techbuyer77
06-12 08:21 PM
my lawyer said it was ok as long as I go back to work for them uon approval. GC is for future job, not current, according to USCIS Director memo.
The problem is my previous employer is not doing well due to economy :(
so I might not have a job upon approval
Please do not imply I am doing something illegal, because it is not that way.
The problem is my previous employer is not doing well due to economy :(
so I might not have a job upon approval
Please do not imply I am doing something illegal, because it is not that way.
wallpaper Cheap Ray-Ban New Wayfarer
ragz4u
01-25 11:53 AM
What is lobbying and is it legal?
As per the definition at Wikipedia, Lobbying is the practice of private advocacy with the goal of influencing a governing body by promoting a point of view that is conducive to an individual's or organization's goals. more information can be found here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying
It is 100% legal and is in fact the preferred way of getting things done by most corporations. Corporations like Microsoft, Dell, Yahoo, Google etc have all used lobbying in the past and in fact I would go as far as saying that every Fortune 1000 firm has used lobbying at one point of time or another. Just search for any company name and the word lobbying on Google and you'll see what we are talking about
What has lobbying got to do with the Immigration Bill?
As we know from part III, Senator Specter will be creating a markup of the Senate Immigration Bill. This may/may not contain the provisions that the immigrant community is looking for.
The differennt bills that are being considered for the markup are McCain Kennedy bill, Cornyn Kyl bill, the Chuck Hagel Bill and a few others
This document by AILA compares the various versions of the bill in different categories http://www.shusterman.com/pdf/immreform106.pdf. This also considers a markup of Senator Specter which is unofficial at the moment. This means that until it gets officially presented to the Judiciary Committee for review, it could change anytime.
This markup already seems to contain the provisions we need, what are we still worried about?
If you have read my post on S.1932, you would know that a bill can be amended at multiple stages.
1) Senator Specter could change his markup, after all he has not come out with an official version. Do not forget that the link above refers to an unofficial version of the markup. As per unconfirmed reports, the Chairman's markup could be out anytime between now and mid-march and a lot of things could change in the mean time
2) Assuming that the markup does contain the provisions that we as immigrants are fighting for, any judiciary committee member can propose an amendment to the bill which could result in a an unwanted change. A case in point is the amendment that Senator Diane Feinstein proposed during S.1932 which reduced the increase in H1B visas from 60,000 to 30,000. Imagine if a senator brings in an amendment that strips off all the provisions for legal immigration!
3) If the bill does not have strong support within the Judiciary committee, it could be voted out and it becomes history
4) Assuming that the bill passes through the above steps, it is presented to the full Senate for a debate and vote. Here too any member of the senate can propose an amendment to the bill and the house votes on it. A case in point is the Byrd Amendment which was introduced by Senate Byrd from Virginia which sought to drop sections 8001 and 8002 from the S.1932. This was defeated by the a margin of 84-15 but remember that if it had enough support, S.1932 would have ended here
5) Once the bill passes with the immigration provisions in the Senate, it is presented to a joint conference committee where a few senators and a few congressmen deliberate on which sections to include int he conference bill from among the House bill and the Senate bill. Remember that the house bill has already been passed (HR.4437) and it does not contain any immigration provisions. The House members could again force the senate representatives to drop the immigration provisions. The S.1932 bill's pro-immigration sections got dropped precisely at this juncture
So as can be seen, there are various stumbling blocks towards achieving a favorable bill.
The only way we can ensure that the pro-immigrant provisions do not get ignored or sacrificed is by lobbying. By lobbying we can ensure that the right folks at the right places can understand our concern and empathize with us.
A lobbying firm can ensure that we send a consistent and effective message to the right people. As mentioned earlier, some of the lobbying firms have ex-Congressmen and ex-Senators on their boards. These folks have a great working relationship with the current senators and congressmen. These lobbyists can not only get our issues be heard by the powers, they can possibly influence them by using some political capital
Why can't we just contact the lawmakers directly and tell them about it? Why spend money for lobbyists?
We can definitely try doing this ourselves. This is a free country and nothing stops us from doing so. Unfortunately the effectiveness of such a method is questionable.
During S.1932 proceedings, many members of this forum contacted their local congressmen and senators and asked for appointments. Many also conveyed their views to the staff and many also faxed their views in. Unfortunately the bill passed without the pro-immigration provisions. The message was not conveyed strongly enough and it was conveyed as individuals and not a group.
