sachug22
10-07 05:00 PM
Some additional assumption in the calculations
China gets its share of EB2 numbers (by priority date)
95% cases are approved and none are delayed
EB3 to EB2 porting and cross-changeability ignored (they counter each other)
I-485 filled in last few months will not be approved (processing delays)
DOS/CIS are efficient and follow rules.
China gets its share of EB2 numbers (by priority date)
95% cases are approved and none are delayed
EB3 to EB2 porting and cross-changeability ignored (they counter each other)
I-485 filled in last few months will not be approved (processing delays)
DOS/CIS are efficient and follow rules.
wallpaper Is David Duchovny#39;s wife
hydboy77
06-04 01:36 PM
As JSB pointed out what you are asking already exists with an EAD, 180 days after filing 485 you can leave your current employer and join a new company as long as it is a same\semilar job. The problem with this same or semilar job is it is a ticking time bomb, the day USCIS decides to go after EAD they can have a restrictive interpretation of same and semilar job and deny your 485 or they can keep sending you employment verification letter rfe every couple of months. I am not being paranioid, for example even though AC 21 clearly states that once 180 days have passed since the 485 has been applied, the employee can join a new job and even if the previous employer has revoked the approved 140 it should not effect the 485 petition, but USCIS is not following this law and blindly sending 485 denial notices to applicants whose approved i140 was revoked by previous employer. Who knows what sort of abuse will USCIS resort to in the future against EAD.
To prevent this we should work towards an administrative fix that once the 485 application is pre adjudicated the applicant should be left alone and not issed any Employment verification letter rfe, or semilar\same job restrictions if they are back logged because of country quota and face multiple year wait.
Instead of Interim GC we should demand that once Labor and I-140 is approved remove the restriction wherein a person has to stay in same job type until GC approved in other words allow the person to take any job while I-485 is pending. This will be a big benefit and logically makes sense. If this happens than GC wait will not pigeon hole people's career in one job and allow them to grow and contribute to economy.
To prevent this we should work towards an administrative fix that once the 485 application is pre adjudicated the applicant should be left alone and not issed any Employment verification letter rfe, or semilar\same job restrictions if they are back logged because of country quota and face multiple year wait.
Instead of Interim GC we should demand that once Labor and I-140 is approved remove the restriction wherein a person has to stay in same job type until GC approved in other words allow the person to take any job while I-485 is pending. This will be a big benefit and logically makes sense. If this happens than GC wait will not pigeon hole people's career in one job and allow them to grow and contribute to economy.
illusions
05-18 02:09 PM
Well,
Panini's profile is "WRONG" on this thread too: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=237356&postcount=1
More, It is wrong to put fake data. All I suggested is that it has some impact on his credibility and his reaction was very strong. I agree with his post contents and second them too! Not comfortable with someone roaming around with fake profile - keep in mind profile is the same whether it is immigration or non-immigration related thread.
You tell me the reason you think why Panini put wrong profile data. OK, you don't know, then tell me why you put correct profile information? You will get your answer.
Marphad, i didn't say that it's wrong or right, you implied he is anti immigrant, spreading rumors and writing un-necessary posts, i just failed to see how you concluded all that just by looking at his profile ? And point taken after you replied.
And isn't the content in his profile all default content (correct me if i'm wrong) when the tracker was introduced, even i had a changeability as US. And i'm not trying to defend him, but you seem to assume it's fake. And the way i see it, it is incomplete.
If one has a fake profile do you really think he will make it so obvious ? it would resemble more accurate data than the most obvious.
And i do know the profile carries on to a on-related immi thread, no doubts there, except it only makes sense looking and analyzing it when related to an immi issue, unless you are looking for something else.
Panini's profile is "WRONG" on this thread too: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=237356&postcount=1
More, It is wrong to put fake data. All I suggested is that it has some impact on his credibility and his reaction was very strong. I agree with his post contents and second them too! Not comfortable with someone roaming around with fake profile - keep in mind profile is the same whether it is immigration or non-immigration related thread.
You tell me the reason you think why Panini put wrong profile data. OK, you don't know, then tell me why you put correct profile information? You will get your answer.
Marphad, i didn't say that it's wrong or right, you implied he is anti immigrant, spreading rumors and writing un-necessary posts, i just failed to see how you concluded all that just by looking at his profile ? And point taken after you replied.
