Wednesday, July 13, 2011

billy graham preaching

images Graham plays with dogs Paula, billy graham preaching. hairstyles Billy Graham In
  • hairstyles Billy Graham In



  • mariner5555
    03-24 12:01 AM
    I live in NJ close to the cherry hill area and i am looking to buy only in Burlington county. I have been living here for about 9 years now and so far haven't thought of investing here. I invested in india and the investment appreciated 4 times or more so i am happy about the decision. I actually needed a bigger place now and i am not seeing that as a investment but if it turns out that way that's fine with me. I just wanted to find out what are people's experiences with the house escpecially for those who are under H1/EAD. well the experience that I gave above was as good as I could since it was told to me in person. it all depends on yr long term horizon .....do u think u will be in NJ for a long time ? if yes and if u are getting a good deal, then house makes sense - price of house would always go up by the cost of inflation + 1 percent (except during bubble burst ..like now) - and I guess RE in NJ will always be in demand ..but u would know better.
    house is definitely better in many many respects --
    if u don't see it as an investment -- then why not ..take the plunge !!
    The only problem that I have (in my case) is GC !! and the fact that prices went up by average of 10% during last 4 - 5 years - which is craziness (And as we know now - a bubble). I for one am not a sucker who wants to pay high for an asset than it is actually worth..in most areas in US atleast --land is plenty and time it takes to build infrastructure is less . demand is low and will be low -- and I don't think of renting as throwing money (did extensive research on the same) - as of now I am happy as I have lot more time on hand , commutes are shorter and the money that I save - I am investing aggresively in stocks etc. here is a latest article about home prices - I guess bottom in 2009 feb ?
    ----------
    Even as sales have plunged, more supply has come on the market, from home builders, foreclosed homes, and from owners who need or want to sell. It'll take a year at least to work off the excess supply, which is driving prices lower.
    Falling home prices could be keeping some buyers on the sidelines, waiting for a better deal. But prices have already fallen significantly, which means more potential buyers can find an affordable house.
    The two major home price indexes will be released on Tuesday by Standard & Poor's and the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight. S&P's Case-Shiller index will probably see a decline of 11% in the 12 months ending in January, down from 9% through December, according to economists at UBS.
    Futures markets predict home prices will fall another 14% by next February, UBS said.

    ----------





    wallpaper hairstyles Billy Graham In billy graham preaching. Image: Billy Graham
  • Image: Billy Graham



  • pd_recapturing
    08-05 08:29 AM
    Friend, How many times, you need to know that even job requirements do get rigged by lawyers and employers to accommodate ppl in eb2/eb3 ...and its not jumping the line ...the person has to restart the labor and 140 in order to change the category ...u cant compare it with labor substitution (if u r comparing !!)





    billy graham preaching. Astrology of Billy Graham with
  • Astrology of Billy Graham with



  • kawosa
    12-25 09:26 AM
    We suffer due to the unfairness of a system that hinges upon the place of your birth! We demand that there be no quotas based on "country of birth" and that we ask for equitable treatment.
    Singling someone out due to his/her "national origin" should be something we backlogged EB2/3 I folks should understand more than others. And yet if someone from Pakistan gets a green card - we gang up on him and are outraged that someone from a terrorist country got it before us!!!! Does that mean we would be ok as long as he got it after us?
    I got plenty of red dots after my mere mention of the stupidity of ganging up on the fella... red dots are ok... it was the messages that came along with that were offensive - traitor , paki pork, etc - I just deleted my posts after that and stopped commenting on that particular thread.
    There is nothing wrong with discussing the history of India and Pakistan, nothing woring in discussing organized vs. unorganized religion, nothing wrong with pointing out the the flaws in Islam or any other religion - The problem is that such discussions always end up with insults hurled at each other. While we may start with the noble intention of having a civil discussion about these issues - every thread like this ends up with offensive remarks that drives people away. The simple question then becomes - is it worth it? Is this the place to do it? Would such a thread be allowed to continue on Ron Gotcher's website? I hope the moderators of this site realize that inaction on their part seems like they condone this type of behavior.
    All the red dots coming my way are more than welcome... just a small request about the insults .... please be brave enough to post them publicy!
    So let us now go back to solving all the controversial theological, anthropological and geopolitical issues. Let us continue to demand for fairness and an immigration system blind to our country of birth - but make sure we point out other people's national origin... no wonder the most anti-immigration people are generally the most recent immigrants.

