gc_lover
04-18 08:15 AM
We are languishing close to 85K. It is very important that we reach 150K very soon. There are some big decisions pending because of that.
That's bad... I had send one more contribution of $100, hope it helps.
That's bad... I had send one more contribution of $100, hope it helps.
wallpaper Finesse Phone. Touch screen
virald
07-19 09:25 AM
So, is it a good idea to wait until next week and then decide the course of action.
Can we send another application just in case? Has anyone talked to their lawyer. As per USCIS, even if they send the application back, it might take 30 days to receive the application. (Understandable, since it is USCIS).
Any one has any clue what to do?
Can we send another application just in case? Has anyone talked to their lawyer. As per USCIS, even if they send the application back, it might take 30 days to receive the application. (Understandable, since it is USCIS).
Any one has any clue what to do?
unitednations
03-31 11:51 AM
I (and I�m sure others too) would like to know how the following works,
Employer X filed labor, 140 for their employee. Both were approved (assumption - no RFEs, etc. until now), 485 was filed for in July 2007, and remains pending.
The employee was employed with Employer X from before the labor was applied and until ~360 days after the 485 was filed, and was always paid more than the LC prevailing wage/offered salary.
In July 2008, the employee leaves employer X and joins employer Y under AC21 provisions. An AC21 letter, G-28N are submitted.
140 never gets revoked by employer X.
In Jan 2009, employer X receives an Ability to Pay RFE for another pending 140 of theirs.
At this point, employer X has 16 140s that are open (pending OR approved with 485 pending to be filed/filed and pending). Out of those 16 140s, one was for the employee that left under AC21.
When they respond to that RFE, I do understand that they could be asked to show ability to pay for all 16 140s, even for the one that doesn�t work for them anymore, because of the fact that it was never revoked.
In this case, is the employee (that left) covered or at risk? I ask this question because the employee that left submitted AC21 documentation immediately upon leaving, thus notifying the USCIS that the �ability to pay� responsibility for his case, if any at all, now lies with the new future employer. There probably isn�t any clear definition of such a situation in the law, but can such an argument ever hold up in court, and protect the employee�s AOS application from getting affected due to any ability to pay issues the old employer (X) has had AFTER the employee left them.
The only person on here that I expect to be able to give a non-speculative answer to this is UN, unless someone else has personally gone through something similar.
Long post, I know, and I hope it does get read.
Thank you.
I worked on a very big case back in 2006.
Company had 20 pending 140's which were filed in 2005
Company had 42 approved 140's
in Janaury 2006 they sent RFE on one of the cases and asked for ability to pay. Before response was sent; second rfe is received on another pending casestating ability to pay and that uscis has noted company has filed many 140's; then third rfe is received on another case asking ability to pay on all pending cases (note this was in vermont service center and at this time the whole cybersoftech issue was going on; so there was a heightened alert from vermont service center).
In preparing for the response to the 20 pending cases; we had to analyze the 42 approved cases to ensure that just in case USCIS went after those cases together with the 20 then we should be ready in this particular response to justify the 42 approved cases.
In the response we only showed the 20 pending cases and that we had ability to pay for them.
Within three weeks; USCIS sent notice of intent to revoke the approved 140's. In the notice of intent to revoke; they stated that their records showed 20 pending; 42 approved cases and 205 h-1b's filed. USCIS went through their calculations and stated that if the average salary was xxx on all these petitions then the company would have to have paid close to $15 million in salaries which was (at that time the 2004 tax returns) more then five times the revenue. USCIS also went on to state they thought the company was involved in fraudulently obtaining h-1b's and 140's.
Now; company guy talks to Shusterman and he wants $2k per case and he can only handle the immigration component and that he neeed a CPA (which was me) and the company guy should also get a criminal attorney.
Well anyways; because in the first 20 cases we thought uscis may go after the approved 140's; the financials looked the right way to support all the cases.
The response was very scientific; hire dates; priority dates; amounts people got paid before priority date; amounts paid after; dates people left the company, etc.
In the various calculations; we proved out that even with people leaving who used ac21; we still had ability to pay for them (ie., even though they were no longer there we still had the financials to pay them). Then we gave another scenario that ability to pay clock should stop once person used ac21. We then did recalculation under this scenario.
In every scenario we showed we had ability to pay. Now; we never requested USCIS to revoke the approved 140's for people who had left; in one of the scenarios we adjusted the calculation to stop showing ability to pay once a person left.
