amitjoey
05-25 12:17 PM
We are thinking about applying for canadian PR. Should we include our son (US citizen) in the application? or do US citizens get to reside in Canada without visa?
Also, currently my company is processing my GC, will this be affected if we apply for canadian PR?
US citizens can come in and stay in canada as a tourist for temporary purposes, but you need a Canadian PR for longer stays. So YES, add your son in your application. Your US-Gc application is not affected by processing canadian PR or vice-versa.
Also, currently my company is processing my GC, will this be affected if we apply for canadian PR?
US citizens can come in and stay in canada as a tourist for temporary purposes, but you need a Canadian PR for longer stays. So YES, add your son in your application. Your US-Gc application is not affected by processing canadian PR or vice-versa.
wallpaper ashton kutcher and demi moore
actaccord
01-13 08:31 PM
at least one person could respond in more civilized and matured way. These kind of response will give good impression about a forum.
Guys please keep your comments in more civilized way to keep/gain good public image of the forum.
I do read most of the threads in this forum (whenever I feel free) i feel some of members who are donors/senior members feel they can get to fight (in abusive way) with any one on any thread no matter whether it spoils the image of forum or their response adds no value to the thread. These kind of attitude can be expected from new members as they may have wrong intentions (or to just vent their frustrations) to join in a forum. But people who are very senior and donors responding in uncivilized manner is not good for them as well as the forum.
I don't see anything wrong PlainSpeak's suggestion but I can't comment on if her suggestion is workable or not. But we can just explain what is right or wrong instead of getting into fight mode.
I would like to see some kind of administration control (removing the response, warning the members) on those threads with abusive/uncivilized response. I know it is tedious job but once we have senior/donors under civilized conversation controlling new members will be of easier as seniors/donors can report those unwanted conversations.
It would be great place to share ideas (good, bad, right, wrong) if those uncivilized response is reduced. The lesser the uncivilized response more the people willing to join hands.
I wanted to join hands but those uncivilized comments keeping me away from participating. I do have friends who joined after me referring felt the same, some even stopped visiting this forum after seeing uncivilized fightings.
There are great people like amitjoey who convey the message in more civilized way (as far as I have seen) and help others (its not easy to post 1100+ posts....). I am new to this country and have very less experience and knowledge to share. But I hope one day I can guide/help some people like amitjoey.
Reason for me to share my thought is amitjoey, otherwise I would have just gone through the thread and felt bad about this forum for uncivilized comments. I am not into any group yet (Eb2/3) as my comp is not going to sponsor gc as per new policy, so I don't belong to any group (or we can say group who's gc never filed). When I read PlainSpeak's comment I thought she was right and after reading amitjoey's comment I learned another view for this issue. After reading those two comments I understand the issue and why IV took different direction or direction different from PlainSpeak's. But when I continued reading this thread I felt why some educated people with good intentions have bad thoughts and respond to others in uncivilized way. In the whole thread only two comments make's sense to me rest doesn't belong/fit to this forum.
Lets get more new members and be civilized to gain confident which will gain more strength to the forum.
Do not overanalyze any bill- All these bills are mere drafts until they come on floor for debate, and even after that they go thru amendments, rewriting, and the final bill comes out in most cases to be very different from the original. Even after the bill is passed in both houses, the committees that are responsible in reconciling the bill will tweak it and fine tune it.
This means that even good provisions can be deleted at any time during the debate, thru an amendment lobbied by the antis- if the EB Community is not vigilant.
To give you an insight: In Dec 2005, there was a line item in a bill that would have recaptured visas for EB applicants, the bill was passed – and at the last minute this provision was deleted.
IF you read through the provisions and the paper that IV created for lobby days in July 2010- Each one of the provisions and the underlying text that IV is asking for has been written with clear understanding of the issues EB applicants face- It is written in a way that if incorporated in any of the bills as an amendment- will give fair and balanced numbers to all categories -EB3, EB2.
So, regardless of which bill (Immigrant friendly) comes on the floor- IV will lobby to have this package included as an amendment. Or IV will lobby to get this inserted into the main bill.
So- Please, do not get worked up about EB3 vs EB2. OR India vs China vs World
The real work is to be vigilant about what bill has the chance to come on the floor and then lobby to get the amendments included.
