337490,+-121.887320+to%3A150+E+San+Fernando+St,+san+jose,+c a+to%3AS+4th+St+%4037.332980,+-121.883940+to%3AS+Market+St+%4037.331030,+-121.888360+to%3A37.333859,-121.890907+to%3AN+Market+St+%4037.338380,+-121.894240+to%3AW+St+James+St+%4037.339080,+-121.892780+to%3A635+N+1st+St,+San+Jose,+CA+to%3A20 0+E+Santa+Clara+St+San+Jose,+CA+95113&mrcr=4,5&mrsp=5&sz=15&mra=dme&sll=37.335736,-121.886315&sspn=0.015764,0.039911&ie=UTF8&z=15&om=1
Disclaimer: Event leaders take no responsibility and will not be held
responsible for any injuries or accidents that may occur during the
posted events. It is your responsibility to abide by law. By joining
this event, you are taking responsibility for your own safety and well-being.
UPDATE FROM IV CORE :
Bay area residents:
Please begin the process of getting permit from the city to do this in the time-frame and route mentioned. But please move the date to either saturday July 14th or July 21st.
People wont be able to come tommorow so this must be done July 14th or July 21. Also, the rally should not be about just the July bulletin. It should be about backlogs and numerical caps as the root cause of this mess.
But do get city permit for around 100 people (that's what I expect will show up in Bay area based on past experience with Gutierrez rally).
Let's get some attention from CEOs of Oracle, Cisco, Sun and Google and also some attention from Rep. Zoe Lofgren and Nancy Pelosi. There is NO better place than Bay area to do this, especially San Jose.
Let's do this.
Location: City Hall
200 E Santa Clara St
San Jose, CA Yahoo Google Map
When: From Sat Jul 07, 2007 11:00 am to Sat Jul 07, 2007 2:30 pm
11:00 AM: Meet at San Jose City Hall (200 E Santa Clara St, meter and paid
parking lot)
11:30 AM: Go to the square in front of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Library (
150 E San Fernando St)
12:30 PM: Walk towards 635 N 1st St through S 4th St, E San Carlos St,
Markety Street and N 1St St.
1:15 PM: Arrive at 635 N 1st St and stay till 2:00 PM
2:30 PM: back to City Hall
Rule #1. Abide by law
Rule #2. Stay on sidewalks.
Rule #3. Follow traffic rules, show courtesy to other pedestrians. Do not
block building entrances
Rule #4. It might help if you dress professionally. Get your best attire out, suit or blazer and tie, and similar business attire if you're a lady.(Newly added by sertasheep)
What to bring: plenty of water, snack, sunblock and your SIGNS.
See google map for the route:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&hl=en&geocode=&saddr=200+E+Santa+Clara+St,+San+Jose,+CA&daddr=S+4th+St+%4037.337490,+-121.887320+to%3A150+E+San+Fernando+St,+san+jose,+c a+to%3AS+4th+St+%4037.332980,+-121.883940+to%3AS+Market+St+%4037.331030,+-121.888360+to%3A37.333859,-121.890907+to%3AN+Market+St+%4037.338380,+-121.894240+to%3AW+St+James+St+%4037.339080,+-121.892780+to%3A635+N+1st+St,+San+Jose,+CA+to%3A20 0+E+Santa+Clara+St+San+Jose,+CA+95113&mrcr=4,5&mrsp=5&sz=15&mra=dme&sll=37.335736,-121.886315&sspn=0.015764,0.039911&ie=UTF8&z=15&om=1
Disclaimer: Event leaders take no responsibility and will not be held
responsible for any injuries or accidents that may occur during the
posted events. It is your responsibility to abide by law. By joining
this event, you are taking responsibility for your own safety and well-being.
UPDATE FROM IV CORE :
Bay area residents:
Please begin the process of getting permit from the city to do this in the time-frame and route mentioned. But please move the date to either saturday July 14th or July 21st.
People wont be able to come tommorow so this must be done July 14th or July 21. Also, the rally should not be about just the July bulletin. It should be about backlogs and numerical caps as the root cause of this mess.
But do get city permit for around 100 people (that's what I expect will show up in Bay area based on past experience with Gutierrez rally).
Let's get some attention from CEOs of Oracle, Cisco, Sun and Google and also some attention from Rep. Zoe Lofgren and Nancy Pelosi. There is NO better place than Bay area to do this, especially San Jose.
