sledge_hammer
11-26 09:14 AM
Couldn't have said that better!!!
Lost in all this is the fact that Punjabi wants to sell his house not because he cannot afford it anymore, but because he wants to move to a different city to a higher paying job and can't be bothered to take responsibility for his failed real estate venture. He could have done the ethical thing and stayed in his present job and paid off his loan but he is choosing not to. And who does he blame for his situation? The concept of the "American dream". So the fact that he wants to shirk his responsibilities in favor of foisting his own debt onto the rest of the country isn't his own fault, it's the "American Dream" that's making him do this. It's not exigent financial circumstances that are causing him to foreclose, it is greed and shortsightedness (colloquially known as "The American Dream"). Greed and shortsightedness already caused him to go 20K under the water. And they will now make him screw up his own credit history. If someone cannot learn from one mistake, I say let him keep making mistakes. He will soon find out how difficult life in the US can be if you don't have a good credit history. As for the burden on us taxpayers, hey, we've been spending 10 billion a week for the past 5 years dropping bombs on people, what's a mere 20K?
Lost in all this is the fact that Punjabi wants to sell his house not because he cannot afford it anymore, but because he wants to move to a different city to a higher paying job and can't be bothered to take responsibility for his failed real estate venture. He could have done the ethical thing and stayed in his present job and paid off his loan but he is choosing not to. And who does he blame for his situation? The concept of the "American dream". So the fact that he wants to shirk his responsibilities in favor of foisting his own debt onto the rest of the country isn't his own fault, it's the "American Dream" that's making him do this. It's not exigent financial circumstances that are causing him to foreclose, it is greed and shortsightedness (colloquially known as "The American Dream"). Greed and shortsightedness already caused him to go 20K under the water. And they will now make him screw up his own credit history. If someone cannot learn from one mistake, I say let him keep making mistakes. He will soon find out how difficult life in the US can be if you don't have a good credit history. As for the burden on us taxpayers, hey, we've been spending 10 billion a week for the past 5 years dropping bombs on people, what's a mere 20K?
wallpaper as a possible Gacy victim.
amitjoey
06-29 06:48 PM
Could it be that the AILA is talking about the 4th category and AILF's Legal Action Center is seeking plaintiffs - mainly 4th category that got their applications rejected?
AILA Follow-up to Update on July Visa Availability
From: AILA National
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 5:48 PM
Subject: Follow-up to Update on July Visa Availability
Further to the email earlier today about July visa availability:
Several members have asked whether they should continue in their efforts to
file adjustment of status applications for employment-based cases. Of course
, this is a matter for each attorney's best judgment, but note that:
-It is not certain what day the revised Bulletin will be issued.
-It is possible that the revised bulletin will not issue at all--efforts to
stop this unprecedented action are being pursued.
-If you "front desk" the application, i.e. decide it is futile to file, and
a remedy opens up later, having submitted the applications may improve the
chances of utlizing whatever fix might be available.
-If you do submit the adjustments, be sure to use a method whereby you can
document delivery, and keep that documentation for each client.
-AILF's Legal Action Center is seeking plaintiffs with respect to both the
adjustment applications that were or are expected to be rejected for June
and the adjustment applications that are expected to be rejected in July. Go
to InfoNet Document # 07062975: http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22798 on InfoNet for the Potential Plaintiff Questionnaire and related FAQ.
We cannot predict now what will happen, but will continue to update the
membership as developments occur.
AILA Follow-up to Update on July Visa Availability
From: AILA National
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 5:48 PM
Subject: Follow-up to Update on July Visa Availability
Further to the email earlier today about July visa availability:
Several members have asked whether they should continue in their efforts to
file adjustment of status applications for employment-based cases. Of course
, this is a matter for each attorney's best judgment, but note that:
-It is not certain what day the revised Bulletin will be issued.
-It is possible that the revised bulletin will not issue at all--efforts to
stop this unprecedented action are being pursued.
-If you "front desk" the application, i.e. decide it is futile to file, and
a remedy opens up later, having submitted the applications may improve the
chances of utlizing whatever fix might be available.
-If you do submit the adjustments, be sure to use a method whereby you can
document delivery, and keep that documentation for each client.
-AILF's Legal Action Center is seeking plaintiffs with respect to both the
adjustment applications that were or are expected to be rejected for June
and the adjustment applications that are expected to be rejected in July. Go
to InfoNet Document # 07062975: http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22798 on InfoNet for the Potential Plaintiff Questionnaire and related FAQ.
We cannot predict now what will happen, but will continue to update the
membership as developments occur.
leoindiano
10-14 09:02 PM
my case is assigned to IO on sept 17th. Still waiting.... EB2I - Nov 2004. TSC...
2011 wallpaper John Wayne Gacy
nk2006
01-15 11:13 AM
Hi RajuSeattle--
You nailed it man. As i said in my post yesterday what you described so well is exactly what happened and so my explanation of just 140 substitution was not accurate.
Please note the response I got from the attorney of my previous employer (the one who revoked)
This is exactly what I previously explained and what XX verified for you. The I-140 was revoked/withdrawn and the labor certification was substituted. If only the I-140 had been revoked/withdrawn then you would still be portable. However, as XX confirmed, the company used the case to substitute another employee.
Clearly the ex-employer and USCIS are at fault. I have the approved I140 and to date on my uscis portfolio it states that my I140 was approved in Feb 2005. I changed jobs in June 2006.
I am so &^^%$#@ tired, that if this does not work....I am going back. Enough is enough.
Mohican,
Your frustration is understandable but talk to a good lawyer and open an MTR immediately. From your description yours is a good example of how USCIS is confused about AC21 cases - work with your lawyer on MTR it seems MTR's are successful in most cases. Also please take time and contact Ombudsman to file DHS Form 7001 as suggested at: http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/gc_1221837986181.shtm.
(look back in this thread a few other members had similar issue - I485 denial upon withdrawal of I140 by previous employer - contact them directly to get specific lawyer info).
You nailed it man. As i said in my post yesterday what you described so well is exactly what happened and so my explanation of just 140 substitution was not accurate.
Please note the response I got from the attorney of my previous employer (the one who revoked)
This is exactly what I previously explained and what XX verified for you. The I-140 was revoked/withdrawn and the labor certification was substituted. If only the I-140 had been revoked/withdrawn then you would still be portable. However, as XX confirmed, the company used the case to substitute another employee.
Clearly the ex-employer and USCIS are at fault. I have the approved I140 and to date on my uscis portfolio it states that my I140 was approved in Feb 2005. I changed jobs in June 2006.
I am so &^^%$#@ tired, that if this does not work....I am going back. Enough is enough.
Mohican,
Your frustration is understandable but talk to a good lawyer and open an MTR immediately. From your description yours is a good example of how USCIS is confused about AC21 cases - work with your lawyer on MTR it seems MTR's are successful in most cases. Also please take time and contact Ombudsman to file DHS Form 7001 as suggested at: http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/gc_1221837986181.shtm.
