Law School Discussion

Law Students => Current Law Students => Topic started by: ............ on April 11, 2006, 07:03:39 AM

Title: .....
Post by: ............ on April 11, 2006, 07:03:39 AM
 .....
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: littlemonkey on April 15, 2006, 08:15:40 PM
Hey,
  this is a bit of a general enquiry, but hopefully someone can help:
  as an international student (from England), it is possible for me to go to law school in America on a J1 (student) Visa. However, for this visa you are supposed to to say that you intend to return to your home country after completing your studies.
  for any non-U.S.citizen hoping to work (in any job) in America, it is very difficult to gain a visa that will let you work. Essentially, your employer is supposed to be able to prove that they are employing you because they cannot find a suitable American to do the job.
   ... my goal is to go to law school in America, and then live in America the rest of my life, working as a lawyer.
   I have yet to research it properly, but it would seem to me that even if I went to a good law school in America, and then passed the bar, it would be very hard to find employment because of the visa issue.
   ... does anyone have any thoughts, or know of any international students who have gone on to practice law in America?
   thanks in advance.

what make you decide to work in USA? Is it not good enough living in England?
I 'm also a intenational student who want to study law  in America,but i think i will return to my country after my graduation. Because there are my family,friends and my lover.I cann't imagine the lonely life in a foreign country.That's my own opinions.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: SymphonyOfDreams on April 20, 2006, 02:02:46 PM
Hehehe actually... I'm considering this same issue too but it would be more difficult for me since I would apply for the student visa to do a masters wich lasts less...

Hey you can do what I'm planning to do... get married to an american... that seems to work, hehehe  ;D
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: giraffe205 on April 20, 2006, 10:22:39 PM
I think marriage is probably your best bet. I have heard of law firms hiring foreign attys how received an LLM from top schools. I don't know what those persons' legal status was, however.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: nestle on May 09, 2006, 01:06:58 AM
Marriage is not the best, it's the only bet. Work visa? Forget about it, you'll get dicked around for years on end and there's no guarantee you'll get the residency! Oh BTW, you've to marry a woman, a man won't do in the US!
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: erox on May 09, 2006, 01:35:55 AM
don't come on a J. you can't waive the foreign residency requirement through marriage. can you get an F visa for law school? you usually get a year-long work visa after that (practical training).

also keep in mind that if you commit marriage fraud for immigration purposes and get caught, you will be PERMANENTLY ineligible for immigration benefits in the future. A lot of people do it, but it's risky.

go talk to an immigration attorney. That is my advice. US immigration law is complicated, and it's a lot harder to get out of a messy situation then to avoid one at the outset.

either that, or just come over and charm some unsuspecting american with your accent. That should be easy enough.....there are certainly plenty of anglophile hipsters to go around.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: mailorder on May 09, 2006, 01:38:52 AM
don't come on a J. you can't waive the foreign residency requirement through marriage. can you get an F visa for law school? you usually get a year-long work visa after that (practical training).

also keep in mind that if you commit marriage fraud for immigration purposes and get caught, you will be PERMANENTLY ineligible for immigration benefits in the future. A lot of people do it, but it's risky.

go talk to an immigration attorney. That is my advice. US immigration law is complicated, and it's a lot harder to get out of a messy situation then to avoid one at the outset.

either that, or just come over and charm some unsuspecting american with your accent. That should be easy enough.....there are certainly plenty of anglophile hipsters to go around.

I guess it was the other way around .. wasn't it?! :)
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: SymphonyOfDreams on May 09, 2006, 08:32:28 AM
There's plenty of hot american chicks for you to marry once you get there, so it shouldn't be hard to NOT fake the marriage... just be sure to get divorce after you become a citizen... again... there's plenty of hot american chicks, why settle with one?   ;)
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: tamron on May 10, 2006, 03:14:04 AM
don't come on a J. you can't waive the foreign residency requirement through marriage. can you get an F visa for law school? you usually get a year-long work visa after that (practical training).

also keep in mind that if you commit marriage fraud for immigration purposes and get caught, you will be PERMANENTLY ineligible for immigration benefits in the future. A lot of people do it, but it's risky.

go talk to an immigration attorney. That is my advice. US immigration law is complicated, and it's a lot harder to get out of a messy situation then to avoid one at the outset.

either that, or just come over and charm some unsuspecting american with your accent. That should be easy enough.....there are certainly plenty of anglophile hipsters to go around.

I guess it was the other way around .. wasn't it?! :)

;)
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: liebe on September 17, 2006, 05:41:00 PM
I am an Indian male, will finish 6 years on H1 next year and I'll start law school, if accepted, after having already finished 6 years on H1.

Does anyone know if I can convert from H1 [7th year extension] to F1? If yes, then after the F1, can I get a new H1 with new 6 year timeframe? Thanks in advance.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: sharpchick on September 17, 2006, 06:49:19 PM
Don't get a J-1, I don't even think they would give it to you anyway (it's a practical training visa).  Most J-1s have a two year homestay rule (meaning you have to go back to your country for two years).  If they don't, then great for you, but once the J-1 expires you have to go back immediately.  And it usually expires within a week or so of graduation.  The F-1 on the other hand (student visa) gives you a year after graduation for you to work in the US and try to get your paperwork together. 

If you got a PhD (along with a JD perhaps) it would actually be much easier for you to stay here, PhD's don't count against the H-1B (skilled worker visa) quota and they are much easier to hire for companies, then you could get a green card after a few years.

Also, every year of course apply for the green card lottery.  You might get lucky.

Other than a work-sponsored green card (for which you must have a work visa first), marriage is the only other option.  FOr two years of marriage you will have a conditional green card, then after your final interview they'll give you the real thing.  Of course they can revoke it if they find out you were lying.  After 5 years with a green card you can apply to become a citizen.  And if you're going to get married, it would be MUCH easier if your spouse were a citizen and not just a green card holder.  It takes YEARS to do the greencard holder thing.  Also, if you end up getting ready to get married, please see a GOOD immigration attorney first.  THey are hard to find, because immigration law is so bizarre and changes often, but there are very many technicalities that could get you to lose your status (like getting engaged and then trying to enter the country with an F-1 visa, if immigration finds out) or at least delay the process a great deal (like marrying outside the U.S.).