    What a tiresome thread!!!

    Several years ago, people actually made an effort to make IV an organization representing all skilled workers, from all parts of the world. Now, immigration matters are totally irrelevant on the forums. Heck, forget about being an exclusively India focused forum, as this thread demonstrates, it is a venue to vent on matters even more narrowly focused - My religion, my sect, my opinion, my petty prejudices. If this is not irrelevant enough, we have enough threads on red dot-green dots to justify a whole separate category of forums :rolleyes:
    Anyway, it does a pretty good job of turning off people. I guarantee you this thread alone has contributed significantly in influencing many planning on attending the March rally to change their mind. It sure did mine.





    2011 Image: Billy Graham billy graham preaching. Evangelist Billy Graham
  • Evangelist Billy Graham



  • coopheal
    01-08 01:12 PM
    Anyway, i'll sign off and i won't post any more message in this thread again.
    Please respect your own post and stop posting on this topic.



    more...


    billy graham preaching. Billy Graham Preaching
  • Billy Graham Preaching



  • sanju
    12-17 05:37 PM
    And BTW, if Bush can doctor intelligence reports in the digital age of 2003, and use those reports to go to WAR, how difficult would it be for a King to change religious books 1000 years back? Just think.

    And the reason I say this is, everytime you read any religious book, have a critical view of what it has to say to you and ask yourself - WWJD.





    billy graham preaching. Billy Graham in Melbourne
  • Billy Graham in Melbourne



  • Macaca
    12-27 12:34 PM
    The following appeared in NYT yesterday. It was discussed by Pat Buchanan (hosting Tucker Carlson's show on MSNBC) last evening. Pat was surprised that Demz were considering it.

    It is available here http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/26/washington/26immig.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

    WASHINGTON, Dec. 25 � Counting on the support of the new Democratic majority in Congress, Democratic lawmakers and their Republican allies are working on measures that could place millions of illegal immigrants on a more direct path to citizenship than would a bill that the Senate passed in the spring.

    The lawmakers are considering abandoning a requirement in the Senate bill that would compel several million illegal immigrants to leave the United States before becoming eligible to apply for citizenship.

    The lawmakers are also considering denying financing for 700 miles of fencing along the border with Mexico, a law championed by Republicans that passed with significant Democratic support.

    Details of the bill, which would be introduced early next year, are being drafted. The lawmakers, who hope for bipartisan support, will almost certainly face pressure to compromise on the issues from some Republicans and conservative Democrats.

    Still, the proposals reflect significant shifts since the November elections, as well as critical support from the Homeland Security Department.

    Proponents said the prospects for such a measure, which would include tougher border security and a guest worker plan, had markedly improved since Nov. 7.

    The Senate plans to introduce its immigration bill next month with an eye toward passage in March or April, officials said. The House is expected to consider its version later. President Bush said last week that he hoped to sign an immigration bill next year.

    The major lawmakers drafting the legislation include Senators Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, and John McCain, Republican of Arizona, along with Representatives Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, and Luis V. Gutierrez, Democrat of Illinois. The four met this month, and their staffs have begun working on a bill.

    �I�m very hopeful about this, both in terms of the substance and the politics of it,� said Mr. Kennedy, the incoming chairman of the Senate Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship Subcommittee.

    Mr. Kennedy acknowledged that there would be hurdles. But he and other lawmakers say Republicans and Democrats are now more likely to work together to repair a system widely considered as broken.

    House Republicans blocked consideration of the bill that passed the Senate this year, saying it amounted to an amnesty for lawbreakers and voicing confidence that a tough stance would touch off a groundswell of support in the Congressional elections. The strategy largely failed.

    Hispanic voters, a swing constituency that Republicans covet, abandoned the party in large numbers. Several Republican hardliners, including Representatives John Hostettler of Indiana and J. D. Hayworth of Arizona, lost their seats. After the dismal showing, House Republicans denied F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. of Wisconsin, the departing chairman of the Judiciary Committee and an architect of the House immigration approach, a senior position on any major committee in the new Congress.