And isn't the content in his profile all default content (correct me if i'm wrong) when the tracker was introduced, even i had a changeability as US. And i'm not trying to defend him, but you seem to assume it's fake. And the way i see it, it is incomplete.
If one has a fake profile do you really think he will make it so obvious ? it would resemble more accurate data than the most obvious.
And i do know the profile carries on to a on-related immi thread, no doubts there, except it only makes sense looking and analyzing it when related to an immi issue, unless you are looking for something else.
2011 Duchovny and his actress wife
snram4
01-22 05:48 PM
That is always one of the option for me. You do not need to tell that. Similarly everyone has the same choice. If some thing does not work out in USA anyone can find an excellent opportunity in India. Not just, if anyone like to go to India they can go anytime. No need to worry about GC or H1b issues
Then please pack your bags and leave the country in the next flight.
Then please pack your bags and leave the country in the next flight.
more...
brahmam
09-17 01:27 AM
Here are the authentic numbers from FLCDataCenter.com (http://flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx)
My analysis from those mdb files: (they are tricky because the data is for FY2005 while the priority date calculations we are doing are for the calendar year)
calendar year 2005 ( received date between 3/19/2005 - 12/31/2005) = 8645
year 2006 (rcv date between 1/1/2006 - 9/27/2006) = 15008
after this it gets bad since the data has no receipt date, only certified date. my estimate is around 12000 for those 3 months of 2006.(total number of certified PERMs between 10/2/2006 - 03/31/2007 = 13873)
total PERM approvals with PD between march 2005 and Dec 2006 ~ 37000
If EB2 is 50%, we are talking ~19000, with an avg of 2.5 GCs per PERM, we need 47,500 GCs between Mar 05 and Jan 07.
Good luck every one :(:D:mad:
My analysis from those mdb files: (they are tricky because the data is for FY2005 while the priority date calculations we are doing are for the calendar year)
calendar year 2005 ( received date between 3/19/2005 - 12/31/2005) = 8645
year 2006 (rcv date between 1/1/2006 - 9/27/2006) = 15008
after this it gets bad since the data has no receipt date, only certified date. my estimate is around 12000 for those 3 months of 2006.(total number of certified PERMs between 10/2/2006 - 03/31/2007 = 13873)
total PERM approvals with PD between march 2005 and Dec 2006 ~ 37000
If EB2 is 50%, we are talking ~19000, with an avg of 2.5 GCs per PERM, we need 47,500 GCs between Mar 05 and Jan 07.
Good luck every one :(:D:mad:
gc_chahiye
06-28 08:21 PM
Read this memo:
http://bibdaily.com/pdfs/6-21-07%20AILA%20memo%20to%20Atyes%20&%20Neufeld.pdf
USCIS has indeed broken the law by doing what it did this month.
It has gone against what they used to do in the past, and they have not published this new policy in a place where stakeholders have a say (or atleast get to know in advance that the policy is changing). Valid complaints. But I dont think AILA is saying they broke the law. And thats scary.
http://bibdaily.com/pdfs/6-21-07%20AILA%20memo%20to%20Atyes%20&%20Neufeld.pdf
USCIS has indeed broken the law by doing what it did this month.
It has gone against what they used to do in the past, and they have not published this new policy in a place where stakeholders have a say (or atleast get to know in advance that the policy is changing). Valid complaints. But I dont think AILA is saying they broke the law. And thats scary.
more...
Caliber
09-04 01:27 PM
I am not any of these. I bet you guys .. $million
Go to your postings in this thread and read what you wrote in "Brain Damage". You wanted to distribute sweets??? How do you feel when YS Jagan grabs what you have in your village? You were supporting them so much, why not advice them to return 10,000 acres of land that he grabbed for Brahmani Steels? Jesus Christ killed YSR, otherwise, they would have grabbed all your village. Be happy, Jesus took him away.
Go to your postings in this thread and read what you wrote in "Brain Damage". You wanted to distribute sweets??? How do you feel when YS Jagan grabs what you have in your village? You were supporting them so much, why not advice them to return 10,000 acres of land that he grabbed for Brahmani Steels? Jesus Christ killed YSR, otherwise, they would have grabbed all your village. Be happy, Jesus took him away.