It was realized that unless we present our case the way Washington, DC is used to seeing it (by hiring lobbyists), the message will not get through.
Lobbyists have direct access to the actual congressmen and senators while the most we can hope is getting a key staff member's attention.
A lobbyist can influence a house member, while we can only hope that the staff members pass our views to the house member.
We do not know which members are really the ones to target and key decision makers and we might end up concentrating on the wrong house members. A lobbyist can help us identify these key members.
All in all, a lobbyist can help us use our energy in the right way and not end up wasting it doing frivolous things and ultimately help us achieve our dreams
And do not forget that some of the anti-immigration groups like numbersusa already have full time lobbyists working for them in DC. If we are to even put up a decent fight against these very dedicated anti-immigrant forces, we need to get help from a professional lobbying firm
As per the definition at Wikipedia, Lobbying is the practice of private advocacy with the goal of influencing a governing body by promoting a point of view that is conducive to an individual's or organization's goals. more information can be found here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying
It is 100% legal and is in fact the preferred way of getting things done by most corporations. Corporations like Microsoft, Dell, Yahoo, Google etc have all used lobbying in the past and in fact I would go as far as saying that every Fortune 1000 firm has used lobbying at one point of time or another. Just search for any company name and the word lobbying on Google and you'll see what we are talking about
What has lobbying got to do with the Immigration Bill?
As we know from part III, Senator Specter will be creating a markup of the Senate Immigration Bill. This may/may not contain the provisions that the immigrant community is looking for.
The differennt bills that are being considered for the markup are McCain Kennedy bill, Cornyn Kyl bill, the Chuck Hagel Bill and a few others
This document by AILA compares the various versions of the bill in different categories http://www.shusterman.com/pdf/immreform106.pdf. This also considers a markup of Senator Specter which is unofficial at the moment. This means that until it gets officially presented to the Judiciary Committee for review, it could change anytime.
This markup already seems to contain the provisions we need, what are we still worried about?
If you have read my post on S.1932, you would know that a bill can be amended at multiple stages.
1) Senator Specter could change his markup, after all he has not come out with an official version. Do not forget that the link above refers to an unofficial version of the markup. As per unconfirmed reports, the Chairman's markup could be out anytime between now and mid-march and a lot of things could change in the mean time
2) Assuming that the markup does contain the provisions that we as immigrants are fighting for, any judiciary committee member can propose an amendment to the bill which could result in a an unwanted change. A case in point is the amendment that Senator Diane Feinstein proposed during S.1932 which reduced the increase in H1B visas from 60,000 to 30,000. Imagine if a senator brings in an amendment that strips off all the provisions for legal immigration!
3) If the bill does not have strong support within the Judiciary committee, it could be voted out and it becomes history
4) Assuming that the bill passes through the above steps, it is presented to the full Senate for a debate and vote. Here too any member of the senate can propose an amendment to the bill and the house votes on it. A case in point is the Byrd Amendment which was introduced by Senate Byrd from Virginia which sought to drop sections 8001 and 8002 from the S.1932. This was defeated by the a margin of 84-15 but remember that if it had enough support, S.1932 would have ended here
5) Once the bill passes with the immigration provisions in the Senate, it is presented to a joint conference committee where a few senators and a few congressmen deliberate on which sections to include int he conference bill from among the House bill and the Senate bill. Remember that the house bill has already been passed (HR.4437) and it does not contain any immigration provisions. The House members could again force the senate representatives to drop the immigration provisions. The S.1932 bill's pro-immigration sections got dropped precisely at this juncture
So as can be seen, there are various stumbling blocks towards achieving a favorable bill.
The only way we can ensure that the pro-immigrant provisions do not get ignored or sacrificed is by lobbying. By lobbying we can ensure that the right folks at the right places can understand our concern and empathize with us.
A lobbying firm can ensure that we send a consistent and effective message to the right people. As mentioned earlier, some of the lobbying firms have ex-Congressmen and ex-Senators on their boards. These folks have a great working relationship with the current senators and congressmen. These lobbyists can not only get our issues be heard by the powers, they can possibly influence them by using some political capital
Why can't we just contact the lawmakers directly and tell them about it? Why spend money for lobbyists?
We can definitely try doing this ourselves. This is a free country and nothing stops us from doing so. Unfortunately the effectiveness of such a method is questionable.