There are bigger issues for our community- Not one immigrant friendly bill has come up for debate in the last 4 years (exception is the dream act). And here the IV Community is debating and fighting about provisions about one of 100 bills that might never see a chance on the floor.
The big battle is to advocate and lobby at grassroots to get a bill to come on the floor- persuade lawmakers to be cosponsors for a bill that will help us, and then when the bill is up for debate, we can talk about what we should include as amendments or insert in the main bill to make it fair for everybody.
Guys please keep your comments in more civilized way to keep/gain good public image of the forum.
I do read most of the threads in this forum (whenever I feel free) i feel some of members who are donors/senior members feel they can get to fight (in abusive way) with any one on any thread no matter whether it spoils the image of forum or their response adds no value to the thread. These kind of attitude can be expected from new members as they may have wrong intentions (or to just vent their frustrations) to join in a forum. But people who are very senior and donors responding in uncivilized manner is not good for them as well as the forum.
I don't see anything wrong PlainSpeak's suggestion but I can't comment on if her suggestion is workable or not. But we can just explain what is right or wrong instead of getting into fight mode.
I would like to see some kind of administration control (removing the response, warning the members) on those threads with abusive/uncivilized response. I know it is tedious job but once we have senior/donors under civilized conversation controlling new members will be of easier as seniors/donors can report those unwanted conversations.
It would be great place to share ideas (good, bad, right, wrong) if those uncivilized response is reduced. The lesser the uncivilized response more the people willing to join hands.
I wanted to join hands but those uncivilized comments keeping me away from participating. I do have friends who joined after me referring felt the same, some even stopped visiting this forum after seeing uncivilized fightings.
There are great people like amitjoey who convey the message in more civilized way (as far as I have seen) and help others (its not easy to post 1100+ posts....). I am new to this country and have very less experience and knowledge to share. But I hope one day I can guide/help some people like amitjoey.
Reason for me to share my thought is amitjoey, otherwise I would have just gone through the thread and felt bad about this forum for uncivilized comments. I am not into any group yet (Eb2/3) as my comp is not going to sponsor gc as per new policy, so I don't belong to any group (or we can say group who's gc never filed). When I read PlainSpeak's comment I thought she was right and after reading amitjoey's comment I learned another view for this issue. After reading those two comments I understand the issue and why IV took different direction or direction different from PlainSpeak's. But when I continued reading this thread I felt why some educated people with good intentions have bad thoughts and respond to others in uncivilized way. In the whole thread only two comments make's sense to me rest doesn't belong/fit to this forum.
Lets get more new members and be civilized to gain confident which will gain more strength to the forum.
Do not overanalyze any bill- All these bills are mere drafts until they come on floor for debate, and even after that they go thru amendments, rewriting, and the final bill comes out in most cases to be very different from the original. Even after the bill is passed in both houses, the committees that are responsible in reconciling the bill will tweak it and fine tune it.
This means that even good provisions can be deleted at any time during the debate, thru an amendment lobbied by the antis- if the EB Community is not vigilant.
To give you an insight: In Dec 2005, there was a line item in a bill that would have recaptured visas for EB applicants, the bill was passed – and at the last minute this provision was deleted.
IF you read through the provisions and the paper that IV created for lobby days in July 2010- Each one of the provisions and the underlying text that IV is asking for has been written with clear understanding of the issues EB applicants face- It is written in a way that if incorporated in any of the bills as an amendment- will give fair and balanced numbers to all categories -EB3, EB2.
So, regardless of which bill (Immigrant friendly) comes on the floor- IV will lobby to have this package included as an amendment. Or IV will lobby to get this inserted into the main bill.
So- Please, do not get worked up about EB3 vs EB2. OR India vs China vs World
The real work is to be vigilant about what bill has the chance to come on the floor and then lobby to get the amendments included.
There are bigger issues for our community- Not one immigrant friendly bill has come up for debate in the last 4 years (exception is the dream act). And here the IV Community is debating and fighting about provisions about one of 100 bills that might never see a chance on the floor.
The big battle is to advocate and lobby at grassroots to get a bill to come on the floor- persuade lawmakers to be cosponsors for a bill that will help us, and then when the bill is up for debate, we can talk about what we should include as amendments or insert in the main bill to make it fair for everybody.
longq
02-13 02:17 PM
Further division is not good.
