pitha
01-28 10:56 AM
I don’t want to start another war here but all I am asking for is a fair treatment of people and not discriminate against people based on country of birth. One of the reasons I left my country, India, is because of the discriminating that exists there in terms of "reservations" where everything is reserved based on your caste for 50%. Now please dont tell me reservations and country cap are different, they are not different they are the same. they accomplish the same purpose in case of skilled immigration.I never thought such a thing would happen in US but it seems worst here because Indians and Chinese make up almost 70 to 80% of H1 (which is dual intent) but when it comes to employment based green cards (which are based on H1) Indians and Chinese combined get only 14% of the visas, don’t you see the tragedy here? Why don’t they enforce the country cap on H1 also, that way people from India and china will not have to suffer worse than others? But US is a competitive country, they want the best available talent for H1 and that’s the reason they don’t put country caps on H1.
Take my case for example, I have come to this country in 1999 on F1 and have been working and paying takes since 2001. I am not even able to apply for 485. If I get laid off now I will have to leave US next year. Contrast this with somebody from Taiwan, UK or some non retrogressed country. In some cases they can get green card within the first year of coming to US. This is not a hypothetical case but a scenario which is happening quite often, especially in EB2. In my own company I have seen people (6 so far) who are 5 years junior to me (i.e joined the company 5 years after I did) get a green card where as I am dazed and confused and haven’t even applied for 485.
I totally agree with country caps in non skilled immigration, because the only criteria is that you don’t have any diseases and don’t have a criminal background. But in skilled immigration it does not make sense to apply country caps unless you apply country caps in H1. but US is a competitive country, they want the best available talent for H1and that’s the reason they don’t put country caps on H1.
getting rid of country caps will hurt ppl from ROW. we need to be united, what do u say? H1B and EB visas are not related and should not be confused as related items. There are exemptions on H1b but none on EB.
totally agree with this.
Have full faith in IV and I am sure they will try to keep the interests of all in mind, not just of those from one country that will benefit from ending country-caps.
Take my case for example, I have come to this country in 1999 on F1 and have been working and paying takes since 2001. I am not even able to apply for 485. If I get laid off now I will have to leave US next year. Contrast this with somebody from Taiwan, UK or some non retrogressed country. In some cases they can get green card within the first year of coming to US. This is not a hypothetical case but a scenario which is happening quite often, especially in EB2. In my own company I have seen people (6 so far) who are 5 years junior to me (i.e joined the company 5 years after I did) get a green card where as I am dazed and confused and haven’t even applied for 485.
I totally agree with country caps in non skilled immigration, because the only criteria is that you don’t have any diseases and don’t have a criminal background. But in skilled immigration it does not make sense to apply country caps unless you apply country caps in H1. but US is a competitive country, they want the best available talent for H1and that’s the reason they don’t put country caps on H1.
getting rid of country caps will hurt ppl from ROW. we need to be united, what do u say? H1B and EB visas are not related and should not be confused as related items. There are exemptions on H1b but none on EB.
totally agree with this.
Have full faith in IV and I am sure they will try to keep the interests of all in mind, not just of those from one country that will benefit from ending country-caps.
wallpaper Ivanka Trump amp; Jared Kushner
swissgear
09-14 02:46 PM
Well, I have not received RFE mail yet. I have changed my employer because our division was sold to Canadian firm and they moved everything to Montreal.
After changing my employer (in June), I applied for EAD/AP and both got approved within 3-4 weeks w/o any issues/RFE.
I have not filed for AC21 and used EAD to switch job. I think my previous employer might have notified USCIS about H1B case (as I had valid H1B too). Again as per attorney, it takes months if not year for USCIS to work on such notifications.
I had travelled to India last year July and came on AP as I could not get H1B stamp in India. The US consulate took more than few months to approve the my application and by that time I had already come to US on AP as suggested by my employer's attoteny.
As far as I know, most likely your RFE would be related to EVL, if you didn't receive it earlier. Also, if you changed state, and working on H1 or EAD, they are sending in a standard RFE like to describe location discrepancy and letter from Employer to state that they still support your GC as per the Labor and 140 application. Hope this helps!!! Good Luck!!!