Good luck!
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: sasas on September 19, 2006, 07:36:46 AM
Find some lousy woman, they usually do it for around $5K. Most marriage fraud involves one transaction: A US citizen accepts a one-time payment to actually marry the foreigner. Usually they sponsor the immigrant, go through with a wedding, and live as roommates, or at least set-up a joint home and accounts that make them appear to live together. It is these cases which are the hardest to uncover, since doing so would require a great deal of private investigation and manpower.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: liitlebit on September 19, 2006, 08:39:36 AM
I am a Canadian citizen who is going through hell because of the marriage with a US citizen. My wife went through a a sperm agency (she used used condoms she conserved in the refrigerator to get the sperm from) I live in New Jersey, and NJ does set out annulments. The judgment was issued based on the fact that I did not want to have children. The judge issued a statement about the acceptable definition of marriage as being a union between a man and a woman for the purpose of raising children. My lawyer has indicated that this could all be tying into the push by the federal goverment to ban gay marriages ... Looks like perhaps the courts are a bit political here in NJ... The annulment was issued on those grounds - what can I say.

The stuipid part I was referring to is that my green card process has been going on since 1999. My son came here in 2001 and had his green card within a few months. It is all based on the same marriage ... I left because my "wife" got pregnant (through artificial insemination) without my consent. That put me in the position of paternity without consent or involvement. She held my immigration status as her method of control and tried to force me to have children against my will.

The marriage was legit, I was already here on a valid visa and had 2 years left on it (with another potential renewal). I adjusted status only because of the definition of 'intent'. Obviously, after I got married I was planning to stay. Therefore, I filed my AOS and started the process. I DID NOT NEED TO GET MARRIED TO BE LEGAL... So in other words, I am getting screwed because I played by the rules all along. If I had waited a year or so before I filed the AOS, I would have had my GC years ago ...
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: opra on September 19, 2006, 06:07:39 PM

I am a Canadian citizen who is going through hell because of the marriage with a US citizen. My wife went through a a sperm agency (she used used condoms she conserved in the refrigerator to get the sperm from)


Get the hell outta there .. after I read this I couldn't eat dinner .. I just could not imagine these women to be so disgusting and desperate!
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: Zul on September 20, 2006, 05:14:26 AM
This is a major concern for me. Based on my research, it would be trivial to get an H1-B and work for ~6 years. A firm would only have to prove no USian could do the job etc. if they have like 30%+ foreign employees or something like that, which law firms probably wouldn't.

But will or can big firms sponsor you for a greencard? I don't want to have to leave the country for a year after the H1-B expires.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: nicholas on September 23, 2006, 09:46:06 PM
Go to Germany.

Reform of the Law on Nationality
_____________________________ ___

The Act reforming the law on nationality entered into force on 1 January 2000.

The key points of the reform are:

- Children born in Germany of foreign parents will, provided certain prerequisites are fulfilled, acquire German nationality from birth. They must however decide between the ages of 18 and 23 years, whether they want to retain their German nationality or the nationality of their parents.

- Children under the age of ten at the time of entry into force of the reform have a similar claim to naturalization.

- Provided that certain other prerequisites are fulfilled, foreigners in general will have the right to become naturalized after only 8 years of habitual residence in the Federal Republic of Germany, instead of 15 as was the case before.

- For naturalization it is necessary to prove adequate knowledge of German. A clean record and a commitment to the tenets of the Basic Law (Constitution) are further criteria. The person to be naturalized must also be in a position to maintain himself/ herself.
 
- The principle of the avoidance of multiple nationality still marks the law on nationality. Those applying for naturalization must in principle give up their foreign nationality. However in contrast to previous legislation, there are generous exceptional rules which allow the previous nationality to be retained. This applies for example to elderly persons and victims of political persecution. If release from the foreign nationality is legally impossible or unacceptable for such persons, for example due to high release fees or degrading methods of release, they can retain their previous nationality. This is also the case if the release from the foreign nationality would bring considerable disadvantages, especially economic disadvantages or problems with property and assets.


http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/www/en/willkommen/staatsangehoerigkeitsrecht/
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: myantonia on September 23, 2006, 10:02:57 PM
I am foreign-born and I have lived in Germany. The difference is that in Germany, you will ALWAYS be an Auslander. Your children and grandchildren will be also. I had a good friend who's parents were Korean immigrants to Germany. She had never been to Korea in her life and spoke very little Korean, but it didn't matter. They still thought of her as a complete foreigner. Her children, whether they will be half German or not, will also be considered foreigners, since they will not be (completely) German. In the U.S., being born and raised here and speaking English and having friends outside of small enclaves is considered being American, but there, you have to be an ethnic German to be considered German. They will more readily accept a white American who speaks no German at all but who is of German ancestory than a German-born Turk who speaks only German and was born and raised in Germany. I don't know about you, but I like America better. Don't get me wrong, racism and hate are just as rampant here as they are anywhere else, but it's easier to get accepted here. I know from experience.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: mr. big on September 23, 2006, 10:29:34 PM
The US and Germany are among the world's major countries of immigration. The US takes in more immigrants than any other country, and Germany is the chief destination of refugees and asylum seekers in Europe. Nothing suggests the influx of migrants to either country will soon cease. Population growth in both countries is fueled by immigration. In the US about one-third of population growth is due to immigration; in Germany, 100% of the population growth is due to immigration. About 8% of the 260 million US population are foreign-born, and almost 9% of Germany's 81 million residents are foreigners. Some foreign-born residents in the US are naturalized US citizens, and about one-sixth of Germany's foreigners were born in Germany (persons born in the US are automatically US citizens; persons born in Germany acquire the nationality of their parents).

Germany proclaims that it does not wish to become a country of immigration, but provides a relatively generous set of services to legal foreigners. The US, by contrast, basks in its immigrant heritage, but provides relatively few public services to help to integrate newcomers.

Immigration. The two parts of Germany have been affected differently by migration. The former West Germany added 13 million net immigrants between 1950 and 1993, while the former East Germany lost 5 million residents because emigration exceeded immigration. The former West Germany included in 1993 about 4 in 5 Germans, and virtually all of the 7 million foreigners in Germany live in the former West Germany. Germany is unlikely to remain a country in which foreigners arrive and remain foreigners. If a net 400,000 immigrants continued to arrive annually, Germany would have a population of about 90 million, of whom 30% would be foreigners. Major cities such as Frankfurt, Stuttgart, and Munich, which are now about one-quarter foreigners, would have populations that were half or more foreign. Since 1 in 6 foreigners in Germany today was born in Germany -- 1.2 million of 7 million -- and half have lived in Germany for 10 or more years, the status quo of foreigners remaining foreigners is not likely to continue.

Asylum.