During S.1932 proceedings, many members of this forum contacted their local congressmen and senators and asked for appointments. Many also conveyed their views to the staff and many also faxed their views in. Unfortunately the bill passed without the pro-immigration provisions. The message was not conveyed strongly enough and it was conveyed as individuals and not a group.
It was realized that unless we present our case the way Washington, DC is used to seeing it (by hiring lobbyists), the message will not get through.
Lobbyists have direct access to the actual congressmen and senators while the most we can hope is getting a key staff member's attention.
A lobbyist can influence a house member, while we can only hope that the staff members pass our views to the house member.
We do not know which members are really the ones to target and key decision makers and we might end up concentrating on the wrong house members. A lobbyist can help us identify these key members.
All in all, a lobbyist can help us use our energy in the right way and not end up wasting it doing frivolous things and ultimately help us achieve our dreams
And do not forget that some of the anti-immigration groups like numbersusa already have full time lobbyists working for them in DC. If we are to even put up a decent fight against these very dedicated anti-immigrant forces, we need to get help from a professional lobbying firm
kirupa
07-20 08:45 PM
What exactly do you dislike about it?
2011 Ray Ban wayfarer Sunglasses rb
Blog Feeds
01-12 07:30 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_QZpVppv4FTs/S0qJpSDU8jI/AAAAAAAAACk/ITKpg-Txn3w/s320/2010-01-01+ICE+detention+2.jpg (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_QZpVppv4FTs/S0qJpSDU8jI/AAAAAAAAACk/ITKpg-Txn3w/s1600-h/2010-01-01+ICE+detention+2.jpg)All Americans should be outraged by the Sunday New York Times report about how ICE officials schemed to cover up the deaths of detainees in detention. http://bit.ly/6p2xlX. The online edition includes a link to a horrifying video of an ICE detainee, Mr. Boubacar Bah, who, after mysteriously suffering a skull fracture, was handcuffed while writhing in agony on the floor in his own vomit, then locked-up in an isolation cell for 13 hours without medical treatment and, finally, transported to a hospital in a coma where he later died.
It would be one thing if death in ICE detention was a rare occurrence. But, unfortunately, it's all too common. In a related article, also published Sunday, the Times reports about other ICE detainee deaths which were the result of substandard medical care and abuse. http://bit.ly/6gJlXu.
As I sat down to write this blog, I hoped to pen a stinging piece expressing my anger and calling for a full overhaul of ICE's detention system, not just more press releases and empty promises. But the New York Times articles speak for themselves �107 people have died in ICE custody since 2003 (not counting the immigrants who were released shortly before death so they wouldn't be added to the tally). Added to my anger is the revulsion that I feel toward an agency that is not only incompetent to care for those it locks up, but whose bureaucrats conspire to avoid paying detainees' medical bills and hide from bad publicity, rather than attend to immigrants in their custody. It seems not one of the faceless ICE bureaucrats is ever called to answer for his or her transgressions. Indeed, participating in the abuse and neglect of ICE detainees may have resume value. Just ask Nina Dozoretz, who was the longtime manager of ICE's Division of Immigration Health Services and Vice President of the Nakamoto Group, a company that, according to the Times, was hired by the Bush administration to monitor ICE detention. Dozoretz reportedly participated in the ICE conference calls where officials debated ways to avoid paying for Boubacar Bah's medical care, and came up with a scheme to shift the costs to his indigent relatives before he died. Shockingly, she was recently hired by the Obama administration to overhaul the ICE detainee healthcare system (I guess I won't hold my breath waiting for positive change I can believe in as it relates to ICE health care).
The abuse is not limited to ICE detainees who are unfortunate enough to become ill or injured while in custody. Last month Chris Crane, Vice President of the Detention and Removal Operations of the union representing approximately 7,200 ICE employees who work in detention and removal operations, testified before the U.S. Congress. He described the abuse faced by immigrants detained at facilities run by private contractors and seriously questioned ICE's will to investigate and police the system.
I have been told that some contract workers in certain facilities have allegedly engaged in consensual sexual misconduct with detainees and it has also been alleged that there have been instances in which contract guards have raped female detainees. It is also alleged that contractors are smuggling contraband into the detention facilities. In areas near the southern border of the United States where contract workers also assist with the transportation of detainees, it has been alleged that contract guards have been involved in, and arrested for, smuggling foreign nationals into the United States. If any of these allegations are true, it certainly begs the question, "what is ICE doing to stop these problems?" As one veteran ICE officer stated to me last week, during a conversation regarding contract guards smuggling contraband into detention facilities in his area, "ICE managers are well aware of the problems in the contract facilities, but don't seem interested in doing anything about it." While this statement may surprise many in the American public, it would not surprise ICE employees who are well aware of problems within ICE management and the unethical manner in which ICE internal investigations are conducted.