2010 David Duchovny Rehabbing For
unitednations
02-17 11:47 AM
This argument does not have much merit. You are confusing diversity with skills - if those friends, cousins etc. meet the job requirements, there is no issue in hiring them for open positions. You are asking us to believe that a country that does not believe in affirmative action in the job market and depends on voluntary action by employers to enhance diversity cares about any of this when it comes to immigration.
No, the intention behind the 7% limit is to protect levels of European immigration and address racist fears of immigration from the 3rd world. This was also the intent behind the diversity lottery - notice the consternation that the diverisity lottery is primarily benefitting non-Europeans.
If you go to the earliest visa bulletins posted on department of state web-site; you will see that Dominican Republic EB3 was retrogressed at one point. Think about that. Dominican Republic; how small is that country. Reason it was retrogressed is probably everyone was getting everyone of their relatives, etc., to come to USA through employment base. The country quota in my mind is designed to prevent such abuses of people making an end run and designing systems to get people from certain countries here.
There is a department of labor precedent court case where they can deny a labor if you are sponsoring a relative or a "close friend". The premise being that if there is a close relationship then the job cannot be truly open to Americans. I have seen USCIS also use this in a case where they figured out that CEO of the company was sponsoring his brother through employment base. This particular case, really opened up my eyes to how EB immigration was working and I started to see things a little bit better from USCIS point of view. Up to this point I thought everyone who was getting EB greencard or H-1b was highly specialized and it was a very difficult thing to do. Company I worked with had a decent number of people on H-1b at the entry level. It was all nationalities and they were from F-1. However,when it came time to sponsor them for greencard, they wouldn't do it because they couldn't satify themselves that no American was available for the job.
In this past year, I have seen USCIS get really, really difficult with h-1b's and greencards. The backlog labors are also getting a tough time. USCIS, department of state, backlog reduction center is treating the consulting companies as temporary staffing companies. There is a whole bunch of requriements that these various agencies are setting and many companies are withdrawing or deciding to not respond to these queries. When this starts happening behind the scenes then it doesn't bode well for "friendly" type immigration policies.
Last year; when cybersoftech situation happened where he filed 350 I-140's, falsified labors; falsified his tax returns, etc., and all the cases were denied or revoked; many of the candidates thought they had been cheated and that USCIS/senators/congressmen were going to make accomodations for them. Nothing like this happened; they were calling themselves "victims" and thought they should get honorary greencard because of what they had been through.
From USCIS/DOL point of view it gave them a case study of the manipulations of the system and how everything worked. Now; they are starting to hold companies to a very high standard and looking for these types of tendenices/trends. If a company has too many H-1b's filed, too many I-140's then they are looking at it as if the company is set up for immigration purpose.
One thing that people shouldn't lose sight of is that a company does not need to sponsor you for a greencard. They could fire you or lay you off at any time. All they need to do is buy you a plane ticket home. All these arguments that people have about spouse not being able to work, career stagnation, etc., would still be arguments if you stayed here on H-1b for six years. if company wasn't going to sponsor you for greencard then these arguments would still apply that you are using. However, would anyone listen if a company didn't want to sponsor you. Why is this relevant? A company is sponsoring you but they are not very interested in lobbying for you. If a company wants you on a permanent basis but it is taking too long then you would think they would lobby for you. They are the petitioner.
Now; companies want more H-1b's. in fact they really don't want it an increase. What is happening is that companies are filing H-1b's six months in advance for jobs they do not have. Ask people who go for visa stamping initially, how difficult it is for company to get them a visa without bull------- about it.
You have the traditional L-1 companies who are filing h-1b's and L-1's because of the no body shopping rule. Depending on the project, bill rates, etc., they determine whether a person will come on h-1 or l-1. it is like they are reserving the right ahead of time depending on their needs. The traditional American company can only get fresh quota cases if they have people on OPT working there. However, if they find a candidate sometime in October they cannot file an H-1b for them. So what is the solution? Increase the cap or make it extremely difficult to get H-1b visa approved and teach everyone a lesson.
This is not as simple as everyone may think it is. There are a lot of things happening behind the scense where there is a "tightening" of approvals and visas.