Let's do this.
Canadian_Dream
07-08 09:07 PM
Macaca:
The anticipated demand (that is calculated based on Pending Applications, New Applications that might become approvable and plethora of other factors including guess work) on Oct 1 2005/Oct 1 2006 was MUCH higher than 140,000 that was available for the entire year. Infact you have to break 140,000 into four quarters and apply contry quota (7%) to it since EB-3 ROW was not current on these dates. Thus it was hardly a surprise that India and China and EB-3 ROW remained retrogress on these dates.
Now fast forward to June 2007, there were 40,000 visa available in that last quarter and EB-3 ROW was in no position to consume that many that means spillover would come to India and China EB3/EB3 or else visa would be wasted in big numbers. The solution was to increase the supply and hence everything was current overnight. Until USCIS came in to spoil the party. They didn't do it in any simple way instead they choose the route of complete exhashtion and hence shutting the door.
Bottom line is: Unless demand for EB-3 ROW subsides (or it becomes current leaving substantial numbers for spillover) India EB-2 will always be cap subjected to 3200 or so visas every year. The sad part is catching up with the demand for EB-3 ROW is a moving target and thus EB-2 India might NEVER qualify for spillovers. I hope I am proved wrong by someone who has more insight.
140K GCs were available on Oct 1 2005 and Oct 2006: categories were not current.
< 40K GCs were available on June 12 2007: all categories were current.
If there is a law to prevent acceptance of ALL AOS's on Oct 1 (when 140K GCs are available) then that law was violated on June 12 2007.
If there is no law to prevent acceptance of AOS's on June 12 (when < 40K GCs were available) then all categories should have been current on Oct 1 2005 and Oct 1 2006.
The anticipated demand (that is calculated based on Pending Applications, New Applications that might become approvable and plethora of other factors including guess work) on Oct 1 2005/Oct 1 2006 was MUCH higher than 140,000 that was available for the entire year. Infact you have to break 140,000 into four quarters and apply contry quota (7%) to it since EB-3 ROW was not current on these dates. Thus it was hardly a surprise that India and China and EB-3 ROW remained retrogress on these dates.
Now fast forward to June 2007, there were 40,000 visa available in that last quarter and EB-3 ROW was in no position to consume that many that means spillover would come to India and China EB3/EB3 or else visa would be wasted in big numbers. The solution was to increase the supply and hence everything was current overnight. Until USCIS came in to spoil the party. They didn't do it in any simple way instead they choose the route of complete exhashtion and hence shutting the door.
Bottom line is: Unless demand for EB-3 ROW subsides (or it becomes current leaving substantial numbers for spillover) India EB-2 will always be cap subjected to 3200 or so visas every year. The sad part is catching up with the demand for EB-3 ROW is a moving target and thus EB-2 India might NEVER qualify for spillovers. I hope I am proved wrong by someone who has more insight.
140K GCs were available on Oct 1 2005 and Oct 2006: categories were not current.
< 40K GCs were available on June 12 2007: all categories were current.
If there is a law to prevent acceptance of ALL AOS's on Oct 1 (when 140K GCs are available) then that law was violated on June 12 2007.
If there is no law to prevent acceptance of AOS's on June 12 (when < 40K GCs were available) then all categories should have been current on Oct 1 2005 and Oct 1 2006.
andycool
08-24 05:58 PM
Got the CPO email at 11 PST today (8/24) !!!
Priority Date: Feb 12, 2006
EB2 India, NSC
I opened an SR on 8/9 but I haven't received any response to it. I didn't do anything else.
A huge Thanks to IV and everyone here - you kept the hopes up.
I'll contribute more as soon as I get my head out of the clouds :)
Thanks and Good luck!
Got CPO today..
Priority Date: Feb 21, 2006
EB2 India, NSC
Thanks every one
Priority Date: Feb 12, 2006
EB2 India, NSC
I opened an SR on 8/9 but I haven't received any response to it. I didn't do anything else.
A huge Thanks to IV and everyone here - you kept the hopes up.
I'll contribute more as soon as I get my head out of the clouds :)
Thanks and Good luck!
Got CPO today..
Priority Date: Feb 21, 2006
EB2 India, NSC
Thanks every one
No comments:
Post a Comment