USCIS re-approved all the cases. However; they sent notice of intent to deny for pepole who left using ac21. those candidates then gave updated letters and they all eventually got the greencards approved.
Now;this particular case is a little different because even though people left; the company still had ability to pay for them. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusion from this for other peoples particular cases. In this case; the fair value of the work I did for them would have cost them about $100K (i actually did audited financial statements for them; they are the only company I did audited financial statements for becuase the stakes were very very high for everyone concerned).
I can tell you that when a company does get this type of RFE; it is very difficult to substantiate everyone together and the calculations and supporting documentation is very complex AND companies have very little desire to help those who have already left. In these types of queries; the company/lawyer doesn't even bother to justify those who have already left; they just ask for revoation and they prove ability to pay for those who are still left with the company. Therefore; USCIS could just make the determination that those revoked cases were approved in error.
The main law for ability to pay is that company has to prove it from priority date until person obtains lawful permanent residency; law was never changed/modified to accomodate ability to pay for a company whose candidates have left using ac21.
Note: This is all pure speculation of what is going on in these cases. I am just writing out loud of why/if there is a shift within uscis.
Employer X filed labor, 140 for their employee. Both were approved (assumption - no RFEs, etc. until now), 485 was filed for in July 2007, and remains pending.
The employee was employed with Employer X from before the labor was applied and until ~360 days after the 485 was filed, and was always paid more than the LC prevailing wage/offered salary.
In July 2008, the employee leaves employer X and joins employer Y under AC21 provisions. An AC21 letter, G-28N are submitted.
140 never gets revoked by employer X.
In Jan 2009, employer X receives an Ability to Pay RFE for another pending 140 of theirs.
At this point, employer X has 16 140s that are open (pending OR approved with 485 pending to be filed/filed and pending). Out of those 16 140s, one was for the employee that left under AC21.
When they respond to that RFE, I do understand that they could be asked to show ability to pay for all 16 140s, even for the one that doesn�t work for them anymore, because of the fact that it was never revoked.
In this case, is the employee (that left) covered or at risk? I ask this question because the employee that left submitted AC21 documentation immediately upon leaving, thus notifying the USCIS that the �ability to pay� responsibility for his case, if any at all, now lies with the new future employer. There probably isn�t any clear definition of such a situation in the law, but can such an argument ever hold up in court, and protect the employee�s AOS application from getting affected due to any ability to pay issues the old employer (X) has had AFTER the employee left them.
The only person on here that I expect to be able to give a non-speculative answer to this is UN, unless someone else has personally gone through something similar.
Long post, I know, and I hope it does get read.
Thank you.
I worked on a very big case back in 2006.
Company had 20 pending 140's which were filed in 2005
Company had 42 approved 140's
in Janaury 2006 they sent RFE on one of the cases and asked for ability to pay. Before response was sent; second rfe is received on another pending casestating ability to pay and that uscis has noted company has filed many 140's; then third rfe is received on another case asking ability to pay on all pending cases (note this was in vermont service center and at this time the whole cybersoftech issue was going on; so there was a heightened alert from vermont service center).
In preparing for the response to the 20 pending cases; we had to analyze the 42 approved cases to ensure that just in case USCIS went after those cases together with the 20 then we should be ready in this particular response to justify the 42 approved cases.
In the response we only showed the 20 pending cases and that we had ability to pay for them.
Within three weeks; USCIS sent notice of intent to revoke the approved 140's. In the notice of intent to revoke; they stated that their records showed 20 pending; 42 approved cases and 205 h-1b's filed. USCIS went through their calculations and stated that if the average salary was xxx on all these petitions then the company would have to have paid close to $15 million in salaries which was (at that time the 2004 tax returns) more then five times the revenue. USCIS also went on to state they thought the company was involved in fraudulently obtaining h-1b's and 140's.
Now; company guy talks to Shusterman and he wants $2k per case and he can only handle the immigration component and that he neeed a CPA (which was me) and the company guy should also get a criminal attorney.
Well anyways; because in the first 20 cases we thought uscis may go after the approved 140's; the financials looked the right way to support all the cases.
The response was very scientific; hire dates; priority dates; amounts people got paid before priority date; amounts paid after; dates people left the company, etc.
