Saturday, July 9, 2011

chicago code logo

images the chicago code logo. chicago code logo. Chicago Bulls Logo Pictures,
  • Chicago Bulls Logo Pictures,



  • paskal
    07-08 09:15 PM
    paskal..

    seriously thinking about sending an email to Oppenheim, Charles to consider moving the dates in the bulletin liberally so no visas r lost each year..before there is another debacle with the October bulletin..

    maybe he is the right person to hear our misery..but not sure if they even consider our emails and tell us not to teach them what to do..

    Hi,

    thanks for your enthusiasm, i would suggest though - not writing to good old charlie, and focusing instead on your local lawmakers (HR and senators).
    We can make this fiasco a catalyst towards incremental reform of the immigration system. There remains a chance that we could get a bridging amendment before the year is up, to provide some relief at least- maybe recapture of numbers or 485 filing. If you have questions about what to send your lawmaker- or present a a meeting- look up your state chapter or contact iv core members- try sertasheep- send him a pm with your specific request.





    wallpaper Chicago Bulls Logo Pictures, chicago code logo. 2011 The Chicago Code.
  • 2011 The Chicago Code.



  • manub
    07-08 10:51 PM
    We won`t get any letter from that comapany as my husband din`t exit in good terms.(Ofcourse if they won`t pay him for months).
    I do believe in our case the reasons are more to do with the officer dealing the case than with actual technical issues.
    In the NOID they said the reason mainly was( he changed from company A to B to C but when he reentered he entered on B instead of C .at that time was not very knowledgeable about all this stuff)he reentry was not legal and was willful misrepresentaton of facts.
    Then our lawyer in our reply sent that as long as both visas are still valid it is legal.Then now they state ok his reentry is not wrong only the paystubs part is wrong and stating he never worked for that company chose to deny.





    chicago code logo. chicago code logo.
  • chicago code logo.



  • krishna.ahd
    01-06 04:14 PM
    Didn't Narendra Modi followed the footstep of Isreali counterparts by killing innocents in Gujarat?

    Its upto Indians to decide which type of leaders we need. Like Gandhi or Modi.

    Modi is elected CM by people of Gujarat , also third time in a row, so you know now what people of Gujarat wants.





    2011 2011 The Chicago Code. chicago code logo. chicago code logo. cancels
  • chicago code logo. cancels



  • Legal
    08-11 11:07 AM
    I agree with yabadaba. We should also send feedback to CNN about the lies Lou Dobbs is perpetuating on national TV.

    You can try...I am afraid CNN is not going to listen to you.

    They know these things well. Lou Dobb's anti-immigrant frenzy/ fanaticism hasboosted the viewership..that's all matters to CNN.



    more...


    chicago code logo. makeup house Chicago Code,
  • makeup house Chicago Code,



  • diptam
    08-06 11:53 AM
    Lot of our case was exactly like that - i was eligible for EB2 when my Eb3 labor was filed. Employer took advantage of my compromising situation ( H was having 390 days juice left)

    If Porting/Interfiling is taken off folks like me will be terribly victimized. I'm here for 9 years - my 1st labor was substituted , 2nd labor ( which should be Eb2 but filed in Eb3) took a round trip from Phily backlog elimination center and now i'm stuck in the Eb3-140 mess at NSC.

    My friends who are lucky enough & have filed fresh EB2 labor (based on BS+5, not MS also) have got till 140 approved and applied 485 as well due to EB2 being JUNE 2006 within 2 years of starting GC process.

    Porting/Interfiling must be there for genuine cases. If someone files a lawsuit against porting i'll file a counter lawsuit on discrimination grounds.

    sroyc,
    What a resolution!!! I completely agree with you. Interfiling should NOT be scrapped but limited to people who qualified for the later category (EB2/EB1) on the date of their PD.





    chicago code logo. pictures the chicago code
  • pictures the chicago code



  • ilwaiting
    04-09 11:46 AM
    Yes you are correct. Employee has nothing to do with the Abuse. More over most of the employers have nothing to do with the abuse as well. Lawmakers must get their facts straight before imposing such foolish laws.


    Pete, I am myself a manager at a leading company and do not fit into the typical "consultant" profile.

    That does not mean I want more shackles on myself because I feel someone is abusing the system. If someone (employers) are abusing the system, go after them - why do you want to go after the employee who, in a lot of cases, has nothing to do with the abuse?