(look back in this thread a few other members had similar issue - I485 denial upon withdrawal of I140 by previous employer - contact them directly to get specific lawyer info).
more...
ras
10-25 11:15 AM
I signed for the Vonage initially was their customer for about a month on world phone. However, Lingo's attractive feature of calling form my mobile to any phone in India lured me to switch over to Lingo. i requested for phone no portability and am expecting the device shortly. I remember initially on this forum it is being mentioned that Calling from a mobile attached to a lingo phone was free only to call landline numbers in India. Couple of days back when I enquired I was told that it is no more restricted to landline but is to landline and mobile phones in India.
Just want to reconfirm with members in the community if some one has concrete information about this feature. Once again the feature am talking about is Calling from your mobile through Lingo to any mobile or landline number.
May be those who are already lingo customers can chip in their thoughts.
Just want to reconfirm with members in the community if some one has concrete information about this feature. Once again the feature am talking about is Calling from your mobile through Lingo to any mobile or landline number.
May be those who are already lingo customers can chip in their thoughts.
gcnirvana
06-20 02:59 PM
This is the number in red on your visa stamp in ur passport. Mine is 8-digits long. Even if ur visa stamp has expired you've to provide that number.
Hope this helps!
Hi,
I am filing up form 485 and on Part 3 Section - Processing Information, there is a question asking for Nonimmigrant Visa Number.
Any clue about this?
Thanks in advance,
Kalpen
Hope this helps!
Hi,
I am filing up form 485 and on Part 3 Section - Processing Information, there is a question asking for Nonimmigrant Visa Number.
Any clue about this?
Thanks in advance,
Kalpen
more...
h1b_forever
06-10 01:48 PM
We as a community should oppose major violation done by these consulting firms.
The only reason these companies send people on L1 is to keep them as bonded labour giving them no chance to switch jobs. These companies can always apply for H1b for such folks, there are enough H1 visas available this year.
There is a reason there are two visa categories L1 and H1. They should not be used to circumvent immigration laws.
The only reason these companies send people on L1 is to keep them as bonded labour giving them no chance to switch jobs. These companies can always apply for H1b for such folks, there are enough H1 visas available this year.
There is a reason there are two visa categories L1 and H1. They should not be used to circumvent immigration laws.
2010 tattoo John Wayne Gacy,
CADude
01-10 04:15 PM
Grow-Up guys and gals!!! There is no point I am right and you are wrong fight. Make this effort successful. Take a chill pill. Relax & enjoy the life.
more...
sri1309
01-06 12:45 PM
I would like this idea to materialize but I am just wondering how it is practical.
Except for waiting for a visa number to be available all other delays are due to the time that it takes to process a case (and also due to the country quota). In labor stage, DOL determines if there is any citizen who fit in the labor description and who is looking for a job. In 140 stage, USCIS determines if the company is in good standing and has the ability to pay. In final stage, the candidate’s biometrics is taken and his background checked. All these are essential process in adjudicating a GC case in the employment category. I just do not how all these can be surpassed and candidates handed over a GC, let alone citizenship.
Allocating recaptured visa numbers and following a sensible order is more practical in eliminating some of the delays…
Most of the people in this forum or most are very highly motivated and cant wait in queues for ever due to the delays that make no sense. I am not sure whats not so clear to you. Looks like you got used to these waits. Are you used to these waits, or have no motivation to do bigger things like rising in jobs, creating companies, creating jobs, but are ok to be stuck forever in these processes that make no sense... Sorry, but not many want to wait in lines beyond the limit.
Except for waiting for a visa number to be available all other delays are due to the time that it takes to process a case (and also due to the country quota). In labor stage, DOL determines if there is any citizen who fit in the labor description and who is looking for a job. In 140 stage, USCIS determines if the company is in good standing and has the ability to pay. In final stage, the candidate’s biometrics is taken and his background checked. All these are essential process in adjudicating a GC case in the employment category. I just do not how all these can be surpassed and candidates handed over a GC, let alone citizenship.
Allocating recaptured visa numbers and following a sensible order is more practical in eliminating some of the delays…
Most of the people in this forum or most are very highly motivated and cant wait in queues for ever due to the delays that make no sense. I am not sure whats not so clear to you. Looks like you got used to these waits. Are you used to these waits, or have no motivation to do bigger things like rising in jobs, creating companies, creating jobs, but are ok to be stuck forever in these processes that make no sense... Sorry, but not many want to wait in lines beyond the limit.
hair images john wayne gacy victims
belmontboy
09-23 05:17 PM
I am sure they are PDs ..see sudden spike in mar 2005. If it was ND or RD you would see that spike in Jul - sep 2007
they are RD's not PD's
IF they were PD's we shouldnot be seeing anything after Jul 2007 [as those were the farthest PD's ever reached].
they are RD's not PD's
IF they were PD's we shouldnot be seeing anything after Jul 2007 [as those were the farthest PD's ever reached].
more...
caliguy
10-21 07:25 PM
Yeah, I believe we still have people from 2004 waiting (and that includes me!!)
Here are some ways of contacting USCIS - Immigration: 12 Ways to Contact USCIS and FBI to Check Case Status (http://immigrationroad.com/green-card/contact-uscis-fbi.php#)
Good luck to all!
There are plenty of folks waiting approval like you including me as well... If your attorney has followed up with USCIS and if u have created an SR, thats probably the best you could do to let USCIS know that they shudn't b sitting on ur case...
Lets hope for the best.... Keep us updated if u see an LUD or get an update...
Here are some ways of contacting USCIS - Immigration: 12 Ways to Contact USCIS and FBI to Check Case Status (http://immigrationroad.com/green-card/contact-uscis-fbi.php#)
Good luck to all!
There are plenty of folks waiting approval like you including me as well... If your attorney has followed up with USCIS and if u have created an SR, thats probably the best you could do to let USCIS know that they shudn't b sitting on ur case...
Lets hope for the best.... Keep us updated if u see an LUD or get an update...
hot hairstyles John Wayne Gacy,
andy garcia
04-18 11:11 AM
Thanks for the replies fellas, this isn't a renewal I am talking about. This is the first time I have applied for an EAD. BTW, does anyone know what's involved in converting from H4 to EAD status i.e.
1. Do you need to apply for SSN before you take a job offer?
A. Yes, you can not start working w/o a SSN
2. EAD by itself is enough to accept employment?
A. No, refer to 1
3. Can you take jobs/resign as and when you please or do you have to somehow get back to H4 status if you quit job on EAD?
A. You can work wherever you want to.
4. Does use of EAD by H4, change non-immigrant status of H1 worker?
A. No, it does not.
Thanks
andy
1. Do you need to apply for SSN before you take a job offer?
A. Yes, you can not start working w/o a SSN
2. EAD by itself is enough to accept employment?
A. No, refer to 1
3. Can you take jobs/resign as and when you please or do you have to somehow get back to H4 status if you quit job on EAD?