Frankly, I have read enough articles about abuse and death in ICE detention. There can be no doubt that the system is corrupt to its core. Can you imagine if, instead, the Times had reported that an American had died in Iranian, North Korean, Cuban, or Syrian custody under similar circumstances? We would all be incensed. The Administration would call for heads to roll, impassioned speeches would thunder on the floor of Congress, and the blogs and media pundits would rage. But the cruelty described by the Times is homegrown. It is endemic to the ICE detention system and will continue unless something is done to stop it.
Several months ago homeland security secretary Janet Napolitano and ICE assistant secretary John Morton announced a review of the ICE detention operations with the stated goal of creating a "truly civil" detention system. In light of what we now know, that effort is too little, too late. The ICE detention system is a national disgrace, requiring President Obama to take immediate steps to protect the constitutional, civil, and human rights of ICE detainees, including,
Suspending ICE's detention authority by placing it in receivership with the Department of Justice pending a full investigation of the abuse and deaths in detention;
Ordering a top to bottom review of ICE, in particular its detention and removal operations, with the goal of overhauling the agency so that the human rights of ICE detainees will be respected and the rule of law enforced; and
Ordering the Department of Justice to commence appropriate civil and criminal investigations of all deaths in ICE detention and pursue all appropriate civil and criminal remedies.
We owe it to the families of the 107 people who died in ICE custody to see to it that the abuse, neglect, and deaths are stopped once and for all. Maybe then they will be able to take comfort in the fact that their loved ones did not die in vain.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-3721695949729474764?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/01/secret-horror-stories-death-and-abuse.html)
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_QZpVppv4FTs/S0qJpSDU8jI/AAAAAAAAACk/ITKpg-Txn3w/s320/2010-01-01+ICE+detention+2.jpg (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_QZpVppv4FTs/S0qJpSDU8jI/AAAAAAAAACk/ITKpg-Txn3w/s1600-h/2010-01-01+ICE+detention+2.jpg)All Americans should be outraged by the Sunday New York Times report about how ICE officials schemed to cover up the deaths of detainees in detention. http://bit.ly/6p2xlX. The online edition includes a link to a horrifying video of an ICE detainee, Mr. Boubacar Bah, who, after mysteriously suffering a skull fracture, was handcuffed while writhing in agony on the floor in his own vomit, then locked-up in an isolation cell for 13 hours without medical treatment and, finally, transported to a hospital in a coma where he later died.
It would be one thing if death in ICE detention was a rare occurrence. But, unfortunately, it's all too common. In a related article, also published Sunday, the Times reports about other ICE detainee deaths which were the result of substandard medical care and abuse. http://bit.ly/6gJlXu.
As I sat down to write this blog, I hoped to pen a stinging piece expressing my anger and calling for a full overhaul of ICE's detention system, not just more press releases and empty promises. But the New York Times articles speak for themselves �107 people have died in ICE custody since 2003 (not counting the immigrants who were released shortly before death so they wouldn't be added to the tally). Added to my anger is the revulsion that I feel toward an agency that is not only incompetent to care for those it locks up, but whose bureaucrats conspire to avoid paying detainees' medical bills and hide from bad publicity, rather than attend to immigrants in their custody. It seems not one of the faceless ICE bureaucrats is ever called to answer for his or her transgressions. Indeed, participating in the abuse and neglect of ICE detainees may have resume value. Just ask Nina Dozoretz, who was the longtime manager of ICE's Division of Immigration Health Services and Vice President of the Nakamoto Group, a company that, according to the Times, was hired by the Bush administration to monitor ICE detention. Dozoretz reportedly participated in the ICE conference calls where officials debated ways to avoid paying for Boubacar Bah's medical care, and came up with a scheme to shift the costs to his indigent relatives before he died. Shockingly, she was recently hired by the Obama administration to overhaul the ICE detainee healthcare system (I guess I won't hold my breath waiting for positive change I can believe in as it relates to ICE health care).