Most of the foreigners arriving in Germany over the past 5 years seeking to settle have arrived as asylum seekers. In Germany and all of the industrial democracies, the majority of asylum applications are rejected, so that separating genuine and false asylum applicants is a major objective of all asylum systems. When the number of asylum seekers surges, as it did in 1992 in Germany to about 438,000, the cost of housing, feeding, and deciding asylum cases -- some DM 6 to 8 billion or $4 to $5 billion -- can equal contributions for development assistance (Germany provided $7 billion ODA in 1993). Both Germany and the US have invented in-between categories for aliens who are not eligible for asylum, but who nonetheless are not deported. The US and German acronyms -- TPS, DED, "tolerated" -- reflect the expectation that these aliens will eventually depart.

Foreign Workers.

Germany recruited guest workers between 1961 and 1973, when their number peaked at 2.6 million, making 1 in 8 workers a foreigner. Over the next 15 years, these foreign workers united their families in Germany, and second and third generation-foreigners joined their parents in the German work force. In the 1990s Germany responded to rising migration pressures from the east after 1989 with 5 distinct foreign worker programs that involve some 350,000 foreigners, and add the equivalent of about 150,000 full-time workers to the German work force. However, unlike 1960s guest worker programs, 1990s foreign worker programs had a different purpose -- to cope with micro- rather than macro-labor shortages, and to make inevitable migration legal. The most important program involves project-tied workers. Under this program, German firms subcontract with foreign firms, and the foreign firm supplies the expertise and workers to complete a particular phase of a project. There were an average 40,000 project-tied foreign workers in Germany in 1994, down from 60,000 in 1992 because of scandals that involved German contractors using project-tied agreements as backdoor guest worker programs.

Most newly-arrived foreign workers are employed seasonally in Germany. A peak 150,000 seasonal foreign workers in 1994 contributed the equivalent of 40,000 FTE to the German labor force. Seasonal foreign workers can remain 90 days in Germany, and most are employed in agriculture, restaurants, or construction. If the workers are employed less than 2 months, the workers and their employers do not have to pay social security taxes on their wages. The third program is for border commuters from the Czech Republic and Poland. If local workers are not available in Germany within 50 km of these eastern borders, then employers can request permission from the German Employment Service to employ commuter workers at prevailing wages who can remain in Germany for up to 2 nights weekly. However, most of the industrial democracies have heeded the advice of the OECD and deregulated their labor markets, and most today play less of a job-matching role in labor markets. The German ES matches about 35 percent of all job seekers and jobs, the US ES three to four percent -- giving governments less credibility when considering employer requests for foreign workers.

Are you an IT pro? Get your act together if you wish to work in Germany. For, there is a job opportunity for you as the country faces the highest shortage of highly qualified IT professionals. In 2002, they introduced a 'German Green Card' for IT specialists. This card allows employers to fill up a vacancy with transnationals if there is a shortage of homegrown professionals. The bad news however is that in other sectors (other than IT), the employment prospects in Germany are not so good. In fact, responding to the high level of unemployment in the country in 1973 the German government put an absolute ban on the recruitment of foreigners in other sectors.

To work in Germany, one needs, first and foremost, a work permit and a visa. To obtain the permit, s/he must have a valid job offer from a German employer. For IT professionals seeking a Green Card, the job offer should entail an annual salary of 77,400 DM /$39,575, or else 100,000 DM/$51,130. The implicit guarantee is that an IT pro can obtain a visa within a few days of applying. IT professionals with lower salaries and other job aspirants have to apply for a 'conventional type' work permit. They must also possess proof of having the requisite skill for the job (a college degree) and work experience of at least a year or two. Finally, they must also be able to demonstrate a working knowledge of the German language. Besides, the prospective employer has to establish that the candidate is well qualified for the post in question and that he is unable to recruit a suitable German candidate for the post.

Application forms can be obtained from the German Embassy or Consulate or can be downloaded from their website. Submit the form to the German Embassy or to the German Consulate General. Applications must be submitted in person or through an approved travel agent. Forms sent via mail are summarily rejected. The documents that you need to furnish with the completed form are a valid passport, two passport-size photographs and an employment contract. It normally takes up to three months for the clearance to come. Once the application is approved, the candidate is issued a travel visa valid for three months. After arriving in Germany, s/he has to immediately register with the authorities until the work permit is extended.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: bebe on September 27, 2006, 02:37:55 PM

I am a Canadian citizen who is going through hell because of the marriage with a US citizen. My wife went through a a sperm agency (she used used condoms she conserved in the refrigerator to get the sperm from)


It's all your fault! Always flush down the toilet used condoms. Literally!
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: c o n d y on September 27, 2006, 02:57:02 PM

The US and Germany are among the world's major countries of immigration. The US takes in more immigrants than any other country, and Germany is the chief destination of refugees and asylum seekers in Europe. Nothing suggests the influx of migrants to either country will soon cease. Population growth in both countries is fueled by immigration. In the US about one-third of population growth is due to immigration; in Germany, 100% of the population growth is due to immigration. About 8% of the 260 million US population are foreign-born, and almost 9% of Germany's 81 million residents are foreigners. Some foreign-born residents in the US are naturalized US citizens, and about one-sixth of Germany's foreigners were born in Germany (persons born in the US are automatically US citizens; persons born in Germany acquire the nationality of their parents).

Germany proclaims that it does not wish to become a country of immigration, but provides a relatively generous set of services to legal foreigners. The US, by contrast, basks in its immigrant heritage, but provides relatively few public services to help to integrate newcomers.

Immigration. The two parts of Germany have been affected differently by migration. The former West Germany added 13 million net immigrants between 1950 and 1993, while the former East Germany lost 5 million residents because emigration exceeded immigration. The former West Germany included in 1993 about 4 in 5 Germans, and virtually all of the 7 million foreigners in Germany live in the former West Germany. Germany is unlikely to remain a country in which foreigners arrive and remain foreigners. If a net 400,000 immigrants continued to arrive annually, Germany would have a population of about 90 million, of whom 30% would be foreigners. Major cities such as Frankfurt, Stuttgart, and Munich, which are now about one-quarter foreigners, would have populations that were half or more foreign. Since 1 in 6 foreigners in Germany today was born in Germany -- 1.2 million of 7 million -- and half have lived in Germany for 10 or more years, the status quo of foreigners remaining foreigners is not likely to continue.

Asylum.