I was on record that DOS/USCIS misallocated visas in 2005. India received much more in eb3 then what they were entitled to. In fact, India, China, Mexico and Phillipines should have not gone over their 7% as a whole of the 250,000 greencards available. Because of this; dos/uscis learned their lesson and started to follow the law appropriately.
I did say that if in 2006 any country went above their limit of 7% then it would cause a lawsuit which I would be a part of. However, there would be some negative outcomes from it. UScIS/DOS behaviour could only change going forward. They could revoke the greencards issued in 2005 for people who went over the 7% limit (uscis has upto 5 years to rescind greencard if approved by mistake) but they would not get re-allocated because there is no carryover from one year to the next in the current law. Only outcome would be to change it going forward. As I've said in the past; people were spoiled at the laziness of DOS/USCIS. Retrogression and the visa allocation should have happened a long time ago.
Again wrong information by you and trying to hide background or historical information. Either USDOS/USCIS has not mismanaged the numbers in 2005. Claiming India and China was given more than they entitled to is wrong . They (DOS) did everything right till 2005. Now only they are violating. One has to study the historical issues before 1999. Before 1999, both India and China (both EB2 and EB3) were retrogressed heavily and backlogged. However ROW was current in all EB catagories. There was no retrogression in ROW. It was always current before 1999.
For example, here is March 1999 VB
All Charge-
ability Areas CHINA-
Except Those mainland
Listed born INDIA MEXICO PHILIPPINES
Employment-
Based
1st C 22JAN98 C C C
2nd C 08SEP96 08SEP97 C C
3rd C 01JAN95 08FEB96 C C
As a part of AC21 act in 2000, the unused numbers (about 100,000) were recaptured to eliminate the backlogs in EB categories. The reason was this recapture to remove retrogression in India and China, as because that was only two countries backlogged at that point.
After that ac21 law, there were additional 100,000 visas available apart from 140,000 visas every year. DOS has given 100,000 additional visas to USCIS in 2000 itself to consume it. Because of USCIS slowness/inefficiency in processing 485s between 1999 and 2004, they even did not have processed the yearly quota. Therefore the recaptured visas were remain unused for 5 years because of USCIS inefficiency. Therefore, at some point, it has to be consumed. Therefore USCIS did backlog elimination drive in 2005 (6 months processing of 485s ) to use all the recaptured visas. The original intension to remove backlogs in India and China. That was done by USCIS. USCIS can not hold that recaptured numbers for ever (by imposing 7% limit in India and China) how the future demands will be in EB3-ROW. Far example, if ROW demands 200,000 EB3 visas in year 2020, USCIS/DOS can not hold that AC21 numbers (that were recaptured in 2000) for ROW to be consumed in 2020, by imposing 7% limit. No one can anticipate future demands.
Theoretically speaking those numbers belongs (AC21 recaptured numbers came only from EB1 and EB2 pool) belongs to EB1 and EB2 category. EB3 never gave any unused numbers in previous years. Ideally speaking, those numbers should have been issued to EB2 category first to eliminate backlogs in EB2 then only to EB3 ROW. Infact, all the ac21 numbers were used to eliminate retro in EB3 only. In 2005 they issed only 44,000 EB2 compare to about 150,000 visas in EB3. This is big injustice to EB2 India and China.
Bottom line is EB3-ROW is enjoying with the expense of EB2 India and China.
I was on record that DOS/USCIS misallocated visas in 2005. India received much more in eb3 then what they were entitled to. In fact, India, China, Mexico and Phillipines should have not gone over their 7% as a whole of the 250,000 greencards available. Because of this; dos/uscis learned their lesson and started to follow the law appropriately.
I did say that if in 2006 any country went above their limit of 7% then it would cause a lawsuit which I would be a part of. However, there would be some negative outcomes from it. UScIS/DOS behaviour could only change going forward. They could revoke the greencards issued in 2005 for people who went over the 7% limit (uscis has upto 5 years to rescind greencard if approved by mistake) but they would not get re-allocated because there is no carryover from one year to the next in the current law. Only outcome would be to change it going forward. As I've said in the past; people were spoiled at the laziness of DOS/USCIS. Retrogression and the visa allocation should have happened a long time ago.
Again wrong information by you and trying to hide background or historical information. Either USDOS/USCIS has not mismanaged the numbers in 2005. Claiming India and China was given more than they entitled to is wrong . They (DOS) did everything right till 2005. Now only they are violating. One has to study the historical issues before 1999. Before 1999, both India and China (both EB2 and EB3) were retrogressed heavily and backlogged. However ROW was current in all EB catagories. There was no retrogression in ROW. It was always current before 1999.