    In fact, if this bill passed in its current form, it will probably not affect me but I will still oppose the bill - why, because it goes against my fundamental belief of freedom of movement. If the senators want to reform the system, may I ask

    1. Why prevent H1Bs from joining legitimate consulting companies such as Deloitte, IBM, BCG etc

    2. Why should H1B's pay Social security and medicare when they are "temporary" and do not get a dime back?

    Think of the bigger picture and then about your own objectives - I am sure you are a well educated person and you will understand the consequences of arbitrary decision making based on vested interests.



    more...


    chicago code logo. the Internal Revenue Code.
  • the Internal Revenue Code.



  • gcisadawg
    12-27 12:04 AM
    Don't you think Pakistan already knows that?

    Yes, you are right. Pakistan knows that. But our audience is not pakistan. It is US and other countries. Who comes to india when pak does nuclear sabre-rattling? It is US. We need to send that message clearly and forcibly to the world. The Clear message is " Nukes dont impact our options. The decision to go to war or not is not impacted by the presence or absence of nukes"

    Do you mean to say that the state and the government of Pakistan did this?

    As to your second question, you never know. To be honest, I dont know...Musharraf started Kargil and they did not acknowledge even dead Pakistan soldiers. Sharif went to US and pleaded Clinton to stop the war.

    I do believe ISI's footprint is there. ISI is built on the image of CIA during cold war. They are a pretty powerful bunch with one complete victory ( against Soviets) and two successful (atleast so far) distruptive operations in Afghanistan and Kashmir. Without the big brother ISI watching, these jihadists can not move around. But I do give the benefit of doubt to Zardari's govt. The poor guy has just lost his wife. He might not have signed off on this ops.





    2010 chicago code logo. chicago code logo. the chicago code logo.
  • the chicago code logo.



  • unitednations
    03-26 05:29 PM
    UN,
    Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. As always, your time is highly appreciated.

    So I assume in the Baltimore case, the 485 eventually did get approved (or if still pending, the USCIS atleast okayed the switch back to the petitioning employer despite the 140 revocation).

    And yes, I am talking about cases where the 140 was revoked for genuine ability to pay reasons and not so the underlying labor could be substituted for someone else.


    I tried looking for the baltimore case but I don't have it on this computer. You might want to search for it on immigration.com.

    That case had a lot more things in it.

    1) person never worked at the location as specified by the greencard labor
    2) person acknowledged he wasn't going to work there upon greencard approval
    3) person was claiming ac21 within same employer for different location


    Administrative appeals office; concurred that ac21 wasn't specific to geographic location and didn't have to be done with another company; it could be done within same company.

    Then AAO went another way and picked on some other issues: Other issues they picked on was information on his g-325a and his work locations. They picked onthat he didn't have h-1b's approved for those particular locations or LCA's and he was out of status. he was good on the ac21 but was out of status prior to filing 485.



    more...


    chicago code logo. dresses the chicago code logo.
  • dresses the chicago code logo.



  • ilwaiting
    04-09 11:09 AM
    Looks like everyone want to talk about their specific selfish advantages and ignore the problem on a whole if this bill passes.

    I think this bill ironically works out well for doctors and researchers!

    We are not consultants.Most of the times we stick to one place. Either doing residency or postdoc we are usually in one place. Most universities are very rigorous with the labour certification process and residency is obtained via "match".

    The consulting companies have been responsible for for flooding the GC process. Consequently researchers and doctors have to wait with the rest of the crowd. This new bills will turn out to be very advantageous to doctors and scientists ( in nonprofit organizations).

    Would like to hear opinions for and against this view......





    hair chicago code logo. cancels chicago code logo. the chicago code logo. the
  • the chicago code logo. the



  • dealsnet
    03-25 08:11 AM
    I have brought a house 4 years back after 2 years in this country. It is $500K house. Forgot about your status, if you have a stable job. If husband and wife working, defenitly go for it. Shop around and find a good home. It is an investment. You can claim much for tax return. My I-485 pending. PD 2004 Jan. Eb2 -India.



    more...


    chicago code logo. Province the chicago code
  • Province the chicago code



  • paskal
    04-09 11:47 AM
    The job description can be put in the way that points to your plus points. If you go the Harvard Biz. school you will have those. I dont think they want you to leave. There will be other avenues out there.