The abuse is not limited to ICE detainees who are unfortunate enough to become ill or injured while in custody. Last month Chris Crane, Vice President of the Detention and Removal Operations of the union representing approximately 7,200 ICE employees who work in detention and removal operations, testified before the U.S. Congress. He described the abuse faced by immigrants detained at facilities run by private contractors and seriously questioned ICE's will to investigate and police the system.
I have been told that some contract workers in certain facilities have allegedly engaged in consensual sexual misconduct with detainees and it has also been alleged that there have been instances in which contract guards have raped female detainees. It is also alleged that contractors are smuggling contraband into the detention facilities. In areas near the southern border of the United States where contract workers also assist with the transportation of detainees, it has been alleged that contract guards have been involved in, and arrested for, smuggling foreign nationals into the United States. If any of these allegations are true, it certainly begs the question, "what is ICE doing to stop these problems?" As one veteran ICE officer stated to me last week, during a conversation regarding contract guards smuggling contraband into detention facilities in his area, "ICE managers are well aware of the problems in the contract facilities, but don't seem interested in doing anything about it." While this statement may surprise many in the American public, it would not surprise ICE employees who are well aware of problems within ICE management and the unethical manner in which ICE internal investigations are conducted.
Frankly, I have read enough articles about abuse and death in ICE detention. There can be no doubt that the system is corrupt to its core. Can you imagine if, instead, the Times had reported that an American had died in Iranian, North Korean, Cuban, or Syrian custody under similar circumstances? We would all be incensed. The Administration would call for heads to roll, impassioned speeches would thunder on the floor of Congress, and the blogs and media pundits would rage. But the cruelty described by the Times is homegrown. It is endemic to the ICE detention system and will continue unless something is done to stop it.
Several months ago homeland security secretary Janet Napolitano and ICE assistant secretary John Morton announced a review of the ICE detention operations with the stated goal of creating a "truly civil" detention system. In light of what we now know, that effort is too little, too late. The ICE detention system is a national disgrace, requiring President Obama to take immediate steps to protect the constitutional, civil, and human rights of ICE detainees, including,
Suspending ICE's detention authority by placing it in receivership with the Department of Justice pending a full investigation of the abuse and deaths in detention;
Ordering a top to bottom review of ICE, in particular its detention and removal operations, with the goal of overhauling the agency so that the human rights of ICE detainees will be respected and the rule of law enforced; and
Ordering the Department of Justice to commence appropriate civil and criminal investigations of all deaths in ICE detention and pursue all appropriate civil and criminal remedies.
We owe it to the families of the 107 people who died in ICE custody to see to it that the abuse, neglect, and deaths are stopped once and for all. Maybe then they will be able to take comfort in the fact that their loved ones did not die in vain.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-3721695949729474764?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/01/secret-horror-stories-death-and-abuse.html)
more...
royus77
07-10 12:02 PM
Why AILA not suing State Dept. or USCIS for other issues... read a letter posted by someone in a forum
To AILF/AILA,
I appreciate your effort in filing lawsuit on behalf of July I-485 filers.
There are several critics on your July I-485 lawsuit. They criticize that you are doing for the benefit of your members (AILA). Definitely, your members will be benefited by huge amount of legal fees. Also, the critic says it is waste of time.
Even one of your reputed member (Rajiv Khanna @ immigration.com) posted in his website that chance of winning the law suit is very minimum.
He posted in his website as follows: "Please note folks, I don�t think this class will be easily approved by courts. CIS could argue a lot of things against it, which I don�t wish to publish in an open forum."
Why you cannot sue for the people who struck at Consulate due to administrative process without probable cause.
Several of them working in U.S (they have proof of employment, pay stubs, worked in the U.S on H1B visa for many years) just went to their home country for short vacation and applied for visa; they have rented house in the U.S and unable to break the lease; unable to pay car dues; their U.S citizen children also held overseas; they are loosing their jobs. State department is holding these visa application for more than a year in several cases.
What steps AILA has taken in this issue. If not, why you are not aware of this issue or why you are not giving importance. Do you think this issue will not bring such a huge legal fee like I-485 lawsuit?
Do you have the number of people who held like that ?Most of the people are struck because of the Name Check which USCIS cannt also do any thing because of security .
VB fiasco was done due to the mis communication between DOS and USCIS and it effected nearly 700k people ..thats the reason .No body is paying AILA for the 485 lawsuit
To AILF/AILA,
I appreciate your effort in filing lawsuit on behalf of July I-485 filers.