A. You can work wherever you want to.
4. Does use of EAD by H4, change non-immigrant status of H1 worker?
A. No, it does not.
Thanks
andy
more...
house john wayne gacy jr victims. hairstyles John Wayne Gacy, Jr - Sufjan. john
Macaca
12-05 04:45 PM
AMY GOODMAN: Our guest for the hour is Lou Dobbs, well known as the CNN anchor of Lou Dobbs Tonight. In May, the New York Times published a critical article about you, Lou.
LOU DOBBS: [inaudible]
AMY GOODMAN: It was called �Truth, Fiction and Lou Dobbs.� Columnist David Leonhardt wrote, �Mr. Dobbs has a somewhat flexible relationship with reality.� Leonhardt highlighted this profile about you that aired on CBS�s 60 Minutes.
LESLEY STAHL: One of the issues he tackles relentlessly is illegal immigration. And on that, his critics say his advocacy can get in the way of the facts.
LOU DOBBS: Tuberculosis, leprosy, malaria?
LESLEY STAHL: Following a report on illegals carrying diseases into the US, one of the correspondents on his show, Christine Romans, told Dobbs that there had been 7,000 cases of leprosy in the US in the past three years.
CHRISTINE ROMANS: Leprosy, in this country
LOU DOBBS: Incredible.
LESLEY STAHL: We checked that and found a report issued by the US Department of Health and Human Services saying 7,000 is the number of leprosy cases over the last thirty years, not the past three, and nobody knows how many of those cases involve illegal immigrants.
[interviewing Dobbs] Now, went to try and check that number, 7,000�we can�t. Just so you know�
LOU DOBBS: I can tell you this: if we reported it, it�s a fact.
LESLEY STAHL: You can�t tell me that. You did report it�
LOU DOBBS: No, I just did.
LESLEY STAHL: How can you guarantee that to me?
LOU DOBBS: Because I�m the managing editor, and that�s the way we do business. We don�t make up numbers, Lesley, do we?
AMY GOODMAN: A day after the 60 Minutes report aired, Lou Dobbs discussed the issue on his program with his reporter, the CNN reporter Christine Romans.
LOU DOBBS: Then there was a question about some of your comments, Christine, following one of your reports. I told Lesley Stahl we don�t make up numbers, and I will tell everybody here again tonight, I stand 100% behind what you said.
CHRISTINE ROMANS: That�s right, Lou. We don�t make up numbers here. This is what we reported. We reported: �It�s interesting, because the woman in our piece told us that there were about 900 cases of leprosy for forty years. There have been 7,000 in the past three years. Leprosy, in this country.� I was quoting Dr. Madeleine Cosman, a respected medical lawyer and medical historian. Writing in The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, she said: �Hansen�s disease��that�s the other modern name, I guess, for leprosy��Hansen�s disease was so rare in America that in forty years only 900 people were afflicted. Suddenly, in the past three years America has more than 7,000 cases of leprosy,� Lou.
LOU DOBBS: It�s remarkable that this�whatever, confusion or confoundment over 7,000 cases. They actually keep a registry of cases of leprosy. And the fact that it rose was because of�one assumes, because we don�t know for sure�but two basic influences: unscreened illegal immigrants coming into this country, primarily from South Asia, and the�secondly, far better reporting.
CHRISTINE ROMANS: That�s what Dr. Cosman told us, Lou.
LOU DOBBS: And, you know, in talking with a number of people, it�s also very clear no one knows, but nearly everyone suspects, there are far more cases of that. It is also, I think, interesting, and I think important to say, one of the reasons we screen people coming into this country is to deal with communicable diseases like leprosy, tuberculosis. The fact is, if we would just screen successfully, all of those diseases can be treated effectively, efficiently and relatively quickly.
AMY GOODMAN: That�s Lou Dobbs on the show. The source behind the claim that there was a spike of 7,000 new cases of leprosy was a controversial medical attorney named Madeleine Cosman. In 2005, she described undocumented immigrants as �deadly time bombs, because of the diseases they bring into the country.� Cosman, who died last year, has also been criticized for these comments she made about Mexican men.
MADELEINE COSMAN: Recognize that most of these bastards molest girls under age twelve, some as young as age five, others age three. Although, of course, some specialize in boys, some specialize in nuns, some are exceedingly versatile and rape little girls age eleven and women up to age seventy-nine.
What is important here is the psychiatric defenses: Why do they do what they do? They do not need a jail; they need a hospital. They are depraved because they were deprived in their home country. But more important is the cultural defense: they suffer from psychiatric cognitive disjuncture, for what does a poor man do if in his home country of Mexico in his jurisdiction if rape is ranked lower than cow stealing? Of course, he will not know how to behave here in strange America. This is thoroughly reprehensible.
AMY GOODMAN: Madeleine Cosman, that�s her quote. She actually is not a medical doctor. She�s a Renaissance author and scholar of sorts. Lou Dobbs?
LOU DOBBS: What would you have me say, Amy? Because what�the reality is what you don�t say, is that Leonhardt�s piece was filled with errors. Secondly, Madeleine Cosman, as we learned following that report in Physicians and Surgeons, the publication, is precisely what you styled her: she is a wack�or was a wackjob. But the New York Times didn�t know that, either. If you would read the obituary for Madeleine Cosman in the New York Times�have you done that, by the way? She died a year ago, which was, by the way, a year after we had used her as a source in a report, along with other people. Did you read that obituary? Did you find that the New York Times had come to basically the same conclusion we had, that she was a credible source? Because if you read that obituary, it is glowing and filled with plaudits for Madeleine Cosman. And so�
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, but, Lou, I think the issue�
LOU DOBBS: But I must�no, no. I am going to say this�
JUAN GONZALEZ: The issue is that we, as journalists�
LOU DOBBS: To go through a body of
JUAN GONZALEZ: �all have our own responsibility to�
LOU DOBBS: No, listen to me, Juan�
JUAN GONZALEZ: No, no, no, no, no, Listen�
LOU DOBBS: �because at least we can have some civility�
JUAN GONZALEZ: Lou�
LOU DOBBS: �to go through this and try to convey that this is a body of work. I spoke for eight seconds after that report on tuberculosis and the screening of illegal immigrants into this country. For eight seconds. And you�re trying to project this as if it is reflective of a body of work. And that, I think, is�I think�
JUAN GONZALEZ: No, but, Lou, the issue�
LOU DOBBS: I would hope that you would be embarrassed by that.
JUAN GONZALEZ: No, Lou, the issue is�
AMY GOODMAN: You�re the managing director of your show�
LOU DOBBS: I am the managing director.
AMY GOODMAN: �and editor of your show.
LOU DOBBS: And let me ask you a question: how many�how many people are on the registry for Hansen�s disease in this country?
JUAN GONZALEZ: 7,000, total.
LOU DOBBS: It�s over 7,000, correct.
AMY GOODMAN: For thirty years.
JUAN GONZALEZ: For thirty years.
LOU DOBBS: Absolutely.
AMY GOODMAN: You said over the last three years because of illegal immigration.
LOU DOBBS: And what did we say? Did I say because of illegal immigration?
AMY GOODMAN: Yes.