In the various calculations; we proved out that even with people leaving who used ac21; we still had ability to pay for them (ie., even though they were no longer there we still had the financials to pay them). Then we gave another scenario that ability to pay clock should stop once person used ac21. We then did recalculation under this scenario.
In every scenario we showed we had ability to pay. Now; we never requested USCIS to revoke the approved 140's for people who had left; in one of the scenarios we adjusted the calculation to stop showing ability to pay once a person left.
USCIS re-approved all the cases. However; they sent notice of intent to deny for pepole who left using ac21. those candidates then gave updated letters and they all eventually got the greencards approved.
Now;this particular case is a little different because even though people left; the company still had ability to pay for them. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusion from this for other peoples particular cases. In this case; the fair value of the work I did for them would have cost them about $100K (i actually did audited financial statements for them; they are the only company I did audited financial statements for becuase the stakes were very very high for everyone concerned).
I can tell you that when a company does get this type of RFE; it is very difficult to substantiate everyone together and the calculations and supporting documentation is very complex AND companies have very little desire to help those who have already left. In these types of queries; the company/lawyer doesn't even bother to justify those who have already left; they just ask for revoation and they prove ability to pay for those who are still left with the company. Therefore; USCIS could just make the determination that those revoked cases were approved in error.
The main law for ability to pay is that company has to prove it from priority date until person obtains lawful permanent residency; law was never changed/modified to accomodate ability to pay for a company whose candidates have left using ac21.
Note: This is all pure speculation of what is going on in these cases. I am just writing out loud of why/if there is a shift within uscis.
2011 metro pcs touch screen phone
gk_2000
04-22 01:00 PM
Can't agree less with you pappu:)
more, not less..
red, welcome. (I know I will get this whenever I correct anyone)
more, not less..
red, welcome. (I know I will get this whenever I correct anyone)
more...
shishya
06-13 07:42 PM
Lol... looks like then you have to marry an american gori/gora or ABCD. :D Hopefully you will find a partner in india and get married before 485 gets approved
Oh yeah .. but that is provided I can file my 485 by that time. Given my PD was just May 06, I had NO preparation for 485 filing, wonder how much time gathering up all the required docs takes for this filing :)
Oh yeah .. but that is provided I can file my 485 by that time. Given my PD was just May 06, I had NO preparation for 485 filing, wonder how much time gathering up all the required docs takes for this filing :)
unitednations
03-31 11:09 AM
So do you think they are going after AC21 folks as a scapegoat? I spoke to few people on this including lawyers and they say that "denials on 485" when 140 gets revoked is a common thing and usually the officer who issues the denial letter does not check and verify to see other details. Thats why they have to go through the MTR process.
That was the case when uscis would send straight denial and then person would do mtr with ac21.
the OP and the particular case I am talking about; they responded to the notice of intent to deny (NOID specifcally said person may be elgiible for ac21 and to give job letter, etc.); however they denied it after the response was sent. It would be different story if they denied due to job mismatching. However, that was not the case. They denied stating the 140 was revoked. Basically, this is a new type of denial and may be a shift in how uscis is doing things.
I spoke to candidate earlier and he talked to the original 140 company. They told him that their h-1b's aren't getting approved (common issue right now with vermont service center for just about everyone) and that in the clean up they revoked almost 70 I-140's for people who had left. He doesn't know if it was in response to an I-140 query or not (uscis adds up cases frequently in rfe's on the 140). When companies revoke 140 to a RFE; USCIS could be making a determination that the 140's company is now revoking were approved iun error and people are not eligible for ac21. Now; if this was the case; uscis officer should have put this in the denial but they did not.
I'll keep everyone posted of what happens to this case.
That was the case when uscis would send straight denial and then person would do mtr with ac21.
the OP and the particular case I am talking about; they responded to the notice of intent to deny (NOID specifcally said person may be elgiible for ac21 and to give job letter, etc.); however they denied it after the response was sent. It would be different story if they denied due to job mismatching. However, that was not the case. They denied stating the 140 was revoked. Basically, this is a new type of denial and may be a shift in how uscis is doing things.
I spoke to candidate earlier and he talked to the original 140 company. They told him that their h-1b's aren't getting approved (common issue right now with vermont service center for just about everyone) and that in the clean up they revoked almost 70 I-140's for people who had left. He doesn't know if it was in response to an I-140 query or not (uscis adds up cases frequently in rfe's on the 140). When companies revoke 140 to a RFE; USCIS could be making a determination that the 140's company is now revoking were approved iun error and people are not eligible for ac21. Now; if this was the case; uscis officer should have put this in the denial but they did not.