There are several critics on your July I-485 lawsuit. They criticize that you are doing for the benefit of your members (AILA). Definitely, your members will be benefited by huge amount of legal fees. Also, the critic says it is waste of time.
Even one of your reputed member (Rajiv Khanna @ immigration.com) posted in his website that chance of winning the law suit is very minimum.
He posted in his website as follows: "Please note folks, I don�t think this class will be easily approved by courts. CIS could argue a lot of things against it, which I don�t wish to publish in an open forum."
Why you cannot sue for the people who struck at Consulate due to administrative process without probable cause.
Several of them working in U.S (they have proof of employment, pay stubs, worked in the U.S on H1B visa for many years) just went to their home country for short vacation and applied for visa; they have rented house in the U.S and unable to break the lease; unable to pay car dues; their U.S citizen children also held overseas; they are loosing their jobs. State department is holding these visa application for more than a year in several cases.
What steps AILA has taken in this issue. If not, why you are not aware of this issue or why you are not giving importance. Do you think this issue will not bring such a huge legal fee like I-485 lawsuit?
Do you have the number of people who held like that ?Most of the people are struck because of the Name Check which USCIS cannt also do any thing because of security .
VB fiasco was done due to the mis communication between DOS and USCIS and it effected nearly 700k people ..thats the reason .No body is paying AILA for the 485 lawsuit
morchu
05-08 05:39 PM
Medicals expire in 1 yr. Also the requirements might have changed.
Can I ask the doctor to re-send the I-693 form?
Can I ask the doctor to re-send the I-693 form?
more...
AtulKRaizada
07-18 08:07 PM
Hello Atul
I agree only crying baby gets milk.
But only lucky applicants get green card :). Its not based on eligibility alone.
Now about protests and demonstrations. I dont think it will work in the US for a myriad of reasons.
I think every year about 30K or more people are coming from India
on H1B. I think half of them apply for GC. At least 200K Indian nationals
alone waiting in the line for GC. Why IV has only 5k? We should have atlease 50K members.
A working plan would be get atleast 100K people to our organization and have everybody contribute $100. That would give us $10Million. We can hire top people and companies to get it done. And donate big funds to these politician.
What I told is just a dream. Most of us here are free riders. In my company there are 5 people who are affected. I'm the only who checks regulary this site. I have to tell them again and again and again to send a fax or donate.
So what to do?
thanks
babu
I agree and I am also fully aware of the numbers, but just don't limit it to we Indians, every immigrant irrespective of origin is impacted. I hate to call it a donation, I rather say everybody contribute as much as possible. $100 is nothing compared to immigration fee and extortion by attorneys and consulting companies.
Somebody has to come forward and show leadership. Just sitting and waiting for every month Visa Bulletin is not going to take us anyware.
I agree only crying baby gets milk.
But only lucky applicants get green card :). Its not based on eligibility alone.
Now about protests and demonstrations. I dont think it will work in the US for a myriad of reasons.
I think every year about 30K or more people are coming from India
on H1B. I think half of them apply for GC. At least 200K Indian nationals
alone waiting in the line for GC. Why IV has only 5k? We should have atlease 50K members.
A working plan would be get atleast 100K people to our organization and have everybody contribute $100. That would give us $10Million. We can hire top people and companies to get it done. And donate big funds to these politician.
What I told is just a dream. Most of us here are free riders. In my company there are 5 people who are affected. I'm the only who checks regulary this site. I have to tell them again and again and again to send a fax or donate.
So what to do?
thanks
babu
I agree and I am also fully aware of the numbers, but just don't limit it to we Indians, every immigrant irrespective of origin is impacted. I hate to call it a donation, I rather say everybody contribute as much as possible. $100 is nothing compared to immigration fee and extortion by attorneys and consulting companies.
Somebody has to come forward and show leadership. Just sitting and waiting for every month Visa Bulletin is not going to take us anyware.
2010 rayban wayfarer sunglasses
bharani
08-11 09:51 AM
Eb2 -I
Pd 04/19/2006
Rd 08/13/2007
Nd 10/10/2007
Pd 04/19/2006
Rd 08/13/2007
Nd 10/10/2007
more...
goldbuckle
March 15th, 2006, 11:54 PM
:rolleyes: Oh, one more thing, any way to batch process the red-eye????