For example, here is March 1999 VB
All Charge-
ability Areas CHINA-
Except Those mainland
Listed born INDIA MEXICO PHILIPPINES
Employment-
Based
1st C 22JAN98 C C C
2nd C 08SEP96 08SEP97 C C
3rd C 01JAN95 08FEB96 C C
As a part of AC21 act in 2000, the unused numbers (about 100,000) were recaptured to eliminate the backlogs in EB categories. The reason was this recapture to remove retrogression in India and China, as because that was only two countries backlogged at that point.
After that ac21 law, there were additional 100,000 visas available apart from 140,000 visas every year. DOS has given 100,000 additional visas to USCIS in 2000 itself to consume it. Because of USCIS slowness/inefficiency in processing 485s between 1999 and 2004, they even did not have processed the yearly quota. Therefore the recaptured visas were remain unused for 5 years because of USCIS inefficiency. Therefore, at some point, it has to be consumed. Therefore USCIS did backlog elimination drive in 2005 (6 months processing of 485s ) to use all the recaptured visas. The original intension to remove backlogs in India and China. That was done by USCIS. USCIS can not hold that recaptured numbers for ever (by imposing 7% limit in India and China) how the future demands will be in EB3-ROW. Far example, if ROW demands 200,000 EB3 visas in year 2020, USCIS/DOS can not hold that AC21 numbers (that were recaptured in 2000) for ROW to be consumed in 2020, by imposing 7% limit. No one can anticipate future demands.
Theoretically speaking those numbers belongs (AC21 recaptured numbers came only from EB1 and EB2 pool) belongs to EB1 and EB2 category. EB3 never gave any unused numbers in previous years. Ideally speaking, those numbers should have been issued to EB2 category first to eliminate backlogs in EB2 then only to EB3 ROW. Infact, all the ac21 numbers were used to eliminate retro in EB3 only. In 2005 they issed only 44,000 EB2 compare to about 150,000 visas in EB3. This is big injustice to EB2 India and China.
Bottom line is EB3-ROW is enjoying with the expense of EB2 India and China.
2011 for Demi Moore and Ashton
garybanz
12-14 11:58 AM
"The SC concluded that the statutory discrimination within the class of aliens is permissible."
This could justify difference in say EB1, EB2 and EB3 or F visa, H Visa and L visa. How ever there is no mention that discrimination could be on the basis of sex/race/country of origin etc. IMHO an extension of standard EEO laws should be applied for EB class immigration too.
NB: I am an HR consultant and an expert on EEO laws, I still think that this discussion is worth taking to a top constitutional attorney. An hour of his time will cost peanuts compared to what we can possibly get out of this.
This could justify difference in say EB1, EB2 and EB3 or F visa, H Visa and L visa. How ever there is no mention that discrimination could be on the basis of sex/race/country of origin etc. IMHO an extension of standard EEO laws should be applied for EB class immigration too.
NB: I am an HR consultant and an expert on EEO laws, I still think that this discussion is worth taking to a top constitutional attorney. An hour of his time will cost peanuts compared to what we can possibly get out of this.
more...
poorslumdog
09-04 12:38 PM
I'm not a free loader like you....Have contributed and still want to contribute...Its just that I cancelled my CC(the source of funds) that I need to reactivate.
Dont tell me your crap stroy. First do it and then we can talk.
Dont tell me your crap stroy. First do it and then we can talk.
kbsyed61
06-01 04:45 PM
Here is the official information on SS benefits while living outside USA.
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/pubs/10137.pdf
Per this rule, Indians are eligible for SS benefits while living in India (at the time of claim), if they have lived in US for 10 years or have 40 Social security credits (That is 10 years of SS contribution.).
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/pubs/10137.pdf
Per this rule, Indians are eligible for SS benefits while living in India (at the time of claim), if they have lived in US for 10 years or have 40 Social security credits (That is 10 years of SS contribution.).
more...
sachug22
10-07 05:00 PM
Some additional assumption in the calculations
China gets its share of EB2 numbers (by priority date)
95% cases are approved and none are delayed
EB3 to EB2 porting and cross-changeability ignored (they counter each other)
I-485 filled in last few months will not be approved (processing delays)
DOS/CIS are efficient and follow rules.