I'll keep everyone posted of what happens to this case.
more...
sk2006
04-27 04:51 PM
Where can I find medical insurance for my parents with reasonable coverage with reasonable premium. Their age is between 55 to 60. Obviously they are with some medical conditions like blood pressure, diabetic... like usual stuff like typical parents would have...Can somebody suggest good one... thanks in advance.
I took from:
http://www..org/
They cover pre existing conditions and one consultation for pre existing condition.
I took from:
http://www..org/
They cover pre existing conditions and one consultation for pre existing condition.
2010 Here comes a cell phone called
Libra
01-31 10:42 AM
also please send letters to WH and IV.
more...
vga_1977
04-18 11:36 AM
Hi All,
Thank you all who gave me valuable suggestions.
I would like to say few things for the rest of the posts, this debate will never end. Every person have their own opinions. I am trying to do my best to pursue my career. I don't think this is wrong. I have seen all kinds of people in my past 13 years experience. We cannot judge any person just by looking at experience/education or what ever... . This is my just my personal opinion.
Once again thank you all who gave me valuable suggestions.
-vga
Thank you all who gave me valuable suggestions.
I would like to say few things for the rest of the posts, this debate will never end. Every person have their own opinions. I am trying to do my best to pursue my career. I don't think this is wrong. I have seen all kinds of people in my past 13 years experience. We cannot judge any person just by looking at experience/education or what ever... . This is my just my personal opinion.
Once again thank you all who gave me valuable suggestions.
-vga
hair metropcs android, New Metro
akred
07-14 07:26 PM
Done
more...
bkarnik
09-17 12:40 PM
does anyone kknow who is the chairman(woman) of the judiciary commitee ???
John Conyers (D) is the chairman of the judiciary committee..
John Conyers (D) is the chairman of the judiciary committee..
hot huawei ascend metro pcs
pdakwala
04-10 11:25 AM
We have long way to go. People please contribute. If you are thinking that senate is on two week recess so nothing is going to happen then you are wrong.
Senate republicans will be working hard to come up with something that addressess the immigration problem. Senate republicans know that border security and immigration is an important issue and they just can not ignore it. So please contribute.
When you get GC your whole family will get benifit. Family of 4 contributing $100 to immigration voice means that per person you have contributed only $25.00. PLEASE BE GENERIOUS AND CONTRIBUTE ON BEHALF OF YOUR FAMILY TOO.
If you are single, please tell your friends to contribute too. Please remember that your success depends on how much you contribute. Don't wait for last minute.
Senate republicans will be working hard to come up with something that addressess the immigration problem. Senate republicans know that border security and immigration is an important issue and they just can not ignore it. So please contribute.
When you get GC your whole family will get benifit. Family of 4 contributing $100 to immigration voice means that per person you have contributed only $25.00. PLEASE BE GENERIOUS AND CONTRIBUTE ON BEHALF OF YOUR FAMILY TOO.
If you are single, please tell your friends to contribute too. Please remember that your success depends on how much you contribute. Don't wait for last minute.
more...
house UNIVERSAL STYLUS PEN FOR TOUCH
uma001
05-25 02:35 PM
This si for Akp
What's up buddy. This si your first post. What have u been doing all this time?
We are paying taxes along with SSN taxes. We have rt to ask or to bash this system.
What's up buddy. This si your first post. What have u been doing all this time?
We are paying taxes along with SSN taxes. We have rt to ask or to bash this system.
tattoo MetroPCS Samsung Forte - New
vsrinir
09-17 01:14 PM
OUR BILL H.R.5882 HAS GOT TO BE APPROVED BY BOTH CONGRESS (HOUSE AND SENATE) BEFORE SEPTEMBER 26TH, 2008 ie., COMING FRIDAY.
THERE WILL BE NO CONGRESS AFTER SEPTEMBER 26TH.
THERE WILL BE NO CONGRESS AFTER SEPTEMBER 26TH.
more...
pictures MetroPCS Samsung Galaxy
add78
04-27 08:44 PM
I read through the bill but don't quite understand...if I am working for a client on H1B, will I need to stop working as soon as this bill takes effect? or it only applies to newly applied H1B's (or extension/transfer)?