    Domestic security officials have voiced support for important elements of the framework under consideration. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has repeatedly raised doubts about the effectiveness of border fencing in remote desert areas. Mr. Bush signed the fence bill this year, but Congress did not appropriate enough money for it. Officials say they would also prefer a less burdensome process than the original Senate bill outlined.

    That bill divided the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants into three groups, those living here for five years or more, those here for two to five years and those here for less than two years.

    All but the illegal immigrants living here for five years or more, roughly seven million, would have to leave the country briefly to be eligible for legal status. Those here for fewer than two years would have to leave the country and would not even be guaranteed a slot in a guest worker plan.

    Domestic security officials said the original plan would have been enormously difficult to administer because many illegal immigrants lacked documentation to prove how long they had been in the United States.

    The officials said it would have fueled a market in fraudulent documents as illegal immigrants scrambled to offer proof of residency.

    The three-tiered approach would also discourage millions of illegal immigrants from registering, driving millions deeper underground.

    �We do have concerns over breaking it down into that tiered system,� said a domestic security official who insisted on anonymity. �When you do that, you run the risk of people trying to create false documentation that would get them the highest benefits.�

    Also expected to have prominent roles in the debate are Representatives Zoe Lofgren, the California Democrat who is likely to head the House Immigration, Border Security and Claims Subcommittee; Howard L. Berman, a California Democrat who has followed immigration issues closely for many years; and Bennie Thompson, the Mississippi Democrat who is set to lead the House Homeland Security Committee and has said he plans to re-evaluate the 700-mile fence.

    But Mr. Flake described himself as optimistic, saying the elections had disabused many Republicans of the notion that opposing legalization and guest worker plans would win widespread support.

    �That illusion is gone,� he said.

    The percentage of Hispanics who voted for Republicans fell to 29 percent, from 44 percent in 2004, and some Republicans say passing immigration bills is a crucial part of the effort to win them back.

    Mr. Flake warned that some Republicans might balk at proposals like broadening the number of illegal immigrants eligible for a less burdensome path to citizenship, making passage of bipartisan legislation potentially �politically more difficult.�

    The prospects for a bill that contains such a proposal remain particularly uncertain in the House, where many prominent Democrats want to ensure broad bipartisan backing as part of their efforts to maintain their majority in 2008, Congressional aides said.

    The House Democrats are concerned about protecting newly elected moderate and conservative Democrats, some of whom had campaigned against legalizing illegal immigrants.

    It is also unclear whether Mr. Gutierrez and Mr. Flake will produce the only House legislation on immigration and whether their plan will ultimately become the basis for the bill that emerges.

    In the Senate, Mr. Kennedy�s bill certainly has the backing of the Democratic leadership, Congressional aides said.

    Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, argued that expanding citizenship eligibility and abandoning financing for the fence would alienate moderates in both parties. The three-tier legalization system, a hard-fought compromise, was critical for moderate Republican support for the original bill.

    The plan under consideration would allow 10 million or 11 million illegal immigrants to become eligible to apply for citizenship without returning home, up from 7 million in the original Senate bill. To be granted citizenship, they would have to remain employed, pass background checks, pay fines and back taxes, and enroll in English classes.

    �I think it�s a nonstarter,� said Mr. Cornyn, who opposes a path to citizenship for illegal workers, but supports a plan for temporary workers that would let foreigners work here temporarily before returning home.

    Congressional aides and lawyers familiar with the proposed bills emphasize that it will be very difficult for a smaller group of illegal immigrants, those who arrived after a certain date, perhaps 2004, to become citizens. The aides said the bill might include incentives for illegal immigrants to leave the country. While they hope such elements may ease concerns, many challenges remain.

    Some powerful unions, which expect to exert more leverage in the new Congress, remain deeply opposed to the temporary worker program in the Senate bill. The unions say it threatens American jobs.

    Officials at the A.F.L.-C.I.O. say they can scuttle such a plan next year, even though Mr. Bush and businesses say it is critical to ensure an adequate labor force.

    There is also the political clock to consider. Supporters of immigration measures acknowledge that the prospects for a bipartisan bill will dim significantly if a bill is not passed before the presidential primaries of 2008 are in full swing.