LOU DOBBS: I said no one knows, but one assumes primarily, because they�re not being screened. That�s what the doctors at the Hansen centers were telling us. Secondly, the issue of�if you want to, I mean, explode eight seconds into a whole body of discussion, fine. The reality is, I think you would agree, that if we were screening illegal immigrants, as well as legal immigrants, we would probably have a heck of a lot less in the way of tuberculosis in this country, and Hansen�s disease.
JUAN GONZALEZ: OK, Lou, I�d like to get into�take this in a much deeper perspective than just the particular fact�
LOU DOBBS: I hope so.
LOU DOBBS: [inaudible]
AMY GOODMAN: It was called �Truth, Fiction and Lou Dobbs.� Columnist David Leonhardt wrote, �Mr. Dobbs has a somewhat flexible relationship with reality.� Leonhardt highlighted this profile about you that aired on CBS�s 60 Minutes.
LESLEY STAHL: One of the issues he tackles relentlessly is illegal immigration. And on that, his critics say his advocacy can get in the way of the facts.
LOU DOBBS: Tuberculosis, leprosy, malaria?
LESLEY STAHL: Following a report on illegals carrying diseases into the US, one of the correspondents on his show, Christine Romans, told Dobbs that there had been 7,000 cases of leprosy in the US in the past three years.
CHRISTINE ROMANS: Leprosy, in this country
LOU DOBBS: Incredible.
LESLEY STAHL: We checked that and found a report issued by the US Department of Health and Human Services saying 7,000 is the number of leprosy cases over the last thirty years, not the past three, and nobody knows how many of those cases involve illegal immigrants.
[interviewing Dobbs] Now, went to try and check that number, 7,000�we can�t. Just so you know�
LOU DOBBS: I can tell you this: if we reported it, it�s a fact.
LESLEY STAHL: You can�t tell me that. You did report it�
LOU DOBBS: No, I just did.
LESLEY STAHL: How can you guarantee that to me?
LOU DOBBS: Because I�m the managing editor, and that�s the way we do business. We don�t make up numbers, Lesley, do we?
AMY GOODMAN: A day after the 60 Minutes report aired, Lou Dobbs discussed the issue on his program with his reporter, the CNN reporter Christine Romans.
LOU DOBBS: Then there was a question about some of your comments, Christine, following one of your reports. I told Lesley Stahl we don�t make up numbers, and I will tell everybody here again tonight, I stand 100% behind what you said.
CHRISTINE ROMANS: That�s right, Lou. We don�t make up numbers here. This is what we reported. We reported: �It�s interesting, because the woman in our piece told us that there were about 900 cases of leprosy for forty years. There have been 7,000 in the past three years. Leprosy, in this country.� I was quoting Dr. Madeleine Cosman, a respected medical lawyer and medical historian. Writing in The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, she said: �Hansen�s disease��that�s the other modern name, I guess, for leprosy��Hansen�s disease was so rare in America that in forty years only 900 people were afflicted. Suddenly, in the past three years America has more than 7,000 cases of leprosy,� Lou.
LOU DOBBS: It�s remarkable that this�whatever, confusion or confoundment over 7,000 cases. They actually keep a registry of cases of leprosy. And the fact that it rose was because of�one assumes, because we don�t know for sure�but two basic influences: unscreened illegal immigrants coming into this country, primarily from South Asia, and the�secondly, far better reporting.
CHRISTINE ROMANS: That�s what Dr. Cosman told us, Lou.
LOU DOBBS: And, you know, in talking with a number of people, it�s also very clear no one knows, but nearly everyone suspects, there are far more cases of that. It is also, I think, interesting, and I think important to say, one of the reasons we screen people coming into this country is to deal with communicable diseases like leprosy, tuberculosis. The fact is, if we would just screen successfully, all of those diseases can be treated effectively, efficiently and relatively quickly.
AMY GOODMAN: That�s Lou Dobbs on the show. The source behind the claim that there was a spike of 7,000 new cases of leprosy was a controversial medical attorney named Madeleine Cosman. In 2005, she described undocumented immigrants as �deadly time bombs, because of the diseases they bring into the country.� Cosman, who died last year, has also been criticized for these comments she made about Mexican men.
MADELEINE COSMAN: Recognize that most of these bastards molest girls under age twelve, some as young as age five, others age three. Although, of course, some specialize in boys, some specialize in nuns, some are exceedingly versatile and rape little girls age eleven and women up to age seventy-nine.
What is important here is the psychiatric defenses: Why do they do what they do? They do not need a jail; they need a hospital. They are depraved because they were deprived in their home country. But more important is the cultural defense: they suffer from psychiatric cognitive disjuncture, for what does a poor man do if in his home country of Mexico in his jurisdiction if rape is ranked lower than cow stealing? Of course, he will not know how to behave here in strange America. This is thoroughly reprehensible.
AMY GOODMAN: Madeleine Cosman, that�s her quote. She actually is not a medical doctor. She�s a Renaissance author and scholar of sorts. Lou Dobbs?
LOU DOBBS: What would you have me say, Amy? Because what�the reality is what you don�t say, is that Leonhardt�s piece was filled with errors. Secondly, Madeleine Cosman, as we learned following that report in Physicians and Surgeons, the publication, is precisely what you styled her: she is a wack�or was a wackjob. But the New York Times didn�t know that, either. If you would read the obituary for Madeleine Cosman in the New York Times�have you done that, by the way? She died a year ago, which was, by the way, a year after we had used her as a source in a report, along with other people. Did you read that obituary? Did you find that the New York Times had come to basically the same conclusion we had, that she was a credible source? Because if you read that obituary, it is glowing and filled with plaudits for Madeleine Cosman. And so�
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, but, Lou, I think the issue�
LOU DOBBS: But I must�no, no. I am going to say this�
JUAN GONZALEZ: The issue is that we, as journalists�
LOU DOBBS: To go through a body of
JUAN GONZALEZ: �all have our own responsibility to�
LOU DOBBS: No, listen to me, Juan�
JUAN GONZALEZ: No, no, no, no, no, Listen�
LOU DOBBS: �because at least we can have some civility�
JUAN GONZALEZ: Lou�
LOU DOBBS: �to go through this and try to convey that this is a body of work. I spoke for eight seconds after that report on tuberculosis and the screening of illegal immigrants into this country. For eight seconds. And you�re trying to project this as if it is reflective of a body of work. And that, I think, is�I think�
JUAN GONZALEZ: No, but, Lou, the issue�
LOU DOBBS: I would hope that you would be embarrassed by that.
JUAN GONZALEZ: No, Lou, the issue is�
AMY GOODMAN: You�re the managing director of your show�
LOU DOBBS: I am the managing director.
AMY GOODMAN: �and editor of your show.
LOU DOBBS: And let me ask you a question: how many�how many people are on the registry for Hansen�s disease in this country?
JUAN GONZALEZ: 7,000, total.
LOU DOBBS: It�s over 7,000, correct.
AMY GOODMAN: For thirty years.
JUAN GONZALEZ: For thirty years.
LOU DOBBS: Absolutely.
AMY GOODMAN: You said over the last three years because of illegal immigration.