Most of the foreigners arriving in Germany over the past 5 years seeking to settle have arrived as asylum seekers. In Germany and all of the industrial democracies, the majority of asylum applications are rejected, so that separating genuine and false asylum applicants is a major objective of all asylum systems. When the number of asylum seekers surges, as it did in 1992 in Germany to about 438,000, the cost of housing, feeding, and deciding asylum cases -- some DM 6 to 8 billion or $4 to $5 billion -- can equal contributions for development assistance (Germany provided $7 billion ODA in 1993). Both Germany and the US have invented in-between categories for aliens who are not eligible for asylum, but who nonetheless are not deported. The US and German acronyms -- TPS, DED, "tolerated" -- reflect the expectation that these aliens will eventually depart.

Foreign Workers.

Germany recruited guest workers between 1961 and 1973, when their number peaked at 2.6 million, making 1 in 8 workers a foreigner. Over the next 15 years, these foreign workers united their families in Germany, and second and third generation-foreigners joined their parents in the German work force. In the 1990s Germany responded to rising migration pressures from the east after 1989 with 5 distinct foreign worker programs that involve some 350,000 foreigners, and add the equivalent of about 150,000 full-time workers to the German work force. However, unlike 1960s guest worker programs, 1990s foreign worker programs had a different purpose -- to cope with micro- rather than macro-labor shortages, and to make inevitable migration legal. The most important program involves project-tied workers. Under this program, German firms subcontract with foreign firms, and the foreign firm supplies the expertise and workers to complete a particular phase of a project. There were an average 40,000 project-tied foreign workers in Germany in 1994, down from 60,000 in 1992 because of scandals that involved German contractors using project-tied agreements as backdoor guest worker programs.

Most newly-arrived foreign workers are employed seasonally in Germany. A peak 150,000 seasonal foreign workers in 1994 contributed the equivalent of 40,000 FTE to the German labor force. Seasonal foreign workers can remain 90 days in Germany, and most are employed in agriculture, restaurants, or construction. If the workers are employed less than 2 months, the workers and their employers do not have to pay social security taxes on their wages. The third program is for border commuters from the Czech Republic and Poland. If local workers are not available in Germany within 50 km of these eastern borders, then employers can request permission from the German Employment Service to employ commuter workers at prevailing wages who can remain in Germany for up to 2 nights weekly. However, most of the industrial democracies have heeded the advice of the OECD and deregulated their labor markets, and most today play less of a job-matching role in labor markets. The German ES matches about 35 percent of all job seekers and jobs, the US ES three to four percent -- giving governments less credibility when considering employer requests for foreign workers.

Are you an IT pro? Get your act together if you wish to work in Germany. For, there is a job opportunity for you as the country faces the highest shortage of highly qualified IT professionals. In 2002, they introduced a 'German Green Card' for IT specialists. This card allows employers to fill up a vacancy with transnationals if there is a shortage of homegrown professionals. The bad news however is that in other sectors (other than IT), the employment prospects in Germany are not so good. In fact, responding to the high level of unemployment in the country in 1973 the German government put an absolute ban on the recruitment of foreigners in other sectors.

To work in Germany, one needs, first and foremost, a work permit and a visa. To obtain the permit, s/he must have a valid job offer from a German employer. For IT professionals seeking a Green Card, the job offer should entail an annual salary of 77,400 DM /$39,575, or else 100,000 DM/$51,130. The implicit guarantee is that an IT pro can obtain a visa within a few days of applying. IT professionals with lower salaries and other job aspirants have to apply for a 'conventional type' work permit. They must also possess proof of having the requisite skill for the job (a college degree) and work experience of at least a year or two. Finally, they must also be able to demonstrate a working knowledge of the German language. Besides, the prospective employer has to establish that the candidate is well qualified for the post in question and that he is unable to recruit a suitable German candidate for the post.

Application forms can be obtained from the German Embassy or Consulate or can be downloaded from their website. Submit the form to the German Embassy or to the German Consulate General. Applications must be submitted in person or through an approved travel agent. Forms sent via mail are summarily rejected. The documents that you need to furnish with the completed form are a valid passport, two passport-size photographs and an employment contract. It normally takes up to three months for the clearance to come. Once the application is approved, the candidate is issued a travel visa valid for three months. After arriving in Germany, s/he has to immediately register with the authorities until the work permit is extended.


You did not mention the easiest way to get residency. Marriage. Gay one included.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: rapeublique on September 28, 2006, 08:28:23 AM
Indeed c o n d y! Germany has no sodomy laws, the age of sexual consent is 14 for all. Germany allows same-sex couples to register their partnerships; grants German resident status to foreign partners; extends to gay and lesbian co-parents some parental rights with respect to their partners' biological children; gives couples status identical to married couples for purposes of tenancy, inheritance, pensions, and health insurance; and requires a formal legal process for dissolution of partnerships, and provision for one partner to collect support from the other afterwards if necessary. Germany allows homosexuals in its military (although not as officers). Hamburg offers a domestic partner registry for same-sex couples, it allows hospital visitation rights, and federally subsidized low-rent housing to registered partners. Christina Schenk and Volker Beck both are openly homosexual members of the German Bundestag (Lower House of Parliament) Klaus Wowereit (Social Democrat), Mayor of Berlin, was openly gay. On July 2002 Germany's high court upheld a law that gives same-sex couples some marriage like benefits. Judges at the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe voted 5-3 to back the law, which was challenged last year by Bavaria and two eastern states. The court rejected a lawsuit by conservatives who argued gay marriage violates constitutional provisions protecting marriage and the family. The law, in effect since August, allows same-sex couples to "marry" at registry offices and requires a court decision for divorce. Same-sex couples also receive rights given to heterosexual couples in areas such as inheritance and health insurance. The legislation brought Germany in line with countries such as Denmark, which was the first to grant rights to same-sex couples in 1989, France and Sweden.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: ha on September 30, 2006, 05:44:22 AM
"Marriage-Minded GWM/GAM couple
(1 American, 1 foreign),
seeks lesbian couple (1 American, 1 foreign)
for marriages of mutual interests."

Classified Ad, The Washington Blade
--------------------------------------------------

"European/American lesbian couple
seeking foreign/American gay male couple
for mutually beneficial arrangement.
Must be willing to move to New York."

Classified Ad, San Francisco Bay Times
--------------------------------------------------

Advertisements like those above appear every week in gay and lesbian newspapers all across the country. For many binational gay and lesbian couples, arranging mutually beneficial "sham" marriages is a last desperate attempt to make a life together in America. Even though the consequences can be severe if they are caught, current American immigration law often leaves binational same-sex couples feeling that they have no other option. Under the family reunification provisions of the immigration laws, gay and lesbian Americans in relationships with foreign nationals have no legal way to bring their partners into the United States. The foreign partner would have to qualify independently, usually by demonstrating some special skill that is needed by employers in the United States. This is very difficult to do, as many people lack the specific skills sought by the Immigration. Even if they possess these skills, they would still be subjected to the strict quota limits on legal immigration. U.S. immigration law would also tear apart a foreign same-sex couple if one of them were to get a job in the United States. Under current law, the spouse of a married heterosexual person would be permitted into the country, but the partner of a gay man or lesbian would have to be left behind.