After changing my employer (in June), I applied for EAD/AP and both got approved within 3-4 weeks w/o any issues/RFE.
I have not filed for AC21 and used EAD to switch job. I think my previous employer might have notified USCIS about H1B case (as I had valid H1B too). Again as per attorney, it takes months if not year for USCIS to work on such notifications.
I had travelled to India last year July and came on AP as I could not get H1B stamp in India. The US consulate took more than few months to approve the my application and by that time I had already come to US on AP as suggested by my employer's attoteny.
As far as I know, most likely your RFE would be related to EVL, if you didn't receive it earlier. Also, if you changed state, and working on H1 or EAD, they are sending in a standard RFE like to describe location discrepancy and letter from Employer to state that they still support your GC as per the Labor and 140 application. Hope this helps!!! Good Luck!!!
ashwaghoshk
03-21 12:39 PM
I still dont see labor approvals after March1. I dont know where you r looking at,, Can you tell me which page your looking at?
I sent you a private message... check that url
I sent you a private message... check that url
2011 Ivana Trump Wedding Pictures,
pcs
08-03 01:39 PM
This guy is the root cause of our problem. Else, we would have got our provisions in Dec'05
DO NOT CONTACT HIM
I REPEAT DO NOT CONTACT HIM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO NOT CONTACT HIM
I REPEAT DO NOT CONTACT HIM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
more...
rbms
10-15 08:29 PM
Will mail on Friday
stuckinretro
10-15 07:54 PM
I think you don't understand. USCIS has no control over the Visa bulletin. The reason India EB3 is doomed because of the percountry limitations set by DOS.
Congress need to change that rule not USCIS.
Know your facts before suggesting something that doesn't work!!!
Guys,
I think this is a time to start another flower campaign to USCIS. It is ridiculuous to have 7 years of retrogression on EB3 India, same is true to good extend for EB2 India also.
Congress need to change that rule not USCIS.
Know your facts before suggesting something that doesn't work!!!
Guys,
I think this is a time to start another flower campaign to USCIS. It is ridiculuous to have 7 years of retrogression on EB3 India, same is true to good extend for EB2 India also.
more...
logiclife
12-20 04:54 PM
Please lookup 245(k).
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
2010 Ivanka trump wedding ring has
DesiGuy
09-11 10:56 AM
another hurdle and another uncertainty. wait goes on...
more...
senthil1
02-04 12:58 PM
Most of your points are ok. But someone has to arrive with a calculation that how much improvement will EB3 get. If it is atleast 2 years then the time and money spent may be Ok. I am sure EB2 will get a very big benefit and I doubt EB3 will get much benefit. My assumption may be wrong. If it is ok even for small benefit we can go ahead with this campaign as the main aim is to remove unfairness in law.
I have to say that I am a bit ticked off by your ignorance. Did not expect this from someone who has been a long time member. You should have thought it through. See my response below.
I have to say that I am a bit ticked off by your ignorance. Did not expect this from someone who has been a long time member. You should have thought it through. See my response below.
hair ivanka trump wedding 2
battineni
08-10 02:23 PM
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
I'm with you...!!
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
I'm with you...!!
more...
axp817
02-13 02:54 PM
Congratulations on the new job, glad everything worked out for you, even in these difficult times. The hard part is behind you now, replying to the RFE shouldn't be an issue anymore.
Godspeed.
Godspeed.
hot ivanka trump wedding dress
pappu
07-23 03:06 PM
Employment letter is a MUST. Without this letter, your application can be denied without even an RFE. Read the latest USCIS memo. Please tell your lawyer and HR.
more...