LOU DOBBS: And what did we say? Did I say because of illegal immigration?
AMY GOODMAN: Yes.
LOU DOBBS: I said no one knows, but one assumes primarily, because they�re not being screened. That�s what the doctors at the Hansen centers were telling us. Secondly, the issue of�if you want to, I mean, explode eight seconds into a whole body of discussion, fine. The reality is, I think you would agree, that if we were screening illegal immigrants, as well as legal immigrants, we would probably have a heck of a lot less in the way of tuberculosis in this country, and Hansen�s disease.
JUAN GONZALEZ: OK, Lou, I�d like to get into�take this in a much deeper perspective than just the particular fact�
LOU DOBBS: I hope so.
tattoo In the 1970s, John Wayne Gacy
Macaca
12-05 05:16 PM
AMY GOODMAN: OK, Lou, let�s talk about some of the guests you�ve had on your show.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: For example, Barbara Coe, leader of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform,�
LOU DOBBS: She�s not a guest. You�re reading from the Southern Poverty Law Center�
AMY GOODMAN: �quoted�just one second�
LOU DOBBS: She was not a guest.
AMY GOODMAN: I am going to look at the�as you said, you actually felt that the Southern Poverty Law Center was so important�
LOU DOBBS: It�s a joke.
AMY GOODMAN: �in getting information�
LOU DOBBS: It�s a joke.
AMY GOODMAN: �that you sent your producers down there to get information so that you wouldn�t represent hate groups on the air.
LOU DOBBS: In their responses, they�re nothing but a fundraising organization�
AMY GOODMAN: So let me�
LOU DOBBS: �and they�re indulging in pure BS.
AMY GOODMAN: OK. Now, let me just�
LOU DOBBS: And so are you, when you quote them.
AMY GOODMAN: Let me just talk about some of the guests that you have had on�
LOU DOBBS: Sure. They�re not guests.
AMY GOODMAN: �or quoted on the show.
LOU DOBBS: Barbara Coe was never a guest.
AMY GOODMAN: No. She was quoted on the show�
LOU DOBBS: That�s different.
AMY GOODMAN: �bitterly attacking Home Depot for betraying Americans, apparently because Hispanic day laborers often gather in front of the store looking for work. Not mentioned were her group, listed by the Southern Poverty Leadership Council as a hate group, or the fact that she routinely refers to Mexicans as �savages.� Coe recently described herself as a member of the Council of Conservative Citizens, the white pride group formed from the remnants�
LOU DOBBS: What year was that?
AMY GOODMAN: �of the segregationist White Citizens� Council of the �50s and �60s,�
LOU DOBBS: What year was she�
AMY GOODMAN: �which Thurgood Marshall called the �Uptown Klan.�
LOU DOBBS: My god, Amy, what year was that on our broadcast? What year?
AMY GOODMAN: Not clear. You can tell me what year was it on your broadcast.
LOU DOBBS: Well, actually, I can, but it was years ago. And it was before we knew what the heck was going on.
AMY GOODMAN: I�m going to talk about a few other people.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: Glenn Spencer, head of the anti-immigration American Patrol, has been interviewed at least twice on the show in 2004, maybe many more times after�I don�t know. Spencer�s website is jammed with anti-Mexican vitriol. He pushes the idea the Mexican government is involved in a secret plot to take over the Southwest�
LOU DOBBS: OK.
AMY GOODMAN: �facts never mentioned on your show. His group is regarded as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League.
LOU DOBBS: You know, well, I really don�t care what�
AMY GOODMAN: Spencer has spoken at least twice to the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens.
LOU DOBBS: You know, I got to be honest with you. I have no knowledge of this fellow. I have no idea�and you�re not telling me when he was on the broadcast.
AMY GOODMAN: You had him on the show. I said�
LOU DOBBS: No, I did not have him on the show. He was quoted�
AMY GOODMAN: January 7th�
LOU DOBBS: He was either quoted in a piece�
AMY GOODMAN: No, no, no. No, no, Lou. On January 7, 2004, and June 4, 2004�
LOU DOBBS: Ah!
AMY GOODMAN: �he was interviewed on your broadcast.
LOU DOBBS: He was not on our broadcast. He may have been in a field report. He was not on our broadcast. And, Amy, let me ask you a question: have you checked to see how many guests we�ve had on our show in the course of�what is that?�
AMY GOODMAN: You have had many.
LOU DOBBS: �three-and-a-half years? No, I mean�
AMY GOODMAN: You have had many.
LOU DOBBS: �let�s get a number. What do you think? Why are you focusing on two or three?
AMY GOODMAN: I can go on and on.
LOU DOBBS: OK, keep going. How many?
AMY GOODMAN: But I think the important point here�
LOU DOBBS: Give us a total. Give us a total of the number of guests you object to.
AMY GOODMAN: Lou, I just want to say something here. You just said to Juan, can�t he take a joke, when you talk about the incursion, Mexico taking over the United States. Yet, it is a growing theme. It is a continuing thread in your broadcast. This guy, Glenn Spencer, whether he said this on your show or not, Dobbs has not�
LOU DOBBS: Oh, no, no.
AMY GOODMAN: Just one second�has not mentioned his ties to American�
LOU DOBBS: Now I�m supposed to be�
AMY GOODMAN: Yes, you have to know who�
LOU DOBBS: I�m supposed to be responsible for what he says off my broadcast?
AMY GOODMAN: No. You should know that he was tied to American Renaissance, the group that says blacks are genetically inferior to whites. You didn�t report those ties or mention Spencer�s�
LOU DOBBS: Do you think we knew it?
AMY GOODMAN: �more wild-eyed contentions�
LOU DOBBS: Do you think we knew it?
AMY GOODMAN: �such as his�
LOU DOBBS: Amy, do you really think we knew it?
AMY GOODMAN: Just listen to this�such as his prediction�
LOU DOBBS: Do you really believe we knew that?
AMY GOODMAN: �that thousands will die in a supposedly forthcoming Mexican invasion.
LOU DOBBS: Oh, come on! You�re giving Glenn Spencer and other detestable people who would make such comments about more air time than anybody.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, Lou�
LOU DOBBS: You have just given him more air�
AMY GOODMAN: But, Lou�
LOU DOBBS: �than I would have ever, and I�
AMY GOODMAN: But, Lou, let me make a final point.
LOU DOBBS: Go back and look at the quotes.
AMY GOODMAN: Let me make a final point.
LOU DOBBS: Who�s giving him more air time? You.
AMY GOODMAN: Your colleague, Wolf Blitzer�
LOU DOBBS: Yeah?
AMY GOODMAN: �on the other hand, also featured Spencer on his own show, but reported Mexico�s official response that SPLC, Southern Poverty Leadership Council�s hate group designation, said that he was a member of a hate group, as designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center. So we�re not�
LOU DOBBS: What year was that?
AMY GOODMAN: What I�m saying is that Wolf�
LOU DOBBS: What year was Wolf Blitzer?
AMY GOODMAN: �Blitzer identified him; you did not.