Today the United States is the only industrialized English-speaking country that does not grant same-sex partners immigration preferences. Legalizing same-sex marriages in the United States would eliminate the immigration hurdle facing binational same-sex couples, but there are other mechanisms through which this goal could be achieved. Indeed, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the UK now all recognize the immigration rights of same-sex couples and some allow gay marriage too. The US should not stand alone among the industrialized English-speaking world in continuing this discriminatory practice against gay and lesbian families. Congress should require the Immigration Service to establish a registry for same-sex couples so they may immigrate together as a family. As examples of how this might work, Congress could look to the policies enacted by the countries discussed above, or to the domestic partner ordinances enacted in numerous municipalities throughout the US.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: erox on October 01, 2006, 05:44:12 PM
There are ways to get your permanent residency through H1 status. Another way to work here is to find work with an American firm in London or wherever (there are plenty who have offices around the world), then have them transfer you to the states. I forget what that type of visa is called, but you can look it up on www.uscis.gov.

re: the gay marriage/immigration thing....I found this out while working in immigration and thought it was hilarious...basically, if a person transitions to another gender (m to f, f to M, whatever) the person is recognized as that gender in almost every state, can get a new birth certificate, and can get married to someone of the opposite sex, petition for them, etc. HOWEVER, Texas refuses to recognize a person's new gender, and you can only get married to someone of the opposite sex as your birth sex in that state, which basically means that "gay marriage" is legal in those cases. Basically what this means is that Texas is the only state where a female who transitioned to male gender can marry another man and petition for him. heh heh.

Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: bdlght on October 05, 2006, 02:49:22 AM

Today the United States is the only industrialized English-speaking country that does not grant same-sex partners immigration preferences. Legalizing same-sex marriages in the United States would eliminate the immigration hurdle facing binational same-sex couples, but there are other mechanisms through which this goal could be achieved. Indeed, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the UK now all recognize the immigration rights of same-sex couples and some allow gay marriage too.


All these countries recognize gay/lesbian couples for the purposes of immigration:


- Australia
- Belgium
- Canada
- Denmark
- Finland
- France
- Germany
- Iceland
- Israel
- Netherlands
- New Zealand
- Norway
- South Africa
- Sweden
- United Kingdom
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: slimshady on October 11, 2006, 10:12:54 PM
Seeing those teary-eyed immigrants gratefully saying the Pledge of Allegiance, I used to wonder why anyone would want to be called an American, What does America stand for? I used to think that it stood for opportunity, equality and justice. The older I get I think that America stands for greed, arrogance and hypocrisy. When I went to Australia last year I was amazed by what people told me they thought about America. The younger people dreamed of going to Los Angeles or New York, imaging them as places filled with excitement and glamour. The older people thought of America as the world's cop and the biggest bully there ever was. They felt that America was like Rome in the days before it fell, full of criminals, festering in garbage. Most people I have met think of America as being number 1, yet I don't really know what the contest was. Certainly we are a leader in the amount of homicides, and the number of guns. We make the most movies and television shows, but not necessarily the best. We smoke the most pot, snort the most lines, mainline the most smack, while hypocritically denouncing drug producing countries. Odds are good that our government may even have been involved in dealing and importing drugs.

What is the history of America? The original settlers slaughtered the Indians, enslaved the Africans and plundered the continent. We loudly criticize other countries for their human rights violations while just 30 years ago our police allowed German Shepherds to attack unarmed protesters. Some years ago the world watched in horror as a crowd of white police officers kicked the crap out of an unarmed black man, and then were found to be guilty of nothing. So why do some people want so much to be a part of it, while many others start to sound like the youth in Germany, "America for Americans." I think that being American is a state of mind, not necessarily the words on your passport. I think the problem, especially for the 'patriotic' types, is in priority. What we define ourselves as being reflects how we see other people. These people see themselves as Americans first, perhaps men second, perhaps fathers third, and farmers fourth. The politically active might set up a different set of identity. They might be gay first, vegetarian second, Texan third, and cabinet-maker fourth. This method of defining ourselves and what we believe to be right is exclusionary, since by definition there can never be a tie among these priorities. When we call ourselves Mexican Americans, it says to the Americans, that the Mexican part is first, and for them it is an insult. If you live in America and you want to be an American, that is what you are first and foremost.

We pledge allegiance to the flag, God and country. It may be related to the Communist witch hunts of the McCarthy era, when there were questions of loyalty. Does it make you an American to join the military and legally execute strangers? Does it make you American to pay taxes and keep a flag in the front yard? I don't think it should make a difference. I think that if we all just considered ourselves human first, everything else being entirely secondary, we might just be better off. We might all see each other as part of the group, part of a vast collective, existing equally within the whole. This does not mean that we need to give up our individuality or identity, quite the contrary. We give up our petty allegiances to transitory memberships, and accept our small place on this small planet, in this short time. When we align ourselves within any group, it is impossible for the will of the group to accurately and thoroughly speak for us. It is this desire, perhaps related to childhood desires for acceptance, perhaps an unconscious desire to be removed from the difficult tasks of decision-making, that allows us to give up that part of ourselves to the herd. Herding never affords us the safety that we imagine, more safety is to be had in solidarity than herding. It might seem irrelevant to even try to redefine our roles, useless to change minds already programmed to self destruct, carved in stone. Perhaps it is, but I don't say this because it is the way that I am and therefore people should try to emulate me. I believe that people should live by what they believe, and for me there doesn't exist a group that believes everything that I believe.

It is sometimes necessary to define our own reality, but in order to be in some kind of society we need to be in agreement on a few basic things. We cannot even agree to disagree. There is no longer any middle, if there ever was one, between my side and your side, because we like to choose sides. From the minute we are socialized, we are taught to establish cliques, to formulate pecking orders, to dominate or be dominated. It leaves no room for anything else, if you dare to step outside the established order, you are by definition outside. Stripped of your privileges, alone in the wilderness. Or you can establish a new order, outside of the old one, but quickly your instincts resurface and you regress back. Hell, I may be a computer geek, but I am the godd**mn King of the Computer Geeks. I may be a punk rocker, but the rest of you dicks are a bunch of suburban poseurs.