Now; some people may not like this posting. However; you need to have as much information as possible in order to strategize and talk to various decision makers. Some of them might sit there and listen to you but then when they start studying the situation they might come to know what I have posted here. if/when quota increases, it will probably be because when the intial 140,000 was set; the economy was at a different stage, population was at a different stage. The increase would probably just follow market realities (population is more then what it was when 140,000 was set and we need to adjust it accordingly).
No, the intention behind the 7% limit is to protect levels of European immigration and address racist fears of immigration from the 3rd world. This was also the intent behind the diversity lottery - notice the consternation that the diverisity lottery is primarily benefitting non-Europeans.
If you go to the earliest visa bulletins posted on department of state web-site; you will see that Dominican Republic EB3 was retrogressed at one point. Think about that. Dominican Republic; how small is that country. Reason it was retrogressed is probably everyone was getting everyone of their relatives, etc., to come to USA through employment base. The country quota in my mind is designed to prevent such abuses of people making an end run and designing systems to get people from certain countries here.
There is a department of labor precedent court case where they can deny a labor if you are sponsoring a relative or a "close friend". The premise being that if there is a close relationship then the job cannot be truly open to Americans. I have seen USCIS also use this in a case where they figured out that CEO of the company was sponsoring his brother through employment base. This particular case, really opened up my eyes to how EB immigration was working and I started to see things a little bit better from USCIS point of view. Up to this point I thought everyone who was getting EB greencard or H-1b was highly specialized and it was a very difficult thing to do. Company I worked with had a decent number of people on H-1b at the entry level. It was all nationalities and they were from F-1. However,when it came time to sponsor them for greencard, they wouldn't do it because they couldn't satify themselves that no American was available for the job.
In this past year, I have seen USCIS get really, really difficult with h-1b's and greencards. The backlog labors are also getting a tough time. USCIS, department of state, backlog reduction center is treating the consulting companies as temporary staffing companies. There is a whole bunch of requriements that these various agencies are setting and many companies are withdrawing or deciding to not respond to these queries. When this starts happening behind the scenes then it doesn't bode well for "friendly" type immigration policies.
Last year; when cybersoftech situation happened where he filed 350 I-140's, falsified labors; falsified his tax returns, etc., and all the cases were denied or revoked; many of the candidates thought they had been cheated and that USCIS/senators/congressmen were going to make accomodations for them. Nothing like this happened; they were calling themselves "victims" and thought they should get honorary greencard because of what they had been through.
From USCIS/DOL point of view it gave them a case study of the manipulations of the system and how everything worked. Now; they are starting to hold companies to a very high standard and looking for these types of tendenices/trends. If a company has too many H-1b's filed, too many I-140's then they are looking at it as if the company is set up for immigration purpose.
One thing that people shouldn't lose sight of is that a company does not need to sponsor you for a greencard. They could fire you or lay you off at any time. All they need to do is buy you a plane ticket home. All these arguments that people have about spouse not being able to work, career stagnation, etc., would still be arguments if you stayed here on H-1b for six years. if company wasn't going to sponsor you for greencard then these arguments would still apply that you are using. However, would anyone listen if a company didn't want to sponsor you. Why is this relevant? A company is sponsoring you but they are not very interested in lobbying for you. If a company wants you on a permanent basis but it is taking too long then you would think they would lobby for you. They are the petitioner.
Now; companies want more H-1b's. in fact they really don't want it an increase. What is happening is that companies are filing H-1b's six months in advance for jobs they do not have. Ask people who go for visa stamping initially, how difficult it is for company to get them a visa without bull------- about it.
You have the traditional L-1 companies who are filing h-1b's and L-1's because of the no body shopping rule. Depending on the project, bill rates, etc., they determine whether a person will come on h-1 or l-1. it is like they are reserving the right ahead of time depending on their needs. The traditional American company can only get fresh quota cases if they have people on OPT working there. However, if they find a candidate sometime in October they cannot file an H-1b for them. So what is the solution? Increase the cap or make it extremely difficult to get H-1b visa approved and teach everyone a lesson.
This is not as simple as everyone may think it is. There are a lot of things happening behind the scense where there is a "tightening" of approvals and visas.
Now; some people may not like this posting. However; you need to have as much information as possible in order to strategize and talk to various decision makers. Some of them might sit there and listen to you but then when they start studying the situation they might come to know what I have posted here. if/when quota increases, it will probably be because when the intial 140,000 was set; the economy was at a different stage, population was at a different stage. The increase would probably just follow market realities (population is more then what it was when 140,000 was set and we need to adjust it accordingly).
more...
voldemar
02-13 12:25 PM
And how do you support that argument please ?