LOU DOBBS: What year? What year?
AMY GOODMAN: Well, I just know when you had him on your show, and you may have had him on since then.
LOU DOBBS: But do you know when Wolf Blitzer had him on?
AMY GOODMAN: Well, soon after that, I suppose. I don�t know.
LOU DOBBS: OK. After we found out that there was a problem.
AMY GOODMAN: But you know what the fact is? I don�t know. And I admit when I don�t know. And I try to get my facts straight.
LOU DOBBS: Sure. Sure. So do we.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: For example, Barbara Coe, leader of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform,�
LOU DOBBS: She�s not a guest. You�re reading from the Southern Poverty Law Center�
AMY GOODMAN: �quoted�just one second�
LOU DOBBS: She was not a guest.
AMY GOODMAN: I am going to look at the�as you said, you actually felt that the Southern Poverty Law Center was so important�
LOU DOBBS: It�s a joke.
AMY GOODMAN: �in getting information�
LOU DOBBS: It�s a joke.
AMY GOODMAN: �that you sent your producers down there to get information so that you wouldn�t represent hate groups on the air.
LOU DOBBS: In their responses, they�re nothing but a fundraising organization�
AMY GOODMAN: So let me�
LOU DOBBS: �and they�re indulging in pure BS.
AMY GOODMAN: OK. Now, let me just�
LOU DOBBS: And so are you, when you quote them.
AMY GOODMAN: Let me just talk about some of the guests that you have had on�
LOU DOBBS: Sure. They�re not guests.
AMY GOODMAN: �or quoted on the show.
LOU DOBBS: Barbara Coe was never a guest.
AMY GOODMAN: No. She was quoted on the show�
LOU DOBBS: That�s different.
AMY GOODMAN: �bitterly attacking Home Depot for betraying Americans, apparently because Hispanic day laborers often gather in front of the store looking for work. Not mentioned were her group, listed by the Southern Poverty Leadership Council as a hate group, or the fact that she routinely refers to Mexicans as �savages.� Coe recently described herself as a member of the Council of Conservative Citizens, the white pride group formed from the remnants�
LOU DOBBS: What year was that?
AMY GOODMAN: �of the segregationist White Citizens� Council of the �50s and �60s,�
LOU DOBBS: What year was she�
AMY GOODMAN: �which Thurgood Marshall called the �Uptown Klan.�
LOU DOBBS: My god, Amy, what year was that on our broadcast? What year?
AMY GOODMAN: Not clear. You can tell me what year was it on your broadcast.
LOU DOBBS: Well, actually, I can, but it was years ago. And it was before we knew what the heck was going on.
AMY GOODMAN: I�m going to talk about a few other people.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: Glenn Spencer, head of the anti-immigration American Patrol, has been interviewed at least twice on the show in 2004, maybe many more times after�I don�t know. Spencer�s website is jammed with anti-Mexican vitriol. He pushes the idea the Mexican government is involved in a secret plot to take over the Southwest�
LOU DOBBS: OK.
AMY GOODMAN: �facts never mentioned on your show. His group is regarded as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League.
LOU DOBBS: You know, well, I really don�t care what�
AMY GOODMAN: Spencer has spoken at least twice to the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens.
LOU DOBBS: You know, I got to be honest with you. I have no knowledge of this fellow. I have no idea�and you�re not telling me when he was on the broadcast.
AMY GOODMAN: You had him on the show. I said�
LOU DOBBS: No, I did not have him on the show. He was quoted�
AMY GOODMAN: January 7th�
LOU DOBBS: He was either quoted in a piece�
AMY GOODMAN: No, no, no. No, no, Lou. On January 7, 2004, and June 4, 2004�
LOU DOBBS: Ah!
AMY GOODMAN: �he was interviewed on your broadcast.
LOU DOBBS: He was not on our broadcast. He may have been in a field report. He was not on our broadcast. And, Amy, let me ask you a question: have you checked to see how many guests we�ve had on our show in the course of�what is that?�
AMY GOODMAN: You have had many.
LOU DOBBS: �three-and-a-half years? No, I mean�
AMY GOODMAN: You have had many.
LOU DOBBS: �let�s get a number. What do you think? Why are you focusing on two or three?
AMY GOODMAN: I can go on and on.
LOU DOBBS: OK, keep going. How many?
AMY GOODMAN: But I think the important point here�
LOU DOBBS: Give us a total. Give us a total of the number of guests you object to.
AMY GOODMAN: Lou, I just want to say something here. You just said to Juan, can�t he take a joke, when you talk about the incursion, Mexico taking over the United States. Yet, it is a growing theme. It is a continuing thread in your broadcast. This guy, Glenn Spencer, whether he said this on your show or not, Dobbs has not�
LOU DOBBS: Oh, no, no.
AMY GOODMAN: Just one second�has not mentioned his ties to American�
LOU DOBBS: Now I�m supposed to be�
AMY GOODMAN: Yes, you have to know who�
LOU DOBBS: I�m supposed to be responsible for what he says off my broadcast?
AMY GOODMAN: No. You should know that he was tied to American Renaissance, the group that says blacks are genetically inferior to whites. You didn�t report those ties or mention Spencer�s�
LOU DOBBS: Do you think we knew it?
AMY GOODMAN: �more wild-eyed contentions�
LOU DOBBS: Do you think we knew it?
AMY GOODMAN: �such as his�
LOU DOBBS: Amy, do you really think we knew it?
AMY GOODMAN: Just listen to this�such as his prediction�
LOU DOBBS: Do you really believe we knew that?
AMY GOODMAN: �that thousands will die in a supposedly forthcoming Mexican invasion.
LOU DOBBS: Oh, come on! You�re giving Glenn Spencer and other detestable people who would make such comments about more air time than anybody.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, Lou�
LOU DOBBS: You have just given him more air�
AMY GOODMAN: But, Lou�
LOU DOBBS: �than I would have ever, and I�
AMY GOODMAN: But, Lou, let me make a final point.
LOU DOBBS: Go back and look at the quotes.
AMY GOODMAN: Let me make a final point.
LOU DOBBS: Who�s giving him more air time? You.
AMY GOODMAN: Your colleague, Wolf Blitzer�
LOU DOBBS: Yeah?
AMY GOODMAN: �on the other hand, also featured Spencer on his own show, but reported Mexico�s official response that SPLC, Southern Poverty Leadership Council�s hate group designation, said that he was a member of a hate group, as designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center. So we�re not�
LOU DOBBS: What year was that?
AMY GOODMAN: What I�m saying is that Wolf�
LOU DOBBS: What year was Wolf Blitzer?
AMY GOODMAN: �Blitzer identified him; you did not.
LOU DOBBS: What year? What year?
AMY GOODMAN: Well, I just know when you had him on your show, and you may have had him on since then.
LOU DOBBS: But do you know when Wolf Blitzer had him on?
AMY GOODMAN: Well, soon after that, I suppose. I don�t know.
LOU DOBBS: OK. After we found out that there was a problem.
AMY GOODMAN: But you know what the fact is? I don�t know. And I admit when I don�t know. And I try to get my facts straight.