Yes, that is my understanding at this point based on the language . As soon as the bill goes into effect, you will need to stop working at the client site if the bill passes in its current form AND you are working as a FT employee (w-2) of a mere placement company (aka agent or desi consulting). If you are an FT employee of big consulting company then until they get waiver for you AND your current client proves that no layoffs were done at the client site in the last 180 days, you will need to stop working.
Yes, that is my understanding at this point based on the language . As soon as the bill goes into effect, you will need to stop working at the client site if the bill passes in its current form AND you are working as a FT employee (w-2) of a mere placement company (aka agent or desi consulting). If you are an FT employee of big consulting company then until they get waiver for you AND your current client proves that no layoffs were done at the client site in the last 180 days, you will need to stop working.
dresses watch phone,touch screen
jonty_11
07-11 02:46 PM
we already have threads on this...Please dont clutter the groups.
more...
makeup Large 3.5quot; Touch Screen
snathan
03-29 01:53 PM
@Snathan how did you know he didn't call me here , are you one of the consultants yourself who does this filthy work of cheating people.
I guess it was my employers discretion to make me sit home with him just not responding to my mails, i couldn't barge in to his office and say hey give me desk to work on? can i ?
Anyways looking at the LCA agreement i think you don't seem to know what you are talking about, I am here holding his company's name on my H1B form , His agreement on LCA and his employment letter, i dunno if there is any other way i could make inroads into barging into his office?
Now if he puts a security guard against me entering his office, shouldn't i report this to DOL too?
Mind your words you low life scum bag. You don’t know what you were doing and paid for H1B and landed here and informed your employer through email which states he did not invite you to the US though he applied for the H1B. By the way when did he informed about the project situation.
Yea...you go ahead and report DOL or even white house. I am sure you won’t get anything out of it as there are so many loop holes in your case. No one is going to pay you the green buck because you want it.
Getting emotional is not going to help you. Your case is not going to impact your employer until he is doing this as a pattern. The only other option is, if you can get another job apply for a transfer and the approval without I-94. Then you will have to go out of the country and come back.
Your first priority should be to get the job and fix your visa issues. Then find other employees working for this employer and if they are in similar situation like you. If so, you have a very strong case and complaint to DOL. May be you should use this as a leverage to get the pay stub and do transfer. Really speaking pay stub is not an issue as long as you are able to get a job.
You need to relax and think what do you want to do and whats your goal...do you want to put your life back on track or go after this guy. You can teach him a lesson but how it’s going to help improving your situation. Because of the current environment, no one needs to file any complaint and every application from any company is thoroughly scrutinized by the USCIS. Worst case he will shut the shop and open another one. All he needs is a $300 to register a company. USCIS is not going to deport him as he might be already on GC or USC. But there is every possibility for ICE to knock on your door. You are just shooting yourself in the foot. Good luck.
I guess it was my employers discretion to make me sit home with him just not responding to my mails, i couldn't barge in to his office and say hey give me desk to work on? can i ?
Anyways looking at the LCA agreement i think you don't seem to know what you are talking about, I am here holding his company's name on my H1B form , His agreement on LCA and his employment letter, i dunno if there is any other way i could make inroads into barging into his office?
Now if he puts a security guard against me entering his office, shouldn't i report this to DOL too?
Mind your words you low life scum bag. You don’t know what you were doing and paid for H1B and landed here and informed your employer through email which states he did not invite you to the US though he applied for the H1B. By the way when did he informed about the project situation.
Yea...you go ahead and report DOL or even white house. I am sure you won’t get anything out of it as there are so many loop holes in your case. No one is going to pay you the green buck because you want it.
Getting emotional is not going to help you. Your case is not going to impact your employer until he is doing this as a pattern. The only other option is, if you can get another job apply for a transfer and the approval without I-94. Then you will have to go out of the country and come back.
Your first priority should be to get the job and fix your visa issues. Then find other employees working for this employer and if they are in similar situation like you. If so, you have a very strong case and complaint to DOL. May be you should use this as a leverage to get the pay stub and do transfer. Really speaking pay stub is not an issue as long as you are able to get a job.