It's in the law. Read INA before going to bed.
It's in the law. Read INA before going to bed.
hair David Duchovny opens up about
485Mbe4001
05-29 02:31 PM
:) he did say hope is on the way...but forgot to say which way or he was try to say what would hope's tombstone read...
Here lies HOPE...it was IN the WAY :rolleyes:
to the others who are bitching and moaning about EB1's, a few months back we were worried about the EB3 converting to EB2..before that we were worried that EB3's were getting more visas than EB2's and so on.....we will keep fighting about the handfull of misallocated visas or work towards recapture. The most important thing from Murthy's letter is that USCIS has started preadjudicating 485 which simply means that there are ton of people stuck in this mess who are waiting to be approved... a handful of visas is nothing...lets all unite and work towards recapture.
Well I am pissed with this whole set up of immigration in this country.. did not obama's campaign say " HOPE IS ON THE WAY".. well its seems for skilled immigrant workers it is " HOPE IS OFF THE WAY"
Here lies HOPE...it was IN the WAY :rolleyes:
to the others who are bitching and moaning about EB1's, a few months back we were worried about the EB3 converting to EB2..before that we were worried that EB3's were getting more visas than EB2's and so on.....we will keep fighting about the handfull of misallocated visas or work towards recapture. The most important thing from Murthy's letter is that USCIS has started preadjudicating 485 which simply means that there are ton of people stuck in this mess who are waiting to be approved... a handful of visas is nothing...lets all unite and work towards recapture.
Well I am pissed with this whole set up of immigration in this country.. did not obama's campaign say " HOPE IS ON THE WAY".. well its seems for skilled immigrant workers it is " HOPE IS OFF THE WAY"
more...
mundada
09-23 11:05 AM
Finally a great idea that the Congress can swallow without appearing being pro-immigration.
hot David Duchovny regularly
amsgc
07-03 11:08 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/us/04visas.html
Just sent her a thank you note and my letter above.
Just sent her a thank you note and my letter above.
more...
house makeup David Duchovny and wife
snathan
08-16 01:09 AM
Don�€™t make a big deal of Shah Rukh�€™s detention:One For The Road:Anand Soondas's blog-The Times Of India (http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/onefortheroad/entry/don-t-make-a-big)
One For The RoadDon’t make a big deal of Shah Rukh’s detention
After a long time actor Salman Khan has come up with a real gem. On hearing about Shah Rukh Khan being questioned by US security at Newark, New Jersey, he said it’s good that the country has such a tight set-up. And that ``there has been no attack after 9/11 because of this.’’
Salman has a point. SRK might be an icon to Indians and many in the subcontinent, even to the desi diaspora spread across the globe, but to America he’s just a visitor. We may be convinced he cannot be involved in anything that’s remotely violent, but the guard given the responsibility of stopping something like 9/11 from happening in his country again will want to take no chances. And what is the possibility that he’s a die hard fan of the Khan and Bollywood? Very slim.
Interestingly, the same day that SRK was detained in Newark, there came news that the great Bob Dylan, who was wandering around Long Branch, near New York City, sometime back, was asked for an ID by two cops too young to know who he really was. When he couldn’t furnish one, he was taken right back to the resort where he was putting up and staff there vouched for him. And America is Dylan’s own country.
Was there a furore? Not that I know of. Not even a little blowin' in the wind.
SRK says he’s ``upset and angry’’ because it was his Muslim name that caused all this. Thousands of Muslims are made to go through extra security checks everyday in America and a host of Western countries. Is he equally upset at that? He's probably just pissed that it happened to him, India's mega star. We all know how a lot of Muslims have been subjected to prejudice around the world because many countries see terrorism as an Islamic phenomenon. Yes, it is uncalled for, unjust and maybe wrong. But America is a country that takes the killings of its people with the seriousness it deserves, unlike India whose record on this is shameful, to say the least.
Also, because most of the perpetrators of 9/11 were Muslims, America thinks it has to be doubly careful where they are concerned. Had the terrorists been Jews, perhaps it would have looked at Jews with similar suspicion. I was much more aggrieved at President Kalam being frisked. But that’s a dated debate.