    Some Congressional aides and immigrants� advocates worry about the commitment of Mr. McCain, a likely presidential candidate in 2008.

    Mr. McCain has long supported legalization that would not require illegal immigrants to leave the United States. Some advocates fear that his ambitions may lead to a shifting of that stance to avoid alienating moderate Republicans.

    A spokeswoman for Mr. McCain said last week that he was not available to comment on the bill being drafted.

    Many lawmakers say their hope is growing that Congress will pass an immigration bill next year.

    �There are going to be hard choices that are going to be made, because we need to build a bipartisan, broad-based coalition,� said Mr. Gutierrez, who leads the House Democratic immigration group. �But I�m hopeful that in the environment in which we�re working now we can get it done.�



    more...


    billy graham preaching. tattoo Billy Graham, perhaps
  • tattoo Billy Graham, perhaps



  • posmd
    07-08 07:32 PM
    I feel the same way Gondalguru. This is a globalised world or atleast so the US would like everyone else to believe. In that sense where you are should matter less than the contribution you are making, yet alas the immigration system is stuck in its 20th century President Kennedy era mindset of "reuniting families". I am not against that per se as it is a noble virtue, but when I see that to be in direct contravention of the aims and objectives of globalization which incidently the USA also champions so vehemently, I sense hypocrisy at worst or a conflict of policy at best.

    My parents immigrated to a country which is NOT retrogressed (ROW of which I hold a passport) when I was 3 yrs old.
    I was schooled and in every other way raised as such. Yet I was born in India................as you rightly point out by mere chance. Yet I am saddled with the consequence of waiting in line with every other applicant from India. If that were not funny enough, one of my close friends, his parents were in the USA in the 60s and left when his mother was 7-8 months pregnant with him, and he was born in India, now he has to go through the same line, he also holds a ROW passport. Should the majority of gestation count toward his citizenship?
    These are difficult questions and the current policy is ill geared to deal with them. Those that win from them laud them and those that get hurt curse them. It is what it is..........dysfunctional.
    It either is or it is not a globalised world, and the policy is or is not such. Unfortunately we are all caught in this indecisive mode that the US currently finds itself locked into, it is not just about us and our immigration situation, it is about a lot of other issues as well and the USA will spend the next 10-20 yrs figuring this out.





    2010 Astrology of Billy Graham with billy graham preaching. Graham plays with dogs Paula,
  • Graham plays with dogs Paula,



  • pointlesswait
    08-05 10:38 AM
    here is another point:
    if you want to remain a slave to the GC process and ristrict your career by staying with a company..just because you dont want to lose your PD...then..god save u and ur future..


    the person who ports his PS was already in the line..he reclaimed his rightful place after going thru the due deligence...of restarting his GC process...in fact ppl.

    i am sure ..after oct they will offer some relief to Eb3 category...


    i think its a childish and selfish idea...i agree labor substitution was absolute nonsense...but not PD porting!

    Why did they not take the employer to court? Why make the EB2 line suffer for these employer's faults?

    If an employer wrongly files your case under EB3 instead of EB2 or EB1, then the onus is on you to challenge them and take them to court if need be.



    more...


    billy graham preaching. Billy Graham speaks during the
  • Billy Graham speaks during the



  • Refugee_New
    01-06 05:24 PM
    What would be the purpose of reading all that? I thought the spotlight was on hamas...this is how you try to move the spotlight away huh!!

    My point is, they keep the spotlight on Hamas and go kill as many innocent civilians as possible.

    Even when they kill school kids, we still blame Hamas. We don't blame the killer and try to stop their mad actions. Thats my point.





    hair Evangelist Billy Graham billy graham preaching. 2011 Billy Graham preaches in
  • 2011 Billy Graham preaches in



  • minimalist
    08-06 11:46 AM
    Shady means or non-shady means, EB2 means that u have superior qualifications and you are more desirable in the US. EB3 means there are a lot like u, so u gotta wait more. Period.

    Well, then why are they allocating Visas to EB3s. They should give all visas to EB2 and then only go to EB3.