China gets its share of EB2 numbers (by priority date)
95% cases are approved and none are delayed
EB3 to EB2 porting and cross-changeability ignored (they counter each other)
I-485 filled in last few months will not be approved (processing delays)
DOS/CIS are efficient and follow rules.
2010 Ashton Kutcher and Demi
franklin
02-13 01:42 PM
immigration-law.com posted country wise EB visa allocation for the year of 2005. For example, Nepal used only 70 EB3 visas. Whereas country limit is 7%. In that case how EB3 Nepal is retrogressed?
Can we sue USCIS? Let's discuss.
In that case, let's hire an attorney.
There is no such thing as EB3 Nepal, which I'm sure you know. In EB3 ROW, this includes everyone else. I'm sure there are some significant numbers from the UK, Germany, Australian (although they might be separate under E3... not sure), Japan, Tawian.... etc etc the list goes on.
EB3 ROW doesn't just mean those from tiny countries with tiny populations
Can we sue USCIS? Let's discuss.
In that case, let's hire an attorney.
There is no such thing as EB3 Nepal, which I'm sure you know. In EB3 ROW, this includes everyone else. I'm sure there are some significant numbers from the UK, Germany, Australian (although they might be separate under E3... not sure), Japan, Tawian.... etc etc the list goes on.
EB3 ROW doesn't just mean those from tiny countries with tiny populations
more...
vactorboy29
09-23 06:20 PM
All this data was generated for last quarter (End of June ).We may see improved numbers in comming updates due to spill over and current approvals for this quarter.
hair and his ex Demi, right,
snathan
03-30 02:55 PM
If congress would have done it's job properly 60 years back, there was no need of nuclear deal now. The comment you made makes it pretty sure that congress was a failure since last 6 decades. The benefits of current nuclear deal will be in next 2 decades. So what poor people of India eat in next two decades? Will you tell them that don't worry...hang on for next 20 years. Also do you know the case of Enron and how politicians of all colors made fool of people.
Again...I am not supporting congress. Yes, we didnt have anything for the last 60 years. Because of MMS we are going to see something in another 20 years. Is there anything you can give me Mr.Advani's vision about it. Even after fifty years.
Whether we like it or not....nothing is going to change for the common man. Advani, Jaya, Karuna, Maya and mulayam all are same shit but different a$$ h&^e.
I am supporting MMS because he is not a politician. Chose the less evil. nothing else.
Again...I am not supporting congress. Yes, we didnt have anything for the last 60 years. Because of MMS we are going to see something in another 20 years. Is there anything you can give me Mr.Advani's vision about it. Even after fifty years.
Whether we like it or not....nothing is going to change for the common man. Advani, Jaya, Karuna, Maya and mulayam all are same shit but different a$$ h&^e.
I am supporting MMS because he is not a politician. Chose the less evil. nothing else.
more...
villamonte6100
12-14 01:03 PM
--Although I agree with what you said in earlier post (I had to debate with someone who thinks otherwise), I find this post in poor taste.
Please guild your temper while expressing yourself and refrain from bursting out. Looks bad to the outsiders if they visit these forums.
Ofcourse, humor is always welcome.
Don't be upset dude. I'm just trying to suggest so that we could think out of the box. I don't think I have a bad taste.
Honestly, we tend to be discuss to much the law here. We are not experts of law and I think we should start calling our lawyers and talk to them about this idea. Let's see what our lawyers will say and then we can share those comments from lawyers.
Please don't be upset.
Please guild your temper while expressing yourself and refrain from bursting out. Looks bad to the outsiders if they visit these forums.
Ofcourse, humor is always welcome.
Don't be upset dude. I'm just trying to suggest so that we could think out of the box. I don't think I have a bad taste.
Honestly, we tend to be discuss to much the law here. We are not experts of law and I think we should start calling our lawyers and talk to them about this idea. Let's see what our lawyers will say and then we can share those comments from lawyers.
Please don't be upset.
hot The cougars Demi Moore and
hiralal
05-31 12:51 AM
I agree but complete removal of county quota is almost impossible ...diversity is just a name !!! US political system in super advanced in many ways(US contitution was written centuries ago and is much better than Indian ..remember the foreigner becoming PM issue and multi party mess that India has) ..my guess would be that country quota limits were introduced to prevent one country nationals from becoming a eventual majority . ofcourse the migration from south Am is another issue)
and hence a better bet would be recapture ..
and hence a better bet would be recapture ..
more...
house and demi moore wedding,
she81
07-03 06:44 PM
Dugg both.
tattoo Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher
srikondoji
06-26 12:44 PM
hope so.