The uniforms may appear different, the suit, the long hair and leather jackets, the tie-dyes and Birkenstocks, but at the heart of it they are uniforms conveying identity and allegiance to the group. The only fringes left are reserved for the walking wounded, the ones so far removed that they are oblivious to anything but the voices in their heads. Instead of trying to rise to new heights, we bury our heads and dig deeper into the muck. It is a luxury to be able to chuck it all, give up on everything. It quite lovely to rely on public transportation, have hot and tasty food and live in a world where everyone we know only a phone call away. There is no judgment to be made, no fingers to point, no blame to be assessed. My rights end where your nose begins, but my responsibilities extend much further. There is a great satisfaction that comes from living well, from treating others as you would treat yourself, and if you are unkind to yourself, than treat others better. Agree to disagree, but attempt to understand. Empathy is more important than sympathy, I can't hate you unless I understand you, and if I understand you I can't hate you. Simple words to live by.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: buffomet on October 15, 2006, 10:37:42 PM

When I went to Australia last year I was amazed by what people told me they thought about America. The younger people dreamed of going to Los Angeles or New York, imaging them as places filled with excitement and glamour. The older people thought of America as the world's cop and the biggest bully there ever was. They felt that America was like Rome in the days before it fell, full of criminals, festering in garbage. Most people I have met think of America as being number 1, yet I don't really know what the contest was.

What is the history of America? The original settlers slaughtered the Indians, enslaved the Africans and plundered the continent. We loudly criticize other countries for their human rights violations while just 30 years ago our police allowed German Shepherds to attack unarmed protesters.

The politically active might set up a different set of identity. They might be gay first, vegetarian second, Texan third, and cabinet-maker fourth. This method of defining ourselves and what we believe to be right is exclusionary, since by definition there can never be a tie among these priorities.

When we align ourselves within any group, it is impossible for the will of the group to accurately and thoroughly speak for us. It is this desire, perhaps related to childhood desires for acceptance, perhaps an unconscious desire to be removed from the difficult tasks of decision-making, that allows us to give up that part of ourselves to the herd. Herding never affords us the safety that we imagine, more safety is to be had in solidarity than herding.

My rights end where your nose begins, but my responsibilities extend much further. There is a great satisfaction that comes from living well, from treating others as you would treat yourself, and if you are unkind to yourself, than treat others better. Agree to disagree, but attempt to understand. Empathy is more important than sympathy, I can't hate you unless I understand you, and if I understand you I can't hate you. Simple words to live by.


Great thoughs! So great that people could just paste them into their signature boxes!
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: egolaw on November 03, 2006, 07:43:55 PM

It's all your fault! Always flush down the toilet used condoms. Literally!


I would not have too big of a problem even if you're not joking, but are you really serious when saying this?
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: gabryponte on November 07, 2006, 06:42:18 PM

There were an average 40,000 project-tied foreign workers in Germany in 1994, down from 60,000 in 1992 because of scandals that involved German contractors using project-tied agreements as backdoor guest worker programs.


Are these program similar to the H1-B visa in the US?
Title: Don't @ # ! * With The H1-B Thing!
Post by: fiscal on November 13, 2006, 01:30:25 AM
Skilled Workers -- or Indentured Servants?
 
Once confined to lower rungs of the workforce, abusive treatment of workers on visas is spreading to legions of white-collar employees

In 1998, Mohan Kutty, a Malaysian-born doctor who has practiced medicine in Hudson, Fla., since he immigrated to the U.S. more than 20 years ago, decided to open five clinics in rural Tennessee. To find physicians to take such hard-to-fill posts, he sponsored work visas for 17 doctors from a variety of countries, including India, Pakistan, and Romania. But when they showed up for work, Kutty paid them just half the $80,000 a year he had promised -- and fired several after they hired a lawyer to help them out.

Last fall, a Labor Dept. judge ordered Kutty to pay the doctors a total of $1.04 million in unpaid wages. The clinics have since closed, and some of the doctors have found work at other Tennessee health-care providers. "The violations were serious and pervasive, and there is little evidence of good-faith efforts to comply with the law on the part of Dr. Kutty," the judge said in her ruling. Kutty has appealed the decision, saying the law was unclear, but was unavailable for comment. Through their lawyer, the doctors declined comment.

CAUGHT IN THE CRUNCH. Such stories have become increasingly commonplace these days. Immigrants have long complained about employers who cheat or abuse them and threaten to have them deported if they protest. Generally, the problem has been confined to the lowest rungs of the workforce, such as Mexican farm hands who enter the country illegally. Nowadays, however, the weak economy has sparked an outbreak of abusive treatment among the legions of white-collar employees who flocked to the U.S. on perfectly valid visas during the late-1990s boom. Usually, theirs are cases of employers who don't pay full salary or benefits. Often, like Kutty, the employers are immigrants, too, so they know how the system works.

Indeed, labor law violations involving workers on H1-B visas, which are designed for skilled employees, have jumped more than fivefold since 1998, according to the Labor Dept. Back-pay awards for such employees have soared by more than ten times.

LESS WILLING TO QUIT.  In response, agency officials have stepped up H1-B investigations. They agree there could be thousands of H1-B workers who don't file complaints because they fear the loss of their visa. "We take very seriously this fear about coming to the government to complain," says D. Mark Wilson, deputy head of the Labor Dept.'s Employment Standards Administration, which enforces labor laws.

The spreading problems stem from the stagnant economy, officials say, which is driving some companies to cut costs by unscrupulous means. At the same time, the scarcity of jobs has left many skilled immigrants more dependent on their employers and less willing to quit if trouble starts. The abuses have been particularly widespread in high tech, which used H1-Bs to bring in tens of thousands of programmers and other professionals when companies were desperate for help during the boom. But with the jobless rate among computer scientists and mathematicians at 6%, vs. a mere 0.7% in early 1998, many workers are more vulnerable.

SEARCHING FOR SPONSORS. Experts point out that the U.S. work-visa system gives employers tremendous power over immigrants. More than a million people are employed in the U.S. under visas for skilled workers. While the rules for each visa type differ, all require immigrants to get a U.S. employer to sponsor them. So if employers yank their sponsorship -- which they can do for almost any reason imaginable -- the immigrant often must return home and try to find another sponsor -- an arduous task. "They don't have the usual rights that U.S. workers have," says Eileen Appelbaum, a professor of labor economics at Rutgers University. "You're essentially an indentured servant."