    Your statement that EB2 requires higher qualification is correct. But the number of jobs requiring those qualifications are less.Doesn't mean people taking up jobs that fall into EB3 category have inferior qualifications. Think of it this way. There may be many people who may be qualified to be a CEO but there will be only one CEO for company.
    EB3 has a lot more applicants because of the 245 cases that were filed in 2001. So get off the pedestal and think normally.
    So you are an undesirable/inferior when compared to people in EB1? If you feel so then you have serious self esteem issues.
    Don't try to spread such inferiority complex.



    more...


    billy graham preaching. illy graham preaching.
  • illy graham preaching.



  • GC_Applicant
    04-08 11:44 PM
    Not that I am going to buy right now., but want to get my home work done.

    Can anybody suggest some good guidelines for mortgage financing., like FHA loans (if I-485 applicant can qualify) and good lenders.

    Thanks for all the great info.





    hot Billy Graham Preaching billy graham preaching. hairstyles Billy Graham
  • hairstyles Billy Graham



  • Macaca
    02-27 07:18 PM
    Democrats Should Read Kipling (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/18/opinion/18kristol.html?ref=opinion) By WILLIAM KRISTOL | NYT, Feb 18

    Browsing through a used-book store Friday � in the Milwaukee airport, of all places � I came across a 1981 paperback collection of George Orwell�s essays. That�s how I happened to reread his 1942 essay on Rudyard Kipling. Given Orwell�s perpetual ability to elucidate, one shouldn�t be surprised that its argument would shed light� or so it seems to me � on contemporary American politics.

    Orwell offers a highly qualified appreciation of the then (and still) politically incorrect Kipling. He insists that one must admit that Kipling is �morally insensitive and aesthetically disgusting.� Still, he says, Kipling �survives while the refined people who have sniggered at him seem to wear so badly.� One reason for this is that Kipling �identified himself with the ruling power and not with the opposition.�

    �In a gifted writer,� Orwell remarks, �this seems to us strange and even disgusting, but it did have the advantage of giving Kipling a certain grip on reality.� Kipling �at least tried to imagine what action and responsibility are like.� For, Orwell explains, �The ruling power is always faced with the question, �In such and such circumstances, what would you do?�, whereas the opposition is not obliged to take responsibility or make any real decisions.� Furthermore, �where it is a permanent and pensioned opposition, as in England, the quality of its thought deteriorates accordingly.�

    If I may vulgarize the implications of Orwell�s argument a bit: substitute Republicans for Kipling and Democrats for the opposition, and you have a good synopsis of the current state of American politics.

    Having controlled the executive branch for 28 of the last 40 years, Republicans tend to think of themselves as the governing party � with some of the arrogance and narrowness that implies, but also with a sense of real-world responsibility. Many Democrats, on the other hand, no longer even try to imagine what action and responsibility are like. They do, however, enjoy the support of many refined people who snigger at the sometimes inept and ungraceful ways of the Republicans. (And, if I may say so, the quality of thought of the Democrats� academic and media supporters � a permanent and, as it were, pensioned opposition � seems to me to have deteriorated as Orwell would have predicted.)

    The Democrats won control of Congress in November 2006, thanks in large part to President Bush�s failures in Iraq. Then they spent the next year seeking to ensure that he couldn�t turn those failures around. Democrats were �against� the war and the surge. That was the sum and substance of their policy. They refused to acknowledge changing facts on the ground, or to debate the real consequences of withdrawal and defeat. It was, they apparently thought, the Bush administration, not America, that would lose. The 2007 Congressional Democrats showed what it means to be an opposition party that takes no responsibility for the consequences of the choices involved in governing.

    So it continues in 2008. The director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Gen. Michael Hayden, the director of national intelligence, the retired Vice Admiral Mike McConnell, and the attorney general, the former federal judge Michael Mukasey, are highly respected and nonpolitical officials with little in the way of partisanship or ideology in their backgrounds. They have all testified, under oath, that in their judgments, certain legal arrangements regarding surveillance abilities are important to our national security.

    Not all Democrats have refused to listen. In the Senate, Jay Rockefeller, chairman of the Intelligence Committee, took seriously the job of updating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in light of technological changes and court decisions. His committee produced an impressive report, and, by a vote of 13 to 2, sent legislation to the floor that would have preserved the government�s ability to listen to foreign phone calls and read foreign e-mail that passed through switching points in the United States. The full Senate passed the legislation easily � with a majority of Democrats voting against, and Senators Obama and Clinton indicating their opposition from the campaign trail.