There are two layers to the SRK incident and we must peel them off with care. One, it is quite ridiculous that Indians feel their icons and superstars are everybody’s icons and superstars. What the heck? If Jet Li came to India tomorrow, the man on the street here would probably call him ‘`Chinky’’ and not give a second look. For that matter, what if G�rard Depardieu came travelling. How many would know him? Matt Damon was here recently and there wasn’t a traffic jam in Delhi. These guys are huge back home.
Moreover, America doesn’t have a culture of fawning the way India has. Mike Tyson was treated like a common rapist and spent most part of his youth in the slammer. Winona Ryder was sentenced to a three-year probation for shoplifting. Chinese born Hollywood actress Bai Ling was fined US 200 dollars for petty theft.
More importantly, we are actually aggrieved because we are ``not like them’’. Well, guess what. It isn’t a virtue. We should be like them and take the security of our country and its people with solemn, no-nonsense professionalism. Frisk Brad Pitt when he lands in India next. Give Tom Cruise the same dose. Don’t spare Bill Clinton either. Isn’t he an ex-prez just like Kalam? Who’s stopping you and what’s stopping you? Colonial hangover? Or is it plain lethargy and callousness. Looks like both.
We are just whimpering over here like hurt puppies because we feel, ``Oh, but we don’t do it to them’’. Oh no, we don’t. And it’s a scandal. We should. I’ve seen white men – and women – get away in India with murder. Indian women can’t get into some discos wearing a sari. And bouncers will frown at you if you are dressed in a kurta. Have you seen what some of these firangs have on them? No one bats a eyelid.
So instead of making SRK’s detention an issue, we should think of upgrading our own security set-up.
There’s a lesson in this. And it is a positive one. A day after our own 26/11, there was hardly any security at CST in Mumbai. It can’t get worse than that. The bottom line: Stop fawning, shed the colonial hangover and make no compromise where the country’s safety is concerned. Can we do that or is it too much to ask from a country that’s been free for 62 years but was ruled by white sahibs for 200?
One For The RoadDon’t make a big deal of Shah Rukh’s detention
After a long time actor Salman Khan has come up with a real gem. On hearing about Shah Rukh Khan being questioned by US security at Newark, New Jersey, he said it’s good that the country has such a tight set-up. And that ``there has been no attack after 9/11 because of this.’’
Salman has a point. SRK might be an icon to Indians and many in the subcontinent, even to the desi diaspora spread across the globe, but to America he’s just a visitor. We may be convinced he cannot be involved in anything that’s remotely violent, but the guard given the responsibility of stopping something like 9/11 from happening in his country again will want to take no chances. And what is the possibility that he’s a die hard fan of the Khan and Bollywood? Very slim.
Interestingly, the same day that SRK was detained in Newark, there came news that the great Bob Dylan, who was wandering around Long Branch, near New York City, sometime back, was asked for an ID by two cops too young to know who he really was. When he couldn’t furnish one, he was taken right back to the resort where he was putting up and staff there vouched for him. And America is Dylan’s own country.
Was there a furore? Not that I know of. Not even a little blowin' in the wind.
SRK says he’s ``upset and angry’’ because it was his Muslim name that caused all this. Thousands of Muslims are made to go through extra security checks everyday in America and a host of Western countries. Is he equally upset at that? He's probably just pissed that it happened to him, India's mega star. We all know how a lot of Muslims have been subjected to prejudice around the world because many countries see terrorism as an Islamic phenomenon. Yes, it is uncalled for, unjust and maybe wrong. But America is a country that takes the killings of its people with the seriousness it deserves, unlike India whose record on this is shameful, to say the least.
Also, because most of the perpetrators of 9/11 were Muslims, America thinks it has to be doubly careful where they are concerned. Had the terrorists been Jews, perhaps it would have looked at Jews with similar suspicion. I was much more aggrieved at President Kalam being frisked. But that’s a dated debate.
There are two layers to the SRK incident and we must peel them off with care. One, it is quite ridiculous that Indians feel their icons and superstars are everybody’s icons and superstars. What the heck? If Jet Li came to India tomorrow, the man on the street here would probably call him ‘`Chinky’’ and not give a second look. For that matter, what if G�rard Depardieu came travelling. How many would know him? Matt Damon was here recently and there wasn’t a traffic jam in Delhi. These guys are huge back home.