That's pretty much how Ekambar Rao Kodali felt when he ran into problems with his job as a systems analyst. The Hyderabad (India) native felt lucky to score an H1-B visa in 1997 that allowed him to move to the U.S. and work for Atlanta-based Softpros Inc. The high-tech consulting firm paid him $4,400 a month, but by the time the economy soured in 2001, his paychecks had already started to come in late, and Softpros didn't keep up its payments on his health insurance, Kodali says. He finally quit in frustration late that year but was forced to move back to India with his wife and three-year-old when the job he had been offered at another company fell through.

"YOU'RE GOING BACK."  In February, Kodali returned to the U.S. after finding work with yet another high-tech consultancy. But the new position -- and his H1-B visa -- expire at the end of the year. He left his family in India, where he will have to return unless something else turns up. "I worked for [Softpros CEO Chand Akkineni] as hard as possible, but he took advantage of me," says Kodali. Akkineni, also a Hyderabad native, concedes that he sent out paychecks late, but he denies that he failed to keep up insurance payments. An H1-B worker's options are few. For example, federal law prohibits employers from forcing H1-B workers to take unpaid leave, yet experts say the practice has become widespread. "You're told, 'If you don't want to do it, fine. You're going back,"' says John W. Steadman, president-elect of the Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers. Vigorous law enforcement would help, but until the job market improves, skilled immigrants will remain at the mercy of their sponsors.

This story originally appeared in the June 16, 2003 issue of BusinessWeek
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: wrw on April 08, 2007, 09:35:58 PM
I have been admitted by a great program -- the thing is that I need a student visa and I was told I may face difficulties to get it given the fact that a family member of mine has already filed a petition to get me a green card (immigration considers it proof of intent to remain in the U.S.) Do I go back to my native country to apply for the student visa as per the standard procedure, or do I apply for the visa from within the U.S., no matter what? Also, will it make a difference that I have been accepted at a well-known, brand name school?
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: hotpot on April 09, 2007, 06:50:02 PM
You have to leave the country for a full year and then come back. Otherwise you won't have another 6 years of H1.



I am an Indian male, will finish 6 years on H1 next year and I'll start law school, if accepted, after having already finished 6 years on H1.

Does anyone know if I can convert from H1 [7th year extension] to F1? If yes, then after the F1, can I get a new H1 with new 6 year timeframe? Thanks in advance.

Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: clockwise on April 11, 2007, 06:56:09 PM

I have been admitted by a great program -- the thing is that I need a student visa and I was told I may face difficulties to get it given the fact that a family member of mine has already filed a petition to get me a green card (immigration considers it proof of intent to remain in the U.S.) Do I go back to my native country to apply for the student visa as per the standard procedure, or do I apply for the visa from within the U.S., no matter what? Also, will it make a difference that I have been accepted at a well-known, brand name school?



From outside or inside the US you're gonna have a hard time getting a student visa because of the petition your relative has filed on your behalf. The standard of review is the same in both cases (consular processing or CIS processing), the only difference is that if you apply from within the US you can stay here even if your student visa application gets denied.

It is more likely than not that you will not be granted the student visa, I had a friend of mine in the same situation and he was compelled to stay illegally in the country for years before he adjusted status to permanent resident after his relative petition became current and he could actually file for AOS (adjustment of status). He couldn't go back to his native country as he was already illegally in the US for close to a year and he would trigger the 10-year reentry bar had he gone back to his country and process the green card from there.

All in all, you can give the student visa a try (you've nothing to lose) but unfortunately the CIS does not really care you may have been accepted by a recognized school.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: time 2 payback on April 11, 2007, 07:55:16 PM

[...] I had a friend of mine in the same situation and he was compelled to stay illegally in the country for years before he adjusted status to permanent resident after his relative petition became current and he could actually file for AOS (adjustment of status). He couldn't go back to his native country as he was already illegally in the US for close to a year and he would trigger the 10-year reentry bar had he gone back to his country and process the green card from there.


If the relative petition for perm residency was such a big obstacle to get a temp student visa couldn't he have his relative withdraw that petition so that he could have his student visa application easily approved?
Title: Read the thread closer!
Post by: tense on April 12, 2007, 07:12:29 PM

[...] I had a friend of mine in the same situation and he was compelled to stay illegally in the country for years before he adjusted status to permanent resident after his relative petition became current and he could actually file for AOS (adjustment of status). He couldn't go back to his native country as he was already illegally in the US for close to a year and he would trigger the 10-year reentry bar had he gone back to his country and process the green card from there.


If the relative petition for perm residency was such a big obstacle to get a temp student visa couldn't he have his relative withdraw that petition so that he could have his student visa application easily approved?


You obviously don't know what you're talking about! You never withdraw a green card petition (even it may take 4-5 years for it to materialize into a green card) just to get a student visa! Do you know the hell you have to go through with an F-1 visa? Most companies don't interview F-1 students because they know they have only 1 year of OPT (practical training) and they do not sponsor H1-B visas for many reasons. They are unfamiliar with the process and know that hiring an American is much easier. Other employers may fear that international students will sooner or later want to return to the home country and training costs them (upwards of $8,000) Many employers expect employees to have excellent communication skills. Even though international students can speak and write English pretty well, it is often not at the level of American employees.
 
Assuming you finally locate an employer willing to sponsor you for an H1-B, such employers are notorious about cheating and abusing foreign hires, threatening to have them deported if they protest when they are not paid full salary or benefits. Labor law violations involving workers on H1-B visas are rampant nowadays and H1-B workers don't file complaints because they fear the loss of their visa. If your employer yanks his sponsorship -- which they can do for almost any reason imaginable -- the H1-Bs often must return home and try to find another sponsor -- an arduous task. H1-Bs are essentially indentured servants. 
Title: Re: Read the thread closer!
Post by: treat on April 12, 2007, 10:12:36 PM

You obviously don't know what you're talking about! You never withdraw a green card petition (even it may take 4-5 years for it to materialize into a green card) just to get a student visa! Do you know the hell you have to go through with an F-1 visa? Most companies don't interview F-1 students because they know they have only 1 year of OPT (practical training) and they do not sponsor H1-B visas for many reasons. They are unfamiliar with the process and know that hiring an American is much easier. Other employers may fear that international students will sooner or later want to return to the home country and training costs them (upwards of $8,000) Many employers expect employees to have excellent communication skills. Even though international students can speak and write English pretty well, it is often not at the level of American employees.
 