    pete,

    i am a physician and in the same boat as you. my employer searched high and dry before i came along. but you are missing something here. except universities that can hire the "best candidate", every other employer has to employ a citizen/gc applicant with the "minimum qualifications for the job". please revisit the rules if you do not understand this. your talent and extra skills count for nothing. employers cannot take the best applicant...if an LCA is needed. this is a very significant problem if applied to H1B renewals. Any tom dick and harry can displace you every 3 years. think about it please, not just your own situation. i am strongly in favor of H1B reform. i believe that this if linked with a bill like strive dramatically increase support for retrogression relief. however the reform needs to be thought through carefully. a 6 mnth LCA process for each renewal would kill us. let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater...





    hot makeup house Chicago Code, chicago code logo. Back to list Chicago
  • Back to list Chicago



  • nogc_noproblem
    08-05 01:49 PM
    A man was sitting alone in his office one night when a genie popped up out of his ashtray...
    ... and said, "And what will your third wish be?"

    The man looked at the genie and said, "Huh? How can I be getting a third wish when I haven't had a first or second wish yet?"

    "You have had two wishes already," the genie said, "but your second wish was for me to put everything back the way it was before you made your first wish. Thus, you remember nothing; because everything is the way it was before you made any wishes. You now have one wish left."

    "Okay," said the man, "I don't believe this, but what the heck. I wish I were irresistible to women."

    "Funny," said the genie as it granted his wish and disappeared forever. "That was your first wish, too!"



    more...


    house the chicago basket bulls chicago code logo. Chicago amp; Northwestern Logo
  • Chicago amp; Northwestern Logo



  • nogc_noproblem
    08-26 10:59 PM
    .





    tattoo pictures the chicago code chicago code logo. the chicago code logo. the
  • the chicago code logo. the



  • Macaca
    12-30 06:57 PM
    A Bridge to a Love for Democracy (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/us/30iht-letter30.html) By RICHARD BERNSTEIN | New York Times

    I write this, my last �Letter from America,� looking out my window at my snowy Brooklyn neighborhood. It�s midmorning Wednesday, three days after our Christmas weekend blizzard, and my street has yet to receive the benefit of a snowplow.

    Cars, as the prize-winning novelist Saul Bellow once put it, are impounded by the drifts. The city is still partly paralyzed, pleasantly, in a way. There�s nothing like a heavy snowfall to give one a bit of a respite, to turn the ordinary, like walking to the corner store, into a little adventure. And there�s the countrylike stillness of this city block filled with snow, absent the usual traffic.

    It seems a good moment, in other words, to pause and reflect. My thoughts turn to a very unsnowy moment in 1972 in a village called Lowu, which was the last village in the Crown Colony of Hong Kong just before the border with China. I was a graduate student in Chinese history and a stringer for The Washington Post going to the territory of Chairman Mao for the first time in my life.

    There was a short trestle bridge at Lowu. I�ve often wondered if it�s still there. The Union Jack flew at one side, the red flag of the People�s Republic of China at the other. The border town on the other side was a little fishing and farming village called Shenzhen, now a modern city of skyscrapers and shopping malls, an emblem of China�s amazing economic development.

    I was favorably disposed toward China as I strode across the bridge, ready to experience the radical egalitarianism of the Maoist revolution, which was generally viewed with favor among American graduate students specializing in China. I was a member of a group, moreover, that partook of a certain leftist orthodoxy. We had learned the �Internationale� so we could sing it for our revolutionary hosts. We were supposed to return to America and report the truth about China, which was, essentially, that it was the future and it worked.

    But it took only about 24 hours on that first journey to China for me utterly to change my mind and, indeed, to become a lifelong anti-Communist and devotee of liberal democracy, to find great wisdom in Winston Churchill�s dictum about its being the worst of all systems except for all the others.

    The noxious cult of personality around Mao was the first thing that effected my political transformation. But deeper than that was the pervasive odor of orthodoxy, the uniformity of it all, the mandatory pious declarations, which, if they were believed, were ridiculous, and, if they were forced, illustrated the terror of it all.

    Many of my American fellow travelers felt very differently about this. In my intense discomfort, I found myself in a sort of Menshevik minority, criticized by the majority for what I remember one person calling my �Darkness at Noon� mentality.