Moreover, America doesn’t have a culture of fawning the way India has. Mike Tyson was treated like a common rapist and spent most part of his youth in the slammer. Winona Ryder was sentenced to a three-year probation for shoplifting. Chinese born Hollywood actress Bai Ling was fined US 200 dollars for petty theft.
More importantly, we are actually aggrieved because we are ``not like them’’. Well, guess what. It isn’t a virtue. We should be like them and take the security of our country and its people with solemn, no-nonsense professionalism. Frisk Brad Pitt when he lands in India next. Give Tom Cruise the same dose. Don’t spare Bill Clinton either. Isn’t he an ex-prez just like Kalam? Who’s stopping you and what’s stopping you? Colonial hangover? Or is it plain lethargy and callousness. Looks like both.
We are just whimpering over here like hurt puppies because we feel, ``Oh, but we don’t do it to them’’. Oh no, we don’t. And it’s a scandal. We should. I’ve seen white men – and women – get away in India with murder. Indian women can’t get into some discos wearing a sari. And bouncers will frown at you if you are dressed in a kurta. Have you seen what some of these firangs have on them? No one bats a eyelid.
So instead of making SRK’s detention an issue, we should think of upgrading our own security set-up.
There’s a lesson in this. And it is a positive one. A day after our own 26/11, there was hardly any security at CST in Mumbai. It can’t get worse than that. The bottom line: Stop fawning, shed the colonial hangover and make no compromise where the country’s safety is concerned. Can we do that or is it too much to ask from a country that’s been free for 62 years but was ruled by white sahibs for 200?
tattoo 2011 david duchovny wife.
shirish
07-14 01:30 PM
Hi,
I applied for I-485 for myself , my wife ans son, on July 27th 07 (Thi sis the receipr date), My lawyer did not send the medical reports with the application. Currently the reports are with him. Medical exam was done on July 18 07. My PD will be current in Aug 08(as per the bulletin). I am sure i will get an RFE for the medical reports, and most probably it wil come in AUG 08 or later.
My question is, do i need to go for medical exam again , or can my lawer send the reports that he has with him to USCIS in reply to the RFE? I am confused since, by the time i get the RFE, the reports would be more than 1 year old.
-Shirish
I applied for I-485 for myself , my wife ans son, on July 27th 07 (Thi sis the receipr date), My lawyer did not send the medical reports with the application. Currently the reports are with him. Medical exam was done on July 18 07. My PD will be current in Aug 08(as per the bulletin). I am sure i will get an RFE for the medical reports, and most probably it wil come in AUG 08 or later.
My question is, do i need to go for medical exam again , or can my lawer send the reports that he has with him to USCIS in reply to the RFE? I am confused since, by the time i get the RFE, the reports would be more than 1 year old.
-Shirish
more...
pictures David Duchovny
eastwest
07-11 03:58 PM
HI,
I have filed my 485 on 8th June 2007, My 140 is approved in August 2006.
I have 2 different questions.
I have changed the job on 1st July 2008. Do I need to involve my attorney to file for AC 21? The New job title is "System Administrator" which is the same ONET CODE.
IN the while I have another offer with title as "Sr Systems Analyst".
My labor was applied as "Network Engineer" ONET code 15-1071. Can I switch to a job with title "Sr. Systems Analyst" ONET Code 15-1081.00 or 15-1051.00
Thanks
I have filed my 485 on 8th June 2007, My 140 is approved in August 2006.
I have 2 different questions.
I have changed the job on 1st July 2008. Do I need to involve my attorney to file for AC 21? The New job title is "System Administrator" which is the same ONET CODE.
IN the while I have another offer with title as "Sr Systems Analyst".
My labor was applied as "Network Engineer" ONET code 15-1071. Can I switch to a job with title "Sr. Systems Analyst" ONET Code 15-1081.00 or 15-1051.00
Thanks
dresses David Duchovny’s not getting
Winner
09-23 01:36 PM
Has anybody really tried to get a mortgage recently? I have been denied by 8 lenders so far simply because I don't have a green card. Most lenders have tightened their underwriting guidelines. They will give mortgages only to U.S.Citizens or somebody who is a permanent resident aka having a green card. There are very very few lenders who will give mortgages to somebody on a visa and the rates may not be very favorable.