    But the Democratic House leadership balked � particularly at the notion of protecting from lawsuits companies that had cooperated with the government in surveillance efforts after Sept. 11. Director McConnell repeatedly explained that such private-sector cooperation is critical to antiterror efforts, in surveillance and other areas, and that it requires the assurance of immunity. �Your country is at risk if we can�t get the private sector to help us, and that is atrophying all the time,� he said. But for the House Democrats, sticking it to the phone companies � and to the Bush administration � seemed to outweigh erring on the side of safety in defending the country.

    To govern is to choose, a Democrat of an earlier generation, John F. Kennedy, famously remarked. Is this generation of Democrats capable of governing?


    An Old Hand Goads Democrats to Get Tough on Ethics (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/20/AR2008022002831.html?hpid=sec-politics) By Mary Ann Akers And Paul Kane | WP, Feb 21



    more...


    house of Billy Graham, preaches billy graham preaching. Called the quot;Billy Graham of
  • Called the quot;Billy Graham of



  • unitednations
    03-25 01:15 PM
    Thanks UN. Gosh!! this thread is an autopsy of current affairs in EB immigration. Very good going, with what is now a misleading title.

    Do they have any filtering mechanism for lot of these fake future employer GC apps through sister/subsidiary or pay for GC companies. We have had few people come on these forums before or after approval of GC asking what happens if they never work for the sponsoring company.

    I personally know someone who got a GC in 2002 without ever working(not for sponsoring employer or even for some other company) and since never worked in the field they got GC. I bet that involved a lot of faking but slipped through every test.

    The number one thing USCIS does is look at how many petitions they have filed compared to number of people on payroll. If it is out of line then they start digging deeper. I have only seen them deny current persons ptition and not go after people who already have gotten greencard. Those iowa companies people have gottn greencard so we will have to wait and see what/if something will happen. I do know that uscis/ice/dol work at their own pace so there is significant time lag in their investigations.





    tattoo Billy Graham in Melbourne billy graham preaching. Will Billy Graham Preach One
  • Will Billy Graham Preach One



  • razis123
    12-18 03:17 AM
    Guys..

    If you believe in Science, you wont tend to believe in any religion or for that matter any God..

    God was created by man..

    Imagine this :

    Take for ex : God is human.. How can a human being be supreme or whatever and manage other humans.. For ex if 1000 people commit crime how can a God being a instance of human being watch them.. Even if he watch them how can he punish them.. all not humanly possible.. so God cannot be human..

    So let us take like what Islam says.. God is not human nor he is physically presence.. In that case how an Supreme being again watch all of our deeds when even a human kind of thing is not possible.. So God cannot be supremely supreme to watch us..

    Earth all happened by itself and it evolved by itself.. It will destroy itself and it will retransform itself.. this is the absolute truth.. believe it or not..

    Everyone has some kind of inner consciensus.. you be afraid to that and answerable to that.. (You can call it as God if you want..)

    Other than that start believing in Science and be answerable to yourself.. Nothing else matters...

    You are saying all this out of sheer ignorance and you yourself dont know what you are speaking about your own creator. If you know little science you will go away from religion, if you know more science, you will come towards religion. You are a victim of the former.



    more...


    pictures tattoo Billy Graham, perhaps billy graham preaching. Participated in Billy Graham
  • Participated in Billy Graham



  • sundevil
    03-25 12:52 PM
    Thanks UN. Gosh!! this thread is an autopsy of current affairs in EB immigration. Very good going, with what is now a misleading title.

    Do they have any filtering mechanism for lot of these fake future employer GC apps through sister/subsidiary or pay for GC companies. We have had few people come on these forums before or after approval of GC asking what happens if they never work for the sponsoring company.

    I personally know someone who got a GC in 2002 without ever working(not for sponsoring employer or even for some other company) and since never worked in the field they got GC. I bet that involved a lot of faking but slipped through every test.

