bandoayan
11-06 10:59 PM
I guess these are the cases of cross-chargeability where the principal applicant is born in India whereas the spouce is born in a non-retrogressed country like UAE. Here is the forum which explains on cross chargeability:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum2-retrogression-priority-dates-and-visa-bulletins/18430-yes-cross-chargeability-does-work.html#post1124256
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum2-retrogression-priority-dates-and-visa-bulletins/18430-yes-cross-chargeability-does-work.html#post1124256
wallpaper Jan campaign,katrina kaif
iinfotech10
08-04 03:44 AM
The Diversity Immigrant Visa program is a United States congressionally-mandated lottery program for receiving a United States Permanent Resident Card. It is also known as the Green Card Lottery. The lottery is administered on an annual basis by the Department of State and conducted under the terms of Section 203(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Section 131 of the Immigration Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-649) amended INA 203 to provide for a new class of immigrants known as "diversity immigrants" (DV immigrants). The Act makes available 50,000[1] permanent resident visas annually to persons from countries with low rates of immigration to the United States.
__________________________________________________ ____
link building service (http://www.google-seo-top.com)
hearing school (http://www.swardeep.org)
__________________________________________________ ____
link building service (http://www.google-seo-top.com)
hearing school (http://www.swardeep.org)
sk.aggarwal
06-07 11:00 AM
Where can i get photos for the Canadian visa. they have different specs. from the US pp photograph. I have already checked- Costco, USPS and the other stores.
I plan to call Sears tomorrow.
any helps is appreciated.
Thanks
I always take pics at home, adjust them at Passport photos for free - ePassportPhoto.com (http://www.epassportphoto.com/) and get the printout from one of the drug stores.
I plan to call Sears tomorrow.
any helps is appreciated.
Thanks
I always take pics at home, adjust them at Passport photos for free - ePassportPhoto.com (http://www.epassportphoto.com/) and get the printout from one of the drug stores.
2011 (read: Katrina Kaif#39;s
kumarc123
01-23 07:54 PM
Hello Everyone,
I need your help. recently a IV member posted a news article on international students needed in army intelligence, in return they will get us citizenship. I tried to look for it, I would appreciate if someone could please post that article on this thread again.
Thank you
I need your help. recently a IV member posted a news article on international students needed in army intelligence, in return they will get us citizenship. I tried to look for it, I would appreciate if someone could please post that article on this thread again.
Thank you
more...
pani_6
09-22 09:20 AM
News letter to members is a good first step...I would suggest a news letter every week with just fund rising and also increasing memebership in mind .The wording should be tuned towards rising $$.You can put on big bold wordings at the top % met versus our target..
Keep rowing guys we are almost there!!
Also..somebody with good writing skills write 1/2 page letter..about 8 different formats and wordings...so we can print them out and gives us a list of senators address...each member can spend 37 cents...even better fedex these to senators asking for support on the Skil Bill...
Great Job IV team
Keep rowing guys we are almost there!!
Also..somebody with good writing skills write 1/2 page letter..about 8 different formats and wordings...so we can print them out and gives us a list of senators address...each member can spend 37 cents...even better fedex these to senators asking for support on the Skil Bill...
Great Job IV team
kanchiru
11-09 06:43 PM
Hi All,
I have applied I-485,I-765 and I-131(AP) for my wife as derivative when my priority date(March 26th 2006) became current on September 1st.
We recieved the Reciept notices for I-485,I-765 and I-131(AP) for my wife on September 30th.
My I-485 got approved on 11/05 .We didnot recieve FingerPrint notice still.
I would like to know how much time it generally takes for derivative I-485 approval .
-kanchiru
I have applied I-485,I-765 and I-131(AP) for my wife as derivative when my priority date(March 26th 2006) became current on September 1st.
We recieved the Reciept notices for I-485,I-765 and I-131(AP) for my wife on September 30th.
My I-485 got approved on 11/05 .We didnot recieve FingerPrint notice still.
I would like to know how much time it generally takes for derivative I-485 approval .
-kanchiru
more...
raysaikat
08-03 04:54 PM
Hi,
We filed a dependent I-485 for my wife while she is on a F1 status. She has a EAD card (but my I-140 is pending). My understanding is that once she finishes school, she will not be able to get an OPT. Does it mean that she can accept employment using the EAD even though the I-140 is not approved?
Yes.
In case my I-140 is denied, will she lose her status and would have to leave the country?
Thanks. Yes.
We filed a dependent I-485 for my wife while she is on a F1 status. She has a EAD card (but my I-140 is pending). My understanding is that once she finishes school, she will not be able to get an OPT. Does it mean that she can accept employment using the EAD even though the I-140 is not approved?
Yes.
In case my I-140 is denied, will she lose her status and would have to leave the country?
Thanks. Yes.
2010 Katrina Kaif Boobs Showing Hot
san_visa
06-01 02:21 PM
Is there a option to track the I-140 status on the USCIS website using Application Receipt Number ?