You need to relax and think what do you want to do and whats your goal...do you want to put your life back on track or go after this guy. You can teach him a lesson but how it’s going to help improving your situation. Because of the current environment, no one needs to file any complaint and every application from any company is thoroughly scrutinized by the USCIS. Worst case he will shut the shop and open another one. All he needs is a $300 to register a company. USCIS is not going to deport him as he might be already on GC or USC. But there is every possibility for ICE to knock on your door. You are just shooting yourself in the foot. Good luck.
girlfriend MetroPCS has bolstered their
deletedUser459
06-05 11:42 AM
haha. yeah, it asks for a username and pas when you go to this page now
i can't see it
i can't see it
hairstyles touch screen phones 2011
meandmygc
07-16 03:50 AM
Signed
shishya
06-15 05:01 PM
It is completely unpredictable. Actually when you file I485 USCIS does not process FIFO(They are supposed to). For example there are 10k gc are left for the year. First they will process the applications which are cleared FP based on PD and receipt date. Always risk is there when filing without marriage. You are safe till USCIS starts process your application. When they take your application for processing then you cannot add your spouse. Also if CIR decides to process backlogs faster then also you will be in problem. Best option is if your marriage is already fixed do it within 3 months and file GC before PD is backdated. You need not file July first. You can wait till Jul15 to see next VB and decide.
This gives me creeps! 485 applications are NOT processed in FIFO order?!!?!?! I was banking on that being FIFO so I could safely assume that my 485 wont be processed before the next retrogression kicks in in a couple of months -- giving me ample time to get married and bring my wife on H4!! :( :( And I do plan to get married in the next 6-9 months :(
This gives me creeps! 485 applications are NOT processed in FIFO order?!!?!?! I was banking on that being FIFO so I could safely assume that my 485 wont be processed before the next retrogression kicks in in a couple of months -- giving me ample time to get married and bring my wife on H4!! :( :( And I do plan to get married in the next 6-9 months :(
chaanakya
08-14 02:47 AM
When you say ..."they are suffering and its not justified".....
This is exactly what is wrong !!! Why the hell do we feel that it is unjustified?? Not only for EB3 or EB2 or anyone for that matter ?? Congress has the authority to pass laws, even something as insane as "no EB immigration for the next 20 years" or something like that. IMMIGRATION is a priviledge, NOT a birthright. India has its laws too, my son who was born here has to report every 6 months like a criminal even though he has a valid visa in India?? Is that unjustified? NO, it is the law in INdia. Students at national universities in India from foreign countries pay in excess of 100 times what an indian student pays, is that justified ? NO, it is the discretion of the UGC.
For those complaning about USCIS, do you even remember trying to pay the water bill or the telephone bill or electric bill in INdia? Those were the reasons that drove people out of the country. The US is not perfect but it has pretty generous laws and the USCIS is not perfect but it is trying. Here, if you dont get a response in 6 months, you have options to pursue this, even talk to senators and congressmen. In INdia there are murder cases that run longer than 15-20 years.
So please cut the "suffering" and "unjustified" feelings from the equation. If you are "suffering" because of immigration related issues, then that is ENTIRELY by choice.
There will be opinions. You are entitled to yours and so am I. I guess we can lay this to rest here. No point in arguing it till the end of time.
This is exactly what is wrong !!! Why the hell do we feel that it is unjustified?? Not only for EB3 or EB2 or anyone for that matter ?? Congress has the authority to pass laws, even something as insane as "no EB immigration for the next 20 years" or something like that. IMMIGRATION is a priviledge, NOT a birthright. India has its laws too, my son who was born here has to report every 6 months like a criminal even though he has a valid visa in India?? Is that unjustified? NO, it is the law in INdia. Students at national universities in India from foreign countries pay in excess of 100 times what an indian student pays, is that justified ? NO, it is the discretion of the UGC.
For those complaning about USCIS, do you even remember trying to pay the water bill or the telephone bill or electric bill in INdia? Those were the reasons that drove people out of the country. The US is not perfect but it has pretty generous laws and the USCIS is not perfect but it is trying. Here, if you dont get a response in 6 months, you have options to pursue this, even talk to senators and congressmen. In INdia there are murder cases that run longer than 15-20 years.
So please cut the "suffering" and "unjustified" feelings from the equation. If you are "suffering" because of immigration related issues, then that is ENTIRELY by choice.
There will be opinions. You are entitled to yours and so am I. I guess we can lay this to rest here. No point in arguing it till the end of time.
No comments:
Post a Comment