So regardless of what August bulletin says, USCIS can just, on a whim stop accepting 485 petitions in Mid July just because they have received "Too many" and the mail room clerk is tired ? I dont know but it really does not sound like something USCIS can do on a whim without publishing a change in the rule first.
So regardless of what August bulletin says, USCIS can just, on a whim stop accepting 485 petitions in Mid July just because they have received "Too many" and the mail room clerk is tired ? I dont know but it really does not sound like something USCIS can do on a whim without publishing a change in the rule first.
more...
pictures ashton kutcher and demi moore
andy garcia
02-23 07:23 AM
Looking only at LCs that are awaiting immigrant visa numbers (ie, LCs that are "still in process" or "certified after current EB3 ROW cutoff dates") here is how it looks (copy to an XL sheet to view properly):
Period, World, India(22%), EB2-India(41% of India), EB2-India-Family(*2.1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1997 to 2002, 269311, 59271, 24320, 51072
2002 to 2003, 36200, 7967, 3269, 6865
2003 to 2004, 13145, 2893, 1187, 2493
2004 to 2005, 6133, 1350, 554, 1163
The pre 2002 numbers pending are really bad. The last column sums up the situation for EB2-India. Use your own %ages to calculate the situation for EB3. It is clear that forward movement will be held back due to the huge chunk of LCs from 1997 to 2002 which are being certified.
So the situation is indeed hopeless and lobbying is the only way out.
Don't forget that a lot of those LC were being used for substitution($$$$) by the consulting companies. Once the regulation about eliminating substitution goes into effect. Some of those will not be able to be recycled.
Period, World, India(22%), EB2-India(41% of India), EB2-India-Family(*2.1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1997 to 2002, 269311, 59271, 24320, 51072
2002 to 2003, 36200, 7967, 3269, 6865
2003 to 2004, 13145, 2893, 1187, 2493
2004 to 2005, 6133, 1350, 554, 1163
The pre 2002 numbers pending are really bad. The last column sums up the situation for EB2-India. Use your own %ages to calculate the situation for EB3. It is clear that forward movement will be held back due to the huge chunk of LCs from 1997 to 2002 which are being certified.
So the situation is indeed hopeless and lobbying is the only way out.
Don't forget that a lot of those LC were being used for substitution($$$$) by the consulting companies. Once the regulation about eliminating substitution goes into effect. Some of those will not be able to be recycled.
dresses ashton kutcher wedding pics
thecipher5
04-23 09:52 AM
Suresh,
I just sent you a pm regarding a similar situation I'd faced...
Contact me if you need more information.
thecipher5
I just sent you a pm regarding a similar situation I'd faced...
Contact me if you need more information.
thecipher5
more...
makeup Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore.
chanduv23
03-27 03:35 PM
JAB TAK SAMOSAE ME AALO HAI
TAB TAK INDIA MAE LALOO HAI
We never know - Laloo could make it.
TAB TAK INDIA MAE LALOO HAI
We never know - Laloo could make it.
girlfriend wife Demi Moore, at Ashton
nashim
07-15 02:06 PM
Dear Attorney,
Is it possible to have 2 different I-485 with 2 different employers at the same time?
I already have an I-485 pending through my current employer. Is it possible for me to file another I-485 through my future employer?
Is it possible to have 2 different I-485 with 2 different employers at the same time?
I already have an I-485 pending through my current employer. Is it possible for me to file another I-485 through my future employer?
hairstyles ashton kutcher and demi moore
ganguteli
03-27 12:03 PM
widower zardari will be marrying kumari mayawati just after election to unite subcontinent and bring peace to world.
:d
:d
ArkBird
04-01 02:56 AM
Here are some of the debacle of Nehru. Some are STILL hunting us and world today.
1. Choosing self over country (see "Sardar" movie for more details. All of congress wanted Sardar Patel as PM but Nehru insisted on him being PM. Can you imagine country today if Sardar Patel would have been the first PM of India?)
2. His promise to hold public referendum in J&K under UN. Why should we invite UN for our internal matter?? Specially when the king of Kashmir has signed union with India himself.