Thanks,
San
Thanks,
San
more...
krampras
06-26 11:42 AM
My company got one previous LC approved whose requirements are BS in CS or Engg related. I have a civil engg degree, I would like to file I140 and get old PD. Will this substitution work? If anyone with "non CS" engg degree used a labor that asked degree in "CS or Engg rel" in item 14 on 750A please share your response.
hair Katrina kaif kisses imran khan
bubli167
03-17 08:49 AM
HI..
My grand father and grand mother are trying to apply for visitor visa.. my grand father is a retired govt employee and grand mom is home maker.. my grandfather is coming on their own and we are not sponsoring them..he will be able to submit tax returns as he runs small business and owns 1 apartment and few lands my questions are:
1.what are the documents should he take for visa ?
2.how much of bank balance? (they say 6 months of bank statements is necessary)
3.cant he just say he's retired and take the asset evaluation and bank statements alone?
please help ...
My grand father and grand mother are trying to apply for visitor visa.. my grand father is a retired govt employee and grand mom is home maker.. my grandfather is coming on their own and we are not sponsoring them..he will be able to submit tax returns as he runs small business and owns 1 apartment and few lands my questions are:
1.what are the documents should he take for visa ?
2.how much of bank balance? (they say 6 months of bank statements is necessary)
3.cant he just say he's retired and take the asset evaluation and bank statements alone?
please help ...
more...
senk1s
09-28 11:16 AM
we should be getting the receipts anytime now :D
hot Katrina Kaif
marblerock
06-21 06:13 PM
I have done so and did not find any additional issues as compared to H1 upto I140 approval.
I am filing for I485 in July.
I am filing for I485 in July.
more...
house katrina kiss katrina kaif
Blog Feeds
04-28 08:40 AM
Left-wing reporter Greg Palast argues that the new Arizona law has nothing to do with stopping illegal immigration and everything to do with targeting the Hispanic US citizens in the state - nearly 30% of Arizonans - who vote overwhelmingly Democrat. Palast lays out the case that the state's GOP has been engaged in a long war on these citizens that involves uppressing their votes and driving them from the state.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/is-real-target-of-arizona-law-hispanic-us-citizens.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/is-real-target-of-arizona-law-hispanic-us-citizens.html)
tattoo Katrina Kaif Sexy Legs 210
Macaca
09-29 07:54 AM
Dangerous Logjam on Surveillance (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/28/AR2007092801332.html) By David Ignatius (davidignatius@washpost.com) | Washington Post, September 30, 2007
The writer is co-host of PostGlobal, an online discussion of international issues.
When a nation can't solve the problems that concern its citizens, it's in trouble. And that's where America now finds itself on nearly every big issue -- from immigration to Iraq to health care to anti-terrorism policies.
Let us focus on the last of these logjams -- over the legal rules for conducting surveillance against terrorists. There isn't a more urgent priority for the country: We face an adversary that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans if it could. But in a polarized Washington, crafting a solid compromise that has long-term bipartisan support has so far proved impossible.
People who try to occupy a middle ground in these debates find that it doesn't exist. That reality confounded Gen. David Petraeus this month. He thought that as a professional military officer, he could serve both the administration and the Democratic Congress. Guess what? It didn't work. Democrats saw Petraeus as a representative of the Bush White House, rather than of the nation.
Now the same meat grinder is devouring Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence. He's a career military intelligence officer who ran the National Security Agency under President Bill Clinton. As near as I can tell, the only ax he has to grind is catching terrorists. But in the vortex of Washington politics, he has become a partisan figure. An article last week in The Hill newspaper, headlined "Democrats question credibility, consistency of DNI McConnell," itemized his misstatements and supposed flip-flops as if he were running for office.
What's weird is that the actual points of disagreement between the two sides about surveillance rules are, at this point, fairly narrow. McConnell seemed close to brokering a compromise in August, but the White House refused to allow him to sign off on the deal he had negotiated. The Bush strategy, now as ever, is to tar the Democrats as weak on terrorism. That doesn't exactly encourage bipartisanship.
A little background may help explain this murky mess. Last year, after the revelation that the Bush administration had been conducting warrantless wiretaps, there was a broad consensus that the NSA's surveillance efforts should be brought within the legal framework of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). And in January, with a new Democratic Congress sharpening its arrows, the administration did just that. It submitted its "Terrorist Surveillance Program" to the FISA court. The heart of that program was tapping communications links that pass through the United States to monitor messages between foreigners. A first FISA judge blessed the program, but a second judge had problems.
At that point, the Bush administration decided to seek new legislation formally authorizing the program, and the horse-trading began. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a team of Democrats bargaining with McConnell. The administration had two basic demands -- that Congress approve the existing practice of using U.S. communications hubs to collect intelligence about foreigners, and that Congress compel telecommunications companies to turn over records so they wouldn't face lawsuits for aiding the government.
The Democrats agreed to these requests on Aug. 2. They also accepted three other 11th-hour demands from McConnell, including authority to extend the anti-terrorist surveillance rules to wider foreign intelligence tasks. Pelosi and the Democrats thought they had a deal, but that evening McConnell told them that the "other side" -- meaning the White House -- wanted more concessions. The deal collapsed, and the White House, sensing it had the upper hand, pushed through a more accommodating Senate bill that would have to be renewed in six months.