house Ivanka Trump#39;s couture Vera
paskal
07-03 02:41 AM
I've said it before and I'll say it again - I don't see how the per country limit is unfair! It was set up so that immigrants from ALL nations would have EQUAL opportunity to immigrate to the U.S. and to prevent any one (or two) countries from monopolizing the visa numbers. Getting rid of the per country limit would most certainly lead to immigration from a limited number of sources (countries) and thus jeopardize the diversity of the immigration process. Getting rid of it would be like robbing Peter to pay Paul because those countries who are severely retrogressed now would only see limited benefits and those who are not all that retrogressed would fall backwards - is that fair!? It seems these forms are dominated by "certain" groups who have their own agenda and don't really care about ROW! It makes me feel uncomfortable being an IV member from ROW!
iv supports a package of measures that includes the recapture and STEM exemptions, not removal of country quotas in isolation. the idea is not to redistribute pain (though frankly country quotas give disproportionate pain to some- for what? being born "wrong'") but to end retrogression by simultaneously increasing numbers available and ending country quotas.
if you want to think about "fair" and "monopolies", i urge you to think of the current monopoly. i am an EB2 in health care- every ROW person with me, waltzes to current GCs and mine is many years away. i cannot change anything about the way i work for years...does my career have the same value as one from ROW? i did not apply for the job as an indian and i was not given a job as one. i had some qualifications that counted....why then are they suddenly subservient to my place of birth?
iv supports a package of measures that includes the recapture and STEM exemptions, not removal of country quotas in isolation. the idea is not to redistribute pain (though frankly country quotas give disproportionate pain to some- for what? being born "wrong'") but to end retrogression by simultaneously increasing numbers available and ending country quotas.
if you want to think about "fair" and "monopolies", i urge you to think of the current monopoly. i am an EB2 in health care- every ROW person with me, waltzes to current GCs and mine is many years away. i cannot change anything about the way i work for years...does my career have the same value as one from ROW? i did not apply for the job as an indian and i was not given a job as one. i had some qualifications that counted....why then are they suddenly subservient to my place of birth?
tattoo ivanka trump wedding dress.
indio0617
02-15 01:06 PM
Berkeleybee,
Just so that you know, I am caught in the name check too. This is a bigger blackhole than even labor processing. Becos atleast labor processing your Immigration Attorneys can write to BECs (You may or may not get a reply, that is a different issue, but atleast it is allowed). In case of FBI name check, you just cant do much. It is a much dreaded process in the whole game and needs to get enough focus. Eventually, it is going to be everybodys problem.
Thanks.
You are probably aware of these and have already tried it.
1. Heard the attorney / employer can file for some extra paperwork to expedite name check. I am not sure what it is... Have you checked into it.
2. Request your Senator / Congress staff to look ibto your case. I heard that often hastens the process. Some of my friends have had success with that approach.
FYI: My employer (Healthcare) has had phenomenal success with I-485 approvals. Average processing time has been 6 months.
Just so that you know, I am caught in the name check too. This is a bigger blackhole than even labor processing. Becos atleast labor processing your Immigration Attorneys can write to BECs (You may or may not get a reply, that is a different issue, but atleast it is allowed). In case of FBI name check, you just cant do much. It is a much dreaded process in the whole game and needs to get enough focus. Eventually, it is going to be everybodys problem.
Thanks.
You are probably aware of these and have already tried it.
1. Heard the attorney / employer can file for some extra paperwork to expedite name check. I am not sure what it is... Have you checked into it.
2. Request your Senator / Congress staff to look ibto your case. I heard that often hastens the process. Some of my friends have had success with that approach.
FYI: My employer (Healthcare) has had phenomenal success with I-485 approvals. Average processing time has been 6 months.
more...
pictures Ivanka Trump wedding dress
mrdelhiite
07-13 08:25 AM
GCBy3000,
Your criticism of Murthy is noted as you are entitled to speak your mind. But let me ask you a simple question:
Did you exhort your lawyer to send a letter to Secretary Chertoff or the USCIS Director? OR
Did your lawyer send a letter on his own, exhorting the Secretary and the USCIS Director to correct this wrong?
I know the Mahatma would have asked himself the same questions before hurling allegations.
Whatever maybe the intentions of Murthy, this letter is certainly going to help not harm our case.
AND YES - For full disclosure, I am a client of Murthy and have been so for more than five years.