3. 1962 debacle. Though may not be a big deal to some people, it gave unrepairable scare which will hunt us and our army for decades to come.
It is true everyone has made some sacrifices but consider if India were not a free country and if Nehru and others like Mahatma Gandhi didn't dedicate themselves to the cause of nation then would we be better off today? We failed to carry the torch left by them for us.
Has anyone asked them to vote for Nehru dynasty after the blunders? Didnt anyone see it coming? Building society is everyone's responsibility. Not just Nehru or his children's.
This is like saying we wasted one spot in Indian cricket team on Sachin Tendulkar when he scored 0 in some matches or didnt win a match for India.
It is team work and collective responsibility that will make this country prosper. Blaming some person by saying all his fault and we are here because he screwed us is not the right thing to do. It just finds a scapegoat and does not solve the problem. We should learn from the mistakes the country has made and learn from them and move forward.
1. Choosing self over country (see "Sardar" movie for more details. All of congress wanted Sardar Patel as PM but Nehru insisted on him being PM. Can you imagine country today if Sardar Patel would have been the first PM of India?)
2. His promise to hold public referendum in J&K under UN. Why should we invite UN for our internal matter?? Specially when the king of Kashmir has signed union with India himself.
3. 1962 debacle. Though may not be a big deal to some people, it gave unrepairable scare which will hunt us and our army for decades to come.
It is true everyone has made some sacrifices but consider if India were not a free country and if Nehru and others like Mahatma Gandhi didn't dedicate themselves to the cause of nation then would we be better off today? We failed to carry the torch left by them for us.
Has anyone asked them to vote for Nehru dynasty after the blunders? Didnt anyone see it coming? Building society is everyone's responsibility. Not just Nehru or his children's.
This is like saying we wasted one spot in Indian cricket team on Sachin Tendulkar when he scored 0 in some matches or didnt win a match for India.
It is team work and collective responsibility that will make this country prosper. Blaming some person by saying all his fault and we are here because he screwed us is not the right thing to do. It just finds a scapegoat and does not solve the problem. We should learn from the mistakes the country has made and learn from them and move forward.
mrdelhiite
07-08 08:54 PM
My question: I came to us on F1 Visa. I do not have my last name in my passport. Yes it is true ..stupid passport department missed it as they write names with hand ... passport was made when I was in high school…9th grade to be precise. I never got it corrected and came to us …visa was issued to me using FNU firstname format. When I applied for I-20 SSN, and everything in US after that I added my last name (my actual family name which got missed in passport) as us system does not allow blank last name. Note that my passport last page correctly shows my fathers and mothers last name which I have added on all my us documents like SSN, DL, … now I have been in us from past 5 years with all ( and I actually mean all) my us docs like H1, SSN, I-20, License, 495 application etc in firstname lastname format. ….. the only 2 things which are not in my first name last name format is
1) visa which is FNU Firstname ( FNU = First name used)
2) My passport which has just my first name and no last name
one of my good friend got a 485 query as his first, middle and last name are mixed up with respect to his passport and 485 application. Which I feel is a much simpler case as compared to mine.
Now my question is should I go ahead and change my name in my passport which is nothing but add my last name and get a new passport preemptively…or I should wait for USCIS decision .. Usually RFE is given 30 – 40 days to reply and I don’t think I will have time to get my passport fixed if and when RFE comes on my 485 .. the only issue I have with preemptive fixing name is sometime it is just better not to add complication to a case when it comes to USCIS …. A lawyer’s opinion is much needed and appreciated.
Thanks for your help
-M
PS: my priority is Feb 2007 EB3
1) visa which is FNU Firstname ( FNU = First name used)
2) My passport which has just my first name and no last name
one of my good friend got a 485 query as his first, middle and last name are mixed up with respect to his passport and 485 application. Which I feel is a much simpler case as compared to mine.
Now my question is should I go ahead and change my name in my passport which is nothing but add my last name and get a new passport preemptively…or I should wait for USCIS decision .. Usually RFE is given 30 – 40 days to reply and I don’t think I will have time to get my passport fixed if and when RFE comes on my 485 .. the only issue I have with preemptive fixing name is sometime it is just better not to add complication to a case when it comes to USCIS …. A lawyer’s opinion is much needed and appreciated.
Thanks for your help
-M
PS: my priority is Feb 2007 EB3