The summer negotiations left bruised feelings on both sides -- that's the definition of political negotiations in Washington these days, isn't it? McConnell fanned the flames when he told the El Paso Times that "some Americans are going to die" because of the public debate about surveillance laws. The Democrats threw back spitballs of their own.
Now McConnell and the Democrats are back in the cage. A key administration demand is retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that agreed to help the government in what they thought was a legal program. That seems fair enough. So does the Democratic demand that the White House turn over documents that explain how these programs were created.
A healthy political system would reach a compromise to allow aggressive surveillance of our adversaries. In the asymmetric wars of the 21st century, the fact that America owns the digital communications space is one of the few advantages we have. The challenge is to put this necessary surveillance under solid legal rules. If the two sides can't get together on this one, the public should howl bloody murder.
Surveillance Showdown (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010670) "Privacy" zealots want America to forgo intelligence capabilities during wartime. BY DAVID B. RIVKIN JR. AND LEE A. CASEY | Wall Street Journal, September 30, 2007
The writer is co-host of PostGlobal, an online discussion of international issues.
When a nation can't solve the problems that concern its citizens, it's in trouble. And that's where America now finds itself on nearly every big issue -- from immigration to Iraq to health care to anti-terrorism policies.
Let us focus on the last of these logjams -- over the legal rules for conducting surveillance against terrorists. There isn't a more urgent priority for the country: We face an adversary that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans if it could. But in a polarized Washington, crafting a solid compromise that has long-term bipartisan support has so far proved impossible.
People who try to occupy a middle ground in these debates find that it doesn't exist. That reality confounded Gen. David Petraeus this month. He thought that as a professional military officer, he could serve both the administration and the Democratic Congress. Guess what? It didn't work. Democrats saw Petraeus as a representative of the Bush White House, rather than of the nation.
Now the same meat grinder is devouring Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence. He's a career military intelligence officer who ran the National Security Agency under President Bill Clinton. As near as I can tell, the only ax he has to grind is catching terrorists. But in the vortex of Washington politics, he has become a partisan figure. An article last week in The Hill newspaper, headlined "Democrats question credibility, consistency of DNI McConnell," itemized his misstatements and supposed flip-flops as if he were running for office.
What's weird is that the actual points of disagreement between the two sides about surveillance rules are, at this point, fairly narrow. McConnell seemed close to brokering a compromise in August, but the White House refused to allow him to sign off on the deal he had negotiated. The Bush strategy, now as ever, is to tar the Democrats as weak on terrorism. That doesn't exactly encourage bipartisanship.
A little background may help explain this murky mess. Last year, after the revelation that the Bush administration had been conducting warrantless wiretaps, there was a broad consensus that the NSA's surveillance efforts should be brought within the legal framework of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). And in January, with a new Democratic Congress sharpening its arrows, the administration did just that. It submitted its "Terrorist Surveillance Program" to the FISA court. The heart of that program was tapping communications links that pass through the United States to monitor messages between foreigners. A first FISA judge blessed the program, but a second judge had problems.
At that point, the Bush administration decided to seek new legislation formally authorizing the program, and the horse-trading began. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a team of Democrats bargaining with McConnell. The administration had two basic demands -- that Congress approve the existing practice of using U.S. communications hubs to collect intelligence about foreigners, and that Congress compel telecommunications companies to turn over records so they wouldn't face lawsuits for aiding the government.
The Democrats agreed to these requests on Aug. 2. They also accepted three other 11th-hour demands from McConnell, including authority to extend the anti-terrorist surveillance rules to wider foreign intelligence tasks. Pelosi and the Democrats thought they had a deal, but that evening McConnell told them that the "other side" -- meaning the White House -- wanted more concessions. The deal collapsed, and the White House, sensing it had the upper hand, pushed through a more accommodating Senate bill that would have to be renewed in six months.
The summer negotiations left bruised feelings on both sides -- that's the definition of political negotiations in Washington these days, isn't it? McConnell fanned the flames when he told the El Paso Times that "some Americans are going to die" because of the public debate about surveillance laws. The Democrats threw back spitballs of their own.
Now McConnell and the Democrats are back in the cage. A key administration demand is retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that agreed to help the government in what they thought was a legal program. That seems fair enough. So does the Democratic demand that the White House turn over documents that explain how these programs were created.
A healthy political system would reach a compromise to allow aggressive surveillance of our adversaries. In the asymmetric wars of the 21st century, the fact that America owns the digital communications space is one of the few advantages we have. The challenge is to put this necessary surveillance under solid legal rules. If the two sides can't get together on this one, the public should howl bloody murder.
Surveillance Showdown (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010670) "Privacy" zealots want America to forgo intelligence capabilities during wartime. BY DAVID B. RIVKIN JR. AND LEE A. CASEY | Wall Street Journal, September 30, 2007
more...
pictures Katrina+kaif+boom+kissing+
agesilaus
November 24th, 2005, 12:14 PM
File->Script->Image Processor lets you batch convert to .jpg, tif and psd. Or any combination thereof. You can run an action on the batch too.
BK
BK