    Still, that discomfort, and the unwillingness of most of the others to experience it, has informed my work as a journalist ever since. I have to admit it: When I went to China as a correspondent for Time magazine seven years after that first trip, my impulse was not so much to look with fresh and impartial eyes on a country that had just opened up to a degree of foreign inspection as it was to expose what I felt many Americans were missing in those rhapsodic days. Namely, that the country under Mao and after belonged to the 20th-century totalitarian mainstream � that it was a poverty-stricken police state and not a viable alternative to Western ways.

    There was a degree of bias in this view, and it led me into some mistakes. On China, in particular, I was perhaps focused too single-mindedly on its totalitarian elements so that I underplayed other elements, notably the speed of change in China, and perhaps even the unsuitableness of many Western democratic ways for a country so essentially backward.

    And perhaps, too, I extrapolated a bit too much from the China experience when it came to other places and other times. When I covered academic life in the United States, for example, I tended to see vicious Maoist Red Guards in the phenomenon of what came to be called political correctness, and, while I don�t think this was entirely wrong, it was an exaggeration.

    And yet, it seems appropriate in this final column to say, as well, that my nearly 40 years in the journalism game haven�t shaken me from the essential belief that formed during that first, memorable visit to China.

    Ever since, despite all our infuriating faults, our wastefulness, our occasional self-satisfied sluggishness, our proneness to demagogy and other forms of anti-intellectualism, our crumbling infrastructure, the Fox News channel, the cult of Sarah Palin, the narcissistic self-indulgence of our urban elites, the detention center in Guant�namo Bay and our crisis-creating greed and shortsightedness � despite all that � I continue to believe that, not to put too fine a point on it, we�re better than they are.

    This doesn�t mean that I think we�re perfect, or that our impulse toward a kind of benevolent imperialism has always had benevolent results. But I have stuck for 40 years to a belief that, yes, our ways are superior � and by our ways I mean such things often taken for granted as a free press, strong civil institutions, an independent judiciary and, perhaps above all, the belief that the powers of the state need to be restrained, and that the institutions of government exist to serve the individual, not the other way around.

    The essential difference with China, even the much-changed China of today, and most of the other non-Western political cultures, is the absence of this sense of restraint, and the primacy of the collective over the individual.

    That�s the idea that I was actually groping toward when I crossed the bridge at Lowu. It�s the idea that I want to end with here on this snowy day in New York in my final sentence on this page. Goodbye.



    more...


    pictures the Internal Revenue Code. chicago code logo. images the chicago code logo.
  • images the chicago code logo.



  • pete
    04-09 11:51 AM
    As is true with everything else it cannot be all gain.
    If we are to have CIR based GC advantage there will need to be H1B regulation. Thousands of h1Bs get filled in matter of hours. Many for consultants. How can that be right. Tough choices will need to be made and so be it.




    pete,

    i am a physician and in the same boat as you. my employer searched high and dry before i came along. but you are missing something here. except universities that can hire the "best candidate", every other employer has to employ a citizen/gc applicant with the "minimum qualifications for the job". please revisit the rules if you do not understand this. your talent and extra skills count for nothing. employers cannot take the best applicant...if an LCA is needed. this is a very significant problem if applied to H1B renewals. Any tom dick and harry can displace you every 3 years. think about it please, not just your own situation. i am strongly in favor of H1B reform. i believe that this if linked with a bill like strive dramatically increase support for retrogression relief. however the reform needs to be thought through carefully. a 6 mnth LCA process for each renewal would kill us. let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater...





    dresses Back to list Chicago chicago code logo. house Chicago Code, Inside the
  • house Chicago Code, Inside the



  • file485
    07-07 10:14 PM
    Actually ..I had even read somewhere in these forums, that 'out of status' etc will be considered since the last entry into the country..

    in your case, if he re entered into the country in 2002, the previous status should not be considered...but we can never argue with the immigration officers,once it gets into their head,they can be the most 'sanki' guys..

    take appt with Rajiv Khanna/Murthy without wasting any minute further..



    more...


    makeup dresses the chicago code logo. chicago code logo. the chicago basket bulls
  • the chicago basket bulls



  • validIV
    06-26 02:47 PM
    I don't know what else to tell you except what I've already stated. Frankly I am surprised that this debate has gone beyond 1 page. I am tired of beating a dead horse.