    You see on all these ac21 issues we rely on uscis memos. Every one of these memos state pending change to the regulations; we are going to follow the principles of this memo.

    it has been 8 years and they still haven't changed the regulations. Memos can be changed at their whim at any time.

    Currently; uscis position is that if someone ports to another company; they are not supposed to check the ability to pay criteria. However; they left themselvees an out that theey can check the genuineness of the ac21 employer. Becasuse of this last statement; what they have been doing is asking for ac21 employer tax returuns, and quarterly wage reports. If you are already on payroll then size of company doesn't matter. However; if you are not on payrroll and it is a very small company then they can challnge it.

    btw; I am not epecting quota to finish early this year. Many companies/lawyers are very frustrated with h-1b right now. I was talking to education evaluator and he told me that there is litteally no business right now. Companies I know of how filed 70 cases last year are not filing any this year due to a combination of issues (iowa issue, lack of approvals and great demand for tansfers by thos who were laid off or had theirr h-1b's cancelled.

    Right now; newer companies who don't have much experience with h-1b are going into the lions den without knowing there is a lion in there.





    dresses hairstyles Billy Graham billy graham preaching. illy graham preaching. makeup
  • illy graham preaching. makeup



  • Sunx_2004
    07-10 02:53 PM
    Just follow the law. There are lots of protections in it for us.

    UN, I am impressed by your knowledge of immigration laws. Can you point me in right direction as to where I find information regarding the current immigration laws and their interpretations.



    more...


    makeup Billy Graham speaks during the billy graham preaching. of Billy Graham, preaches
  • of Billy Graham, preaches



  • panky72
    08-07 09:17 PM
    A boy and his father (new immigrants in Canada), were visiting a shopping centre. They were amazed by almost everything they saw, but especially by two shiny, silver walls that could move apart and back together again. The boy asked his father: "What is this, Dad?" The father (never having seen an elevator) responded: "Son, I have never seen anything like this in my life, I don't know what it is."

    While the boy and his father were watching wide-eyed, an old lady in a wheel chair rolled up to the moving walls and pressed a button. The walls opened and the lady rolled between them into a small room. The walls closed and the boy and his father watched small circles of lights with numbers above the walls light up. They continued to watch the circles light up in the reverse direction. The walls opened up again and a beautiful and attractive 24-year-old woman stepped out.
    The father shouts to his son: "GO GET YOUR MOTHER!!!":D





    girlfriend Will Billy Graham Preach One billy graham preaching. Billy Graham Evangelistic
  • Billy Graham Evangelistic



  • yrspassby
    08-07 04:38 PM
    My wife and I were happy for twenty years. Then we met.

    When a man brings his wife flowers for no reason, there's a reason.

    Always get married early in the morning. That way, if it doesn't work out, you haven't wasted a whole day.

    In olden times, sacrifices were made at the altar, a practice that still continues.

    Getting married is very much like going to a restaurant with friends. You order what you want, then when you see what the other fellow has, you wish you had ordered that.

    I think men who have a pierced ear are better prepared for marriage. They've experienced pain and bought jewelry.





    hairstyles illy graham preaching. billy graham preaching. Billy Graham preaches on the
  • Billy Graham preaches on the



  • krishnam70
    03-26 07:10 PM
    The attachment upload fails for me as well but goddamn UN, you are unbelievable.

    1. Your knowledge of the specifics and technicalities and access to information is very impressive

    2. And you go out of your way to share it with others

    That being said, I skimmed through the document real quick and the part that caught my eye was the AAOs point on the applicant never having resided/lived in the same state as the employer, which you had also mentioned in one of your earlier posts.

    Wouldn't that be quite common in most consulting scenarios? What if the beneficiary/applicant has never lived in the same state as the petitioning employer but has lived in and worked for the employer (at client locations, offsite assignments) in nearby bordering states, from before the labor was filed and until long after the 485 was filed. Do you see the USCIS ever having issues with that?

    That whenever a company now applies for an H1 ( not that many companies are going to do in this climate) they have to put in as many locations/states as possible? By your suggestions if USCIS is deeming most h1b companies as 'Staffing' companies(and if it allows them to exist) then almost all H1 LCA should contain 4-5 states in which the H1B could work? How would prevailing wage calculation be done in that case? Or for that matter if each time an H1B candidate goes to work in a different location and the employer(staffing) company files 'Amend petition for location' does the prevailing wage factor come in to picture?

    your advise in this could help some people who are in consulting so that they can insist with their employers to file for 'amend' in case they are working elsewhere.