ALL I AM SAYING IS WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY. REASON WHY I LIKE IV OVER MURTHY. IMMIGRATION IS MURTHY'S PRIMARY BUSINESS .. IV IS DOING NOT FOR MONEY BUT TO REALLY FIX THINGS ... MUST MEAN SOMETHING RIGHT ... GO IV
-M
Your criticism of Murthy is noted as you are entitled to speak your mind. But let me ask you a simple question:
Did you exhort your lawyer to send a letter to Secretary Chertoff or the USCIS Director? OR
Did your lawyer send a letter on his own, exhorting the Secretary and the USCIS Director to correct this wrong?
I know the Mahatma would have asked himself the same questions before hurling allegations.
Whatever maybe the intentions of Murthy, this letter is certainly going to help not harm our case.
AND YES - For full disclosure, I am a client of Murthy and have been so for more than five years.
ALL I AM SAYING IS WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY. REASON WHY I LIKE IV OVER MURTHY. IMMIGRATION IS MURTHY'S PRIMARY BUSINESS .. IV IS DOING NOT FOR MONEY BUT TO REALLY FIX THINGS ... MUST MEAN SOMETHING RIGHT ... GO IV
-M
dresses ivanka trump wedding dress.
bigboy007
06-30 10:19 PM
But as what i see now the chance of announcing on monday might not happen they will do it most probably on 3rd saying we already reached max no. of visas through this they can find a way of out to clean their hands and good support for if any cases filed. 4th holiday hence no issues and 5 th after its all gone. Lets stay tuned from Monday else have all nice weekend.
more...
makeup Best Wedding Dress? Ivanka
chmur
09-10 02:37 PM
As of 05/10 's inventory report - there were ~200,000 GC application pending across ALL categories.
I expect they would have reduced this backlog by 40,000 in the last 6 months . Will be verified by the next inventory report due , hopefully next month.
If they reduce the backlog by 40,000 "NET" per year , backlog should be over in next 5 years.
If they open the flood gates and let more applications to come in then this NET reduction is not possible.
I expect they would have reduced this backlog by 40,000 in the last 6 months . Will be verified by the next inventory report due , hopefully next month.
If they reduce the backlog by 40,000 "NET" per year , backlog should be over in next 5 years.
If they open the flood gates and let more applications to come in then this NET reduction is not possible.
girlfriend Ivanka Trump
mallu
06-20 02:54 PM
PD Nov.2002 India EB2( original labor ).
I-485 RD Jul 2006 . AD : June 2008.
Waiting for actual card...:D
I-485 RD Jul 2006 . AD : June 2008.
Waiting for actual card...:D
hairstyles vera wang ivanka trump dress.
Jaime
02-19 12:27 AM
Guys, this looks good. It is NOT for illegal aliens. Paragraphs (c) and (d) state that the alien must be admissible as an immigrant (i.e. not have broken the law by being an illegal), read paragraph (d) here:
"(d) Security and Law Enforcement Clearances- The alien, if over 15 years of age, shall submit fingerprints in accordance with procedures established by the Secretary of Homeland Security. Such fingerprints shall be submitted to relevant Federal agencies to be checked against existing databases for information relating to criminal, national security, or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a process for challenging the accuracy of matches that result in a finding of ineligibility for adjustment of status."
Read the "or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section"....so, anyone who broke the law by entering the country illegally would NOT be eligible.
So, stop sending those letters opposing this bill, and instead let's support it!!
"(d) Security and Law Enforcement Clearances- The alien, if over 15 years of age, shall submit fingerprints in accordance with procedures established by the Secretary of Homeland Security. Such fingerprints shall be submitted to relevant Federal agencies to be checked against existing databases for information relating to criminal, national security, or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a process for challenging the accuracy of matches that result in a finding of ineligibility for adjustment of status."
Read the "or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section"....so, anyone who broke the law by entering the country illegally would NOT be eligible.