    If you are renting for 1500/month thats 18,000 a year, or 540,000 in 30 years that you lose with no chance of claiming as a deduction or ever using for anything. Rather than losing that money, why not use it to own the property you are living in?

    As a homeowner, you can use that 540,000 to own the home. The interest and property taxes you pay are tax deductible, and the principal means that at the end of the 30 years, the home is yours (20 if your loan is 20 years). Even when you are paying the mortgage, you are saving. You are getting bigger tax returns and you are owning the home that you live in. No amount of rent will guarantee either.

    Through a combination of tax deductions, home equity, and property value, I am willing to bet you that I can save the same amount you do by renting, but still be ahead by owning the property I live in in 30 years. Just take a look at any home owner's history and tell me someone who hasn't doubled the value of their home (home only, not including their savings) in the past 30 years or more.

    Everyone here that is dead-set on renting, by all means continue to throw your money away. And it REALLY is throwing your money away. How you wish to justify doing so is fine by me as long as you can sleep at night and explain to your family, friends and kids why you chose to rent for 30 or so years.

    If you buy - and take a mortgate - you end up losing (the same way you "lose" your rent)
    1. Interest you pay
    2. Property taxes you will pay forever.
    3. Maintenance you will pay forever.

    On the other hand - if you rent and,
    A. IF you pay less in rent than #1 + #2 + #3,
    B. IF you invest the remainder plus your mortgage principal amount in some other investment vehicle with superior investment returns than real estate.
    .... Then you will come out ahead renting.

    The tipping point is whether your rent equals interest + property taxes + maintenance. Based on which side is higher - either renting or buying could be good for you. I don't think there is a clear cut answer. This does not take into account the flexibility associated with renting - which is important for non-GC holders. If you assign a non-zero dollar value of $X with that flexibility, then your rent needs to be interest + tax + maintanance + $X to get to the tipping point. On the other hand, if you are not forced to save (in the form of mortgage principal payment every month) - you may just spend that money instead of investing that. If you assign a dollar value of $Y with that (probability multiplied by actual dollar value) - then the tipping point is at
    $rent = $interest + $tax + $maintenance + $X(dollar value for flexibility) - $Y(dollar value for probability of spending money instead of saving).

    Now as soon as you plug in the numbers in this equation - it will give you your tipping point and will tell you whether it is right for you to rent or to buy.

    Think about it. It is not as clear cut as you think it is. :-) Based on your earlier posts - you got an absolutely faboulous deal on your house (maybe because of your timing) and the tipping point equation would probably highly favor buying in your case. For many other (specially for those without a GC) - it may not be so clear cut.





    girlfriend the chicago code logo. the chicago code logo. The Chicago the chicago code
  • The Chicago the chicago code



  • iwantmygreen
    04-15 05:18 PM
    Factors to consider when buying:
    1. Will you have to slog extra to make mortgage payments. If it means you are going to spend less time with your family, then is it really worth it.
    2. Will your spouse start working to help support mortgage payments. Does this imply kids go to daycare. Then probably your kid isnt geting the care a mom can only provide to her child.
    3. Will the stress level increase after buying the house (again worried for making payments, losing jobs). Is it worth it.
    4. Mostly all apartments have open areas where kids can play. They are much bigger then backyards in any house. Even in your backyard you will have to watch your kids when they are outdoors. Same here in the apartment outdooors.
    5. Chances are you will have more savings when you live in an apartment. You can do something really constructive like take you family for vacation, cruise.
    6. Does owning a home prevent you from visiting your home country, relatives etc as you are always tied up to making mortgage payments.

    For people who are really making lots of money & dont care much for it, above statments dont have much significance. Most of us are in the middle class range. So savings do matter to them.


    Let me declare the winners:
    1. Mariner & nojoke are logical & declared winners in this debate
    2. kaiserose & NKR have made some mistakes by buying a costly home & wouldn't admit.

    May God Bless you guys.





    hairstyles Province the chicago code chicago code logo. house Chicago Code
  • house Chicago Code



  • delax
    07-13 09:17 PM
    \
    relax buddy,

    dont jump too much, i can see u are EB2 and trust me this date can go back anywhere without u getting ur golden card...i am EB3 and i am a pharmacist and i dont know why we are in EB3, we have much more demand than the computer people who all are in EB2. so buddy good luck if u get ur card in few months.... just pray for us....thank u...