    - cheers
    kris





    sanju
    12-29 02:29 PM
    I do not know how much this true ,but one thing is sure America is helping ISLAM (As of today and popular belief that america is destroying ISLAM) ..
    by clearing the mess out of Afganistan ,IRAQ and well sometime may be from IRAN ....

    Why they are doing >>>> Why they are helping Israel and Attacking Countries which has vast muslim poulation and near to Israel ...Why not attacking Indonesia ,Malaysia ,Pakistan because the Bible has something like that
    " Jews must have own land to have a Great ARMAGADEM WAR .When most of the jews will be defeated and killed ,few left will accept christanity. "

    so how to achieve this . Please mind America is ruled by Conservative christian not by jews ...

    Well read Bible and other books and you will able to judge .....

    So I have tried to acknowledge two things " A country go for war when future is not safe" and America Need to keep Alive israel till the great ARMGADEM WAR " So you will say why america is havinng WAR "
    Please note that Jews killed Jesus. This fact do not go well with conservative


    I�ve heard some real whoppers in my life, but this one tops them all. I am sure your favroite movie is - Conspiracy Theory.

    Cheers!


    .





    gcisadawg
    12-27 01:02 AM
    So, if ISI is behind Bombay, I struggle to understand what it would gain from provoking India.

    The 'machinery''s motives I can understand. They are being pursued by Pakistan army and NATO forces, and by provoking India and starting a conflict on the eastern border, they would divert Pakistan army and get some relief. Plus, the more chaos in Pakistan, the better it is for them.

    Look at this way...

    Obama is planning to increase troops in Afghanistan. US is now doing cross-border attacks in pakistan. When he increases the troop level, it would only increase further hitting the core soverignity of pakistan.

    The supercop is completely preoccupied in transition with the messiah of hope taking oath on jan 20th. It would need few weeks for him to settle down.

    Pakistan is fractured with ISI's own trained militants causing havoc in Balochistan and NWFP. They are militants from Punjab and POK who are helping the tribes and Taliban. Taliban is hiding for the past 7 years and only the last two year have seen such a tremendous increase in attacks.
    Without Punjab militant's expertise (with kashmir on-the-job training) , it is impossible for Taliban to regroup in a way they have re-grouped.

    As a result, Military is forced to act on Tribes/taliban/punjab militants to support the war on terror and to satisfy USA.

    The Key questions are
    a> Who asked Punjab militants to go and create havoc in NWFP/Balochistan/Afghan border? Is it Military or ISI or lying low for a while when taking peace with India ( but using their expertise somewhere else)

    It attracted US's attention and just forces Pak Military to do more and more..

    With this Mumbai attack, what the ISI supported militants expected is a war between India and Pakistan. Military sees an escape route too.

    When a war breaks out,

    Tension on the Western border comes down to a nought. Taliban, Tribes, Punjab Militants, ISI and the military are ALL on the same side and India is the enemy. US would be a spectator. It unites the nation of Pakistan like nothing else.
    It reduces the pressure on the military. Military can wash from its hands the responsbility of being the ally in 'war on terror'

    A weak central govt in India with a totally angry Indian population wanting 'something' need to be done to stop this.
    A fuse that can easily go off...A baloon that can easily burst..My point is India can be very easily provoked at this stage.

    US took revenge in Afghanistan for 09/11. It initiated a war of choice in Iraq. It allowed Israel to pummel Lebanon while preaching 'war on terror'. US can not prevent India from doing a war if needed.

    Dude, we have seen Mumbai, we have seen parliament attack, we have seen Ashkardam all in broad day light in addition
    to many hit and run operations. How many more the world want us to tolerate? Buddha and Gandhi may have born in india but does the world expect us to tolerate attacks after attacks after attacks?

    I generally dont try to be emotional. But I saw this live on TV while I was waiting in the airport to board my flight
    from India to US and it impacted me profoundly. Man, "Enough is enough"...

    Peace,
    G



    No comments:

    Post a Comment