I used www.MemberhomeLoan.com
I used www.MemberhomeLoan.com
more...
makeup Tags: David Duchovny
GCard_Dream
10-18 07:21 PM
You are right. You are allowed to stay 3 years out of last 5 years outside of Canada. Your PR should still be good.
Dear Folks,
I got my Canadian PR in Sep 2005. I did the landing and gave a canadian address after which I got my PR. After that I was under the assumption that I have to spend atleast 2 years in a span of five years and did not take any attempt to land into Canada using PR. I am thinking of applying for SIN by post while I reside in US.
I am not sure now if my PR is still valid??
Can someone advice?
Dear Folks,
I got my Canadian PR in Sep 2005. I did the landing and gave a canadian address after which I got my PR. After that I was under the assumption that I have to spend atleast 2 years in a span of five years and did not take any attempt to land into Canada using PR. I am thinking of applying for SIN by post while I reside in US.
I am not sure now if my PR is still valid??
Can someone advice?
girlfriend David Duchovny and his wife,
ujjvalkoul
08-30 11:14 AM
Once you get ur Canadian PR, how long can we "not go" to canada. Will the PR expire if we do not land in canada??
hairstyles Apparently, David Duchovny#39;s
garybanz
12-14 02:15 PM
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.
If no one (including the Govt.) is allowed to discriminate based on national origin then how can the Govt. discriminate on EB Emigration based on national origin ?
I think this is a fair question and most Americans in my work place agree with me. I don't know if we will win the case or not but if we win we can get
1) Removal of country based quotas
2) recapture of Visa's lost due to country based quotas
If we lose the case we will at least get more attention of the national media, it's up to us how we manage the media attention and have a positive effect on the popularity of our cause.
IMHO taking the opinion of the best attorney on constitutional law can not hurt. :)
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.
If no one (including the Govt.) is allowed to discriminate based on national origin then how can the Govt. discriminate on EB Emigration based on national origin ?
I think this is a fair question and most Americans in my work place agree with me. I don't know if we will win the case or not but if we win we can get
1) Removal of country based quotas
2) recapture of Visa's lost due to country based quotas
If we lose the case we will at least get more attention of the national media, it's up to us how we manage the media attention and have a positive effect on the popularity of our cause.
IMHO taking the opinion of the best attorney on constitutional law can not hurt. :)
sarath99
10-20 01:00 PM
Hi,
My sister is a citizen and she applied GC for my parents who are in India.She applied for I-130 in April and it was approved in 2 months.She now has to fill the form I-864 and is in the process of doing so.Meanwhile my parents would like to visit USA.They'll be coming in December and be staying for 6 mos.They have a 10 yr visa and visited us back in 2004.
My question is it ok for them to visit USA?I read that they might be denied entry becasue of their approved I-130.We do not want to apply AOS here and they will return in June 09.
Thanks for any advice.
My sister is a citizen and she applied GC for my parents who are in India.She applied for I-130 in April and it was approved in 2 months.She now has to fill the form I-864 and is in the process of doing so.Meanwhile my parents would like to visit USA.They'll be coming in December and be staying for 6 mos.They have a 10 yr visa and visited us back in 2004.
My question is it ok for them to visit USA?I read that they might be denied entry becasue of their approved I-130.We do not want to apply AOS here and they will return in June 09.
Thanks for any advice.
rongha_2000
07-26 02:42 PM
So why are you here in the first place? Why in US? Why applying for GC? Why on IV to try to improve this broken system? Face the fact, you too dont want to return or else you wouldnt be here.
There is no harm in being selfish and persuing a better life. "Do something good for India" is an ideal punch line for preachers. BUT Be realistic.
I am an Indian and proud to be so. Indians - Remove the "SLAVE" mentality from your minds. Think positive. Do some thing good for India, where you have been born and brought up; where your previous generations have flourished. Since, you are now living and earning in US, be loyal to US too.
There is no harm in being selfish and persuing a better life. "Do something good for India" is an ideal punch line for preachers. BUT Be realistic.
I am an Indian and proud to be so. Indians - Remove the "SLAVE" mentality from your minds. Think positive. Do some thing good for India, where you have been born and brought up; where your previous generations have flourished. Since, you are now living and earning in US, be loyal to US too.