LOU DOBBS: Sure. Sure. So do we.
more...
pictures john wayne gacy jr victims
Dipika
10-06 11:44 AM
Hi vikki76, bpositive, dipika, caliguy, leoindiano:
If I am correct, your PDs are current, right? Do you guys know if your case was pre-adjudicated and/or assigned to an IO? I keep reading from the forums that some apps with PDs as late as Dec 2004 and a couple of Jan 2005 got approved. Wondering why the earlier (eg. mine is July 04) not approved yet. Could we all join togther and write a letter to Napolitino(Thanks to SoP for the idea) and ask her to take some action on our cases?
in resent SR, IO said my case is pre adjudicated and under review. we asked what's that mean, he doesn't know - if it's under review then how preadjudicated?
i send request to senator before 2 weeks, but still no change in LUD and no reply.:confused:
If I am correct, your PDs are current, right? Do you guys know if your case was pre-adjudicated and/or assigned to an IO? I keep reading from the forums that some apps with PDs as late as Dec 2004 and a couple of Jan 2005 got approved. Wondering why the earlier (eg. mine is July 04) not approved yet. Could we all join togther and write a letter to Napolitino(Thanks to SoP for the idea) and ask her to take some action on our cases?
in resent SR, IO said my case is pre adjudicated and under review. we asked what's that mean, he doesn't know - if it's under review then how preadjudicated?
i send request to senator before 2 weeks, but still no change in LUD and no reply.:confused:
dresses Serial Killer John Wayne Gacy
greencardvow
07-31 04:30 PM
You can withdraw an existing 485 application once you get Receipt No. Just write a letter to USCIS asking them to withdraw your 485 application stating the reason for withdrawl.
Sorry for the layman's question, but is there an established process for revoking an AOS application? Thanks for your input!
Sorry for the layman's question, but is there an established process for revoking an AOS application? Thanks for your input!
more...
makeup john wayne gacy, movie
aps
10-29 01:00 AM
One of the iv member, has stated that the I485 has been denied for his friend, upon withdrawl of 140 by his ex-employer. His ex-employer has informed USCIS, that the employee left the job on his own. Also, he quoted that "USCIS denied I485 because, ac21 can be used in case of layoffs only , not switching for jobs"
In your letter you are requesting to give RFE/NOID before denial, but the fundamental reason for denial is different in the above case. what is use of getting RFE/NOID, in that case?
thanks,
aps
From IV: IV commends the initiative taken by it's members nk2006, pd_recpaturing, ItsNotfunny and others. As these members have observed, we all know that any one who has filed for AOS/I-485 can potentially be hit with this issue, especially in the current job market situations. If you believe in the old adage prevention is better than cure, this is an action item you have to subscribe to. It will be only a matter of time the number of such denials is going to spike.
In recent weeks there has been a spate of I485 denials by USCIS in the AC21 cases. In most of these cases, the underlying I-140 has been revoked by previous employer. But AC21 regulations and related memo�s require that I485�s should not be denied based on that � provided I485 has been pending for more than 180 days and the applicant has changed to a new job that is same or similar. USCIS has been rejecting cases without even issuing a NOID � again required by AC21 regulations. So USCIS is not following AC21 regulations and related field memo�s for whatever the reasons.
Obviously this will have a very bad impact on us � in addition to tremendous amount of stress it can have very bad economic implications including loss of job. In the current economic conditions we cannot afford to lose the job change flexibility provided by AC21 regulations. IV has started a campaign to fight this.
After a brief campaign to write to Ombudsman, it has been decided to intensify this campaign and write to various officials in USCIS hierarchy. IV core members have been actively involved in coming up with a strategy and are actively supporting this effort. By sending large number of letters we can draw their attention to this issue and resolve as quickly as possible. There are other strategies that are being discussed and will be underway soon to tackle this issue. This is the first and the most important step up on which other steps depend.
I request all the members to start sending the following 4 letters. For your convenience the letters have been completely written including addresses to be sent � all you have to do is download following 4 google documents � add the date, your name and address � and send it to the address provided on each letter.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_1d3mzhr6c
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_2fp3nrhvb
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_3d8h2x7dr
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_4fxnvq9tw
To reiterate: You have to send 4 letters � these letters can be downloaded at the above URL�s. Edit the document to add current date, name, address etc. and mail it (regular mail). After doing that, please update the poll so we know how many letters are being sent.
To get more background on this issue and see what has been done so far, please see these two threads: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22052;
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716
To achieve positive results we need to send these letters in large numbers - please send them today and let everyone else be aware of this effort. Thank you.
Request to core/web site admin: can you please add a link to this thread on the IV main page to get better coverage to this campaign - thanks.
In your letter you are requesting to give RFE/NOID before denial, but the fundamental reason for denial is different in the above case. what is use of getting RFE/NOID, in that case?
thanks,
aps
From IV: IV commends the initiative taken by it's members nk2006, pd_recpaturing, ItsNotfunny and others. As these members have observed, we all know that any one who has filed for AOS/I-485 can potentially be hit with this issue, especially in the current job market situations. If you believe in the old adage prevention is better than cure, this is an action item you have to subscribe to. It will be only a matter of time the number of such denials is going to spike.
In recent weeks there has been a spate of I485 denials by USCIS in the AC21 cases. In most of these cases, the underlying I-140 has been revoked by previous employer. But AC21 regulations and related memo�s require that I485�s should not be denied based on that � provided I485 has been pending for more than 180 days and the applicant has changed to a new job that is same or similar. USCIS has been rejecting cases without even issuing a NOID � again required by AC21 regulations. So USCIS is not following AC21 regulations and related field memo�s for whatever the reasons.
Obviously this will have a very bad impact on us � in addition to tremendous amount of stress it can have very bad economic implications including loss of job. In the current economic conditions we cannot afford to lose the job change flexibility provided by AC21 regulations. IV has started a campaign to fight this.
After a brief campaign to write to Ombudsman, it has been decided to intensify this campaign and write to various officials in USCIS hierarchy. IV core members have been actively involved in coming up with a strategy and are actively supporting this effort. By sending large number of letters we can draw their attention to this issue and resolve as quickly as possible. There are other strategies that are being discussed and will be underway soon to tackle this issue. This is the first and the most important step up on which other steps depend.
I request all the members to start sending the following 4 letters. For your convenience the letters have been completely written including addresses to be sent � all you have to do is download following 4 google documents � add the date, your name and address � and send it to the address provided on each letter.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_1d3mzhr6c
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_2fp3nrhvb
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_3d8h2x7dr
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_4fxnvq9tw
To reiterate: You have to send 4 letters � these letters can be downloaded at the above URL�s. Edit the document to add current date, name, address etc. and mail it (regular mail). After doing that, please update the poll so we know how many letters are being sent.
To get more background on this issue and see what has been done so far, please see these two threads: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22052;
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716
To achieve positive results we need to send these letters in large numbers - please send them today and let everyone else be aware of this effort. Thank you.