    I hope you get your GC soon. As for me its 'wait until dark'. It'll come some day.

    And NO I am not an IT EB2. I am a non-STEM MBA in Finance who does not pratice engineering anymore.





    Ramba
    09-30 02:08 PM
    I love to see Obama in White House too. My only concern is who drives his Immigration Policy. Sen. Durbin? The provisions in CIR 2007 were scary.

    I am here legally in this country from Sept 2000.
    Applied for GC in March 2006 (EB3 I), filed 485 in July 07, used AC 21 in April 08 and now working on EAD.

    I already had backup plan for Canada. If I wanted to keep my Canadian PR current I had to fulfill the 2 yrs out of first 5 requirement and was required to relocate to Canada in Aug 07. After July 07 fiasco and getting EAD, I thought of giving up on that back-up plan. It was not an easy decision, but we decided to bite the bullet and were thinking that AC-21 memo and EAD are good enough safe-guards for any denial if and when it comes. Also other thing I thought as it is it's going to take ages for my date to become current by that time at least my child's education will be done (he is in high school) and he doesn't have to go through relocation pains as far as school is concerned. He has already done that 4 times in last 8 years. So all in all we were satisfied with the decision to abandon Canadian PR and using AC 21. But now all of a sudden I see there are so many denials for straight forward AC21 cases and moreover if Obama wins then immigration policy are driven by Durbin. AC-21 is the thread that I am hanging on to, if that goes away then what....just don't want to think about it.

    AC21 denial is nothing to do with immigaration policy of Durbin or Obama. It is due to lack of regulations in USCIS or USCIS not efficient to follow the law/rules or bad customer service. This is where we need Obama. Becuase, he is favor of more/stright regulation or more accountability or strong government.





    hopefulgc
    07-13 12:58 PM
    Very good point by alterego.
    This letter has a very striking problem in it.. one that can cause a huge problem for the people signing it.
    How can one say that they wanted to apply in EB2, but their lawyer said they should apply in EB3?
    As pointed out by pappu, Category is determined by job requirements and not the summary qualifications of the beneficiary.
    If you sign and say that the lawyer said you should apply in EB3/EB2/whatever, you are essentially stating that lawyers were involved in fabricating the job requirements. This is the same problem that is causing Fragomen clients to be investigated/audited.
    This is just an advice. I am prepared to support IV and the members in whatever we decide to follow.




    Can I ask why the complaint in the letter about the change in interpretation of the law in favor of Eb2 I? Before jumping on me, read on.
    The overflow visas would not go to EB3 I, under either interpretation. They would now go to either oversubscribed EB2 countries namely India and China(horizontally) or as in the past 2 yrs they went to to EB3 ROW under the old interpretation(Vertically).
    Arguably the first one is better for EB3 India since atleast, if you are qualified and your employer agrees and your job description is suited to EB2, then you could move. You certainly could not move your country of chargability. If you were hoping for overflow from EB3ROW, it would still have to pass through the gate of EB2I.
    Perhaps the person drafting the letter can explain their rationale on including this in the letter.

    I agree with Pappu, the single most important thing that could help EB3I in the near term is a visa recapture legislation. That is where the most energy of EB3 and for that matter all of IV membership should be. Specifically the membership needs to get more robust in their actions especially personally meeting lawmakers and their staff. Meeting affected constituents from their districts seems to have the most influence on them.
    Additionally, I would not convey the sense that, you were "deciding" on whether to file Eb2 or EB3. That should solely be based on the job description and is more up to the employers discretion in the current law. The beneficiary should not have a role in that(as per what I understand). Additionally, noone was prevented from porting their PD or using Sub labors or moving into EB2 category should the new job description meet the criteria (always remember you being qualified for EB2 means didly squat to the USCIS, it is the job description and the employer's desire for it that the USCIS considers, only then do your qualifications even matter to them). I agree that all of these are irksome to those waiting patiently in line, but those are the rules unfortunately. To my mind, the labor sub. thing was the most egregious, discriminatory and widely abused(thank god it has been ended), unfortunately those in the queue over the last few years paid for it.



    No comments:

    Post a Comment