So, stop sending those letters opposing this bill, and instead let's support it!!
willwin
03-17 03:12 PM
Right. But here USCIS plays its villain role. What happens is USCIS moves clock ahead depending upon last month's "demand." We always think stramline logic.. USCIS does not work that way. It will kick PD to x date for an example Dec 2002. Now at the same time it will keep RD at say for example july 2001..Now it will keep some files eating dust in Name check so end effect is "Some" will get their gC. So next month, seeing this "demand" USCIS will kick PD further.. same game.. I believe at some level it decides seeing it reaching to "3500" limit put a break. So in reality what happen is even though USCIS kicks PD ahead not "all applicants with valid PD" get their GC. If they are unlucky enough to stuck in name check or RD is not being current, they will again wait for years for next kicking cycle start from April 2001.
But when that happens, I guess, guys in CP wil get their interview scheduled (as long as their PD is current; no RD date concept there) as the queue in CP is not as long. Correct?
But when that happens, I guess, guys in CP wil get their interview scheduled (as long as their PD is current; no RD date concept there) as the queue in CP is not as long. Correct?
thomachan72
07-05 04:46 PM
Money never, never comes last, IMHO. Money does have its place right beside grass root efforts. Any one who undermines either of them at any time is making a huge mistake.
I am scratching my head to figure out how IV benefits with non paying members? If you say that by being a member of IV, we have done the honors, I have no answer for you. If you say that we all boast about being a 15K member org, You can pass on me. Are you a proponent of "I dont care how IV benefits from me, All that I care for is if I got my question answered or not " thought process? As long as we see IV only as a forum and compare with other forums, we will never see the invaluable difference. while eulogizing the founders, also try to see what they would like us to do. I am positive they would love more contributions than a simple eulogy so that we can enable ourselves with more ammo. Thanks for the undeserved pat. I will be happy if people take a moment and introspect their stand on this issue.
Friend I dont disagree with you regarding the value of money but we should think in the context of the current situation, right? The CIR is gone for now. It may / may not come back in 2009, who knows. Now we have the 485 filing crisis. You said we have 15000 members. How many of these are actually affected by the current crisis?? I can tell about one person, myself, certainly I am not affected directly. Now if lets say 20% are affected that would be 3000, right? Do you know how many people applied for 485 this time, it certainly is in the 100K or much more numbers. Now if we start being very critical of the few here (approx 3000), who have not contributed, we are making a mistake. I may be completely wrong on these numericals. Lets hope everybody contributes (if IV actually needs fund urgently). Atleast regarding the present crisis we are fortunate the AILF is taking up the case for FREE. People who want to contribute can through IV or even directly. I dont think contribution is going to make a difference here. This is not a lobbying effort involving the pattonbog, this is a legal case in which we are just joining.
I am scratching my head to figure out how IV benefits with non paying members? If you say that by being a member of IV, we have done the honors, I have no answer for you. If you say that we all boast about being a 15K member org, You can pass on me. Are you a proponent of "I dont care how IV benefits from me, All that I care for is if I got my question answered or not " thought process? As long as we see IV only as a forum and compare with other forums, we will never see the invaluable difference. while eulogizing the founders, also try to see what they would like us to do. I am positive they would love more contributions than a simple eulogy so that we can enable ourselves with more ammo. Thanks for the undeserved pat. I will be happy if people take a moment and introspect their stand on this issue.
Friend I dont disagree with you regarding the value of money but we should think in the context of the current situation, right? The CIR is gone for now. It may / may not come back in 2009, who knows. Now we have the 485 filing crisis. You said we have 15000 members. How many of these are actually affected by the current crisis?? I can tell about one person, myself, certainly I am not affected directly. Now if lets say 20% are affected that would be 3000, right? Do you know how many people applied for 485 this time, it certainly is in the 100K or much more numbers. Now if we start being very critical of the few here (approx 3000), who have not contributed, we are making a mistake. I may be completely wrong on these numericals. Lets hope everybody contributes (if IV actually needs fund urgently). Atleast regarding the present crisis we are fortunate the AILF is taking up the case for FREE. People who want to contribute can through IV or even directly. I dont think contribution is going to make a difference here. This is not a lobbying effort involving the pattonbog, this is a legal case in which we are just joining.
No comments:
Post a Comment