Request to core/web site admin: can you please add a link to this thread on the IV main page to get better coverage to this campaign - thanks.
girlfriend Killer John Wayne Gacy 4/6
rsharma
06-13 11:25 PM
I understand your point. But this is exactly what anti-immigrants complain about H1Bs. ( depressing wages, outsourcing etc)
It is interesting that we are using anti-immigrant's arguments to pin L1s.
I would like to point out the differences between H1B and L1
1. There is a yearly limit for H1B (65k + 20K) but L1s are limitless.
2. A minimum wage need clause is there for H1B but minimum wage is not required to be paid for L1s. There are people in L1A visas who are supposed to be Senior Managers are sometimes paid less than 60K per annum by these offshore companies. As although they are brough in L1A visa they are in fact developers.
3. Almost 99% of the L1s are from offshore companies whose main intention is to send the project/job to offshore, most of the H1Bs do not have this intention.
4. L1s cannot change their employer, so they are bound to follow what their offshore employer ask them to do i.e try to take the job offshore, H1Bs can change employers, they will not try to send the job to offshore as they will then eventually have tomove back to offshore.
So if we clearify these points even to the antis, I hope they will understand who is the real culprint for the employment scarcity. Each of these companies are moving thousands of jobs out of this country making the problems for Citizens/Green Card holders/H1Bs.
99.99% of all the L1s are not used as they were intended when the law was signed.
It is interesting that we are using anti-immigrant's arguments to pin L1s.
I would like to point out the differences between H1B and L1
1. There is a yearly limit for H1B (65k + 20K) but L1s are limitless.
2. A minimum wage need clause is there for H1B but minimum wage is not required to be paid for L1s. There are people in L1A visas who are supposed to be Senior Managers are sometimes paid less than 60K per annum by these offshore companies. As although they are brough in L1A visa they are in fact developers.
3. Almost 99% of the L1s are from offshore companies whose main intention is to send the project/job to offshore, most of the H1Bs do not have this intention.
4. L1s cannot change their employer, so they are bound to follow what their offshore employer ask them to do i.e try to take the job offshore, H1Bs can change employers, they will not try to send the job to offshore as they will then eventually have tomove back to offshore.
So if we clearify these points even to the antis, I hope they will understand who is the real culprint for the employment scarcity. Each of these companies are moving thousands of jobs out of this country making the problems for Citizens/Green Card holders/H1Bs.
99.99% of all the L1s are not used as they were intended when the law was signed.
hairstyles John Wayne Gacy Crime .
andy garcia
07-10 07:43 PM
We all know that IV is not Indian. More Indian!=All Indian. Lets not worry about it and most importantly I request IV members from all countries to ignore it as a reporter mistake as they script stories in their fashion to elicit more coverage. It is almost impossible to edit the story that has been distributed by Reuters/AP. Once its gone, its out of their hands.
Maybe 80 -90 % Indian.:)
Maybe 80 -90 % Indian.:)
PlainSpeak
04-06 08:32 AM
And their news page has also changed to reflect this "modest" movement (previously it stated - "the movement will not be weeks or months but could be years")
On both extremes, it's nothing but just an attempt to generate traffic to the website I guess.
Interesting that he claims - the modest movement will be because of the 7% country cap. In my understanding, it does not apply when spiilover happens (plz correct me if I am wrong)
Yes you are right ..
Country caps are not followed or implemented in spillover visas. Why do you think EB2I moved to May 2006 last year July 2010
On both extremes, it's nothing but just an attempt to generate traffic to the website I guess.
Interesting that he claims - the modest movement will be because of the 7% country cap. In my understanding, it does not apply when spiilover happens (plz correct me if I am wrong)
Yes you are right ..
Country caps are not followed or implemented in spillover visas. Why do you think EB2I moved to May 2006 last year July 2010
Caliber
06-16 11:21 AM
Let me ask you a simple question.. WHY ARE YOU SUPPORTING THIS FRAUDULANT ACTIVITY??? .... think for a minute and then decide whether to reply me back or not.. bye....
Dear L1Fraud,
Please let me know if you need support from me. You can PM me.
When I complained to ICE and other authorities, I did not seek any support from this forum as there are many free raiders and will only pull you down. I and Angelfire did all alone. Angelfire did most of the job.
For any one who is opposing this, my question:
Why should US give us Green Cards? Why should they even extend H1 beyond 6 years?. If they do not extend H1, always new guys can keep coming on L1/H1 and the cost to employers will be much less. USCIS can have lots of money for H1 renewals. Only the body shoppers and end clients will benefit. Are you supporting more body shopping?
L1 dumping is VIOLATION. They can not work at client's place. When there is a competition, it should be on fair terms. If your pay is XXX K, other H1 or US Citizen/GC holder will compete with you for that salary plus minus 5-10 %. But these OUTSOURCE company's that dump L1 are competing for that job with 30-40 K. Can you guys believe this? Ask that guy from that BIG outsouce company, he will tell you, he is on H1. Take him for a drink, he will cry infront of you that he is paid peanuts and is on L1. He took this job as he wants to come to US and that his spouse can work. So he can afford to work for that peanut. Can H1 holder compete with these guys where our spouses can not work? Even Citizens and GC's can not compete due to cost of living being higher.
If you are on H1, at least you can not cheat on W2. But in L1, there is no minimum wage rule.
If you do not want to support the OP, it is OK. But do not stop some one trying to correct the violations.
Dear L1Fraud: May I request you to please become Donor? You can post such things in Donor forum and there you can have some meaningful debate and not personal attacks.
Dear L1Fraud,
Please let me know if you need support from me. You can PM me.
When I complained to ICE and other authorities, I did not seek any support from this forum as there are many free raiders and will only pull you down. I and Angelfire did all alone. Angelfire did most of the job.
For any one who is opposing this, my question:
Why should US give us Green Cards? Why should they even extend H1 beyond 6 years?. If they do not extend H1, always new guys can keep coming on L1/H1 and the cost to employers will be much less. USCIS can have lots of money for H1 renewals. Only the body shoppers and end clients will benefit. Are you supporting more body shopping?
L1 dumping is VIOLATION. They can not work at client's place. When there is a competition, it should be on fair terms. If your pay is XXX K, other H1 or US Citizen/GC holder will compete with you for that salary plus minus 5-10 %. But these OUTSOURCE company's that dump L1 are competing for that job with 30-40 K. Can you guys believe this? Ask that guy from that BIG outsouce company, he will tell you, he is on H1. Take him for a drink, he will cry infront of you that he is paid peanuts and is on L1. He took this job as he wants to come to US and that his spouse can work. So he can afford to work for that peanut. Can H1 holder compete with these guys where our spouses can not work? Even Citizens and GC's can not compete due to cost of living being higher.
If you are on H1, at least you can not cheat on W2. But in L1, there is no minimum wage rule.
If you do not want to support the OP, it is OK. But do not stop some one trying to correct the violations.
Dear L1Fraud: May I request you to please become Donor? You can post such things in Donor forum and there you can have some meaningful debate and not personal attacks.
No comments:
Post a Comment