Assuming you finally locate an employer willing to sponsor you for an H1-B, such employers are notorious about cheating and abusing foreign hires, threatening to have them deported if they protest when they are not paid full salary or benefits. Labor law violations involving workers on H1-B visas are rampant nowadays and H1-B workers don't file complaints because they fear the loss of their visa. If your employer yanks his sponsorship -- which they can do for almost any reason imaginable -- the H1-Bs often must return home and try to find another sponsor -- an arduous task. H1-Bs are essentially indentured servants. 


Indians regularly describe the problems facing them and others: "This is a real human rights violation in America. You are an indentured servant, a modern-day slave." A garment worker in an urban sweatshop? No, he is a computer programmer, hired under an H-1B guest worker visa. Employers seek H-1Bs not because of a shortage of programmers but from a desire for cheap indentured labor. Imported programmers and engineers are paid 15-33% below normal. Even highly pro-business Forbes Magazine cites a pay gap of 25-30%. The Wall Street Journal has reported that the H-1Bs are paid $20-25K less than Americans with the same skills.

Most H-1Bs want their employers to sponsor them for green cards. It is here that the de facto indentured servitude arises. They do not dare change employers, as that would necessitate renewing the green card process and therefore losing time they had already put in. In recent years, an H-1B would typically be stuck in a job for about 5 years. The law requiring that H-1Bs be hired at the prevailing wage is riddled with loopholes. H-1Bs aren't going to get raises either -- if one cannot leave, one has no bargaining power.

And though some employers do not cheat their H-1Bs relative to American programmers of the same age and background, they still save on salaries by hiring H-1Bs whose median age is 28, instead of hiring more expensive Americans over age 49. Even the industry-dominated high-tech work force Committee of the National Research Council concedes that employers often prefer younger programmers, but the ex-programmers forced into other fields do not count in such data. Yet US citizens and permanent residents do not get priority over the imports. Employers who favor aliens have an arsenal of legal means to reject all US workers who apply.
Title: Re: Read the thread closer!
Post by: stripmeta on April 12, 2007, 10:24:12 PM

Indians regularly describe the problems facing them and others: "This is a real human rights violation in America. You are an indentured servant, a modern-day slave." A garment worker in an urban sweatshop? No, he is a computer programmer, hired under an H-1B guest worker visa. Employers seek H-1Bs not because of a shortage of programmers but from a desire for cheap indentured labor. Imported programmers and engineers are paid 15-33% below normal. Even highly pro-business Forbes Magazine cites a pay gap of 25-30%. The Wall Street Journal has reported that the H-1Bs are paid $20-25K less than Americans with the same skills.

Most H-1Bs want their employers to sponsor them for green cards. It is here that the de facto indentured servitude arises. They do not dare change employers, as that would necessitate renewing the green card process and therefore losing time they had already put in. In recent years, an H-1B would typically be stuck in a job for about 5 years. The law requiring that H-1Bs be hired at the prevailing wage is riddled with loopholes. H-1Bs aren't going to get raises either -- if one cannot leave, one has no bargaining power.

And though some employers do not cheat their H-1Bs relative to American programmers of the same age and background, they still save on salaries by hiring H-1Bs whose median age is 28, instead of hiring more expensive Americans over age 49. Even the industry-dominated high-tech work force Committee of the National Research Council concedes that employers often prefer younger programmers, but the ex-programmers forced into other fields do not count in such data. Yet US citizens and permanent residents do not get priority over the imports. Employers who favor aliens have an arsenal of legal means to reject all US workers who apply.


Internationals may be paid less than American workers, they may be reduced to indentured servants and involuntary servitude, but I don't hear them complain as much as you do! I mean, they are grateful they even have a job! Do you know how many students do not even get an offer because of their international student status?

I know a Turkish student, for instance, who finished his graduate studies chemical engineering in New York after graduating from one of the most prestigious universities in Turkey. At the end he started working for a company in Long Island he did not want to. He says that when you go to an interview, the first question they ask is "Do you have a Green Card?" The second question is "Will you be needing a sponsor in the future?" If you don't have a green card and you need a sponsor, they never even get back to you.
Title: Re:
Post by: packetlaw on April 12, 2007, 10:36:01 PM

Internationals may be paid less than American workers, they may be reduced to indentured servants and involuntary servitude, but I don't hear them complain as much as you do! I mean, they are grateful they even have a job! Do you know how many students do not even get an offer because of their international student status?

I know a Turkish student, for instance, who finished his graduate studies chemical engineering in New York after graduating from one of the most prestigious universities in Turkey. At the end he started working for a company in Long Island he did not want to. He says that when you go to an interview, the first question they ask is "Do you have a Green Card?" The second question is "Will you be needing a sponsor in the future?" If you don't have a green card and you need a sponsor, they never even get back to you.


stripmeta, you are a sick m o t h e r @ # ! * e r!!! Just like American schools and employers that enslave people!

@ # ! * you female dog!
Title: Re: Read the thread closer!
Post by: inertia on April 13, 2007, 12:40:00 AM

[...] I had a friend of mine in the same situation and he was compelled to stay illegally in the country for years before he adjusted status to permanent resident after his relative petition became current and he could actually file for AOS (adjustment of status). He couldn't go back to his native country as he was already illegally in the US for close to a year and he would trigger the 10-year reentry bar had he gone back to his country and process the green card from there.


If the relative petition for perm residency was such a big obstacle to get a temp student visa couldn't he have his relative withdraw that petition so that he could have his student visa application easily approved?


You obviously don't know what you're talking about! You never withdraw a green card petition (even it may take 4-5 years for it to materialize into a green card) just to get a student visa! Do you know the hell you have to go through with an F-1 visa? Most companies don't interview F-1 students because they know they have only 1 year of OPT (practical training) and they do not sponsor H1-B visas for many reasons. They are unfamiliar with the process and know that hiring an American is much easier. Other employers may fear that international students will sooner or later want to return to the home country and training costs them (upwards of $8,000) Many employers expect employees to have excellent communication skills. Even though international students can speak and write English pretty well, it is often not at the level of American employees.
 
Assuming you finally locate an employer willing to sponsor you for an H1-B, such employers are notorious about cheating and abusing foreign hires, threatening to have them deported if they protest when they are not paid full salary or benefits. Labor law violations involving workers on H1-B visas are rampant nowadays and H1-B workers don't file complaints because they fear the loss of their visa. If your employer yanks his sponsorship -- which they can do for almost any reason imaginable -- the H1-Bs often must return home and try to find another sponsor -- an arduous task. H1-Bs are essentially indentured servants. 


True, you'd still have spent years to get the green card via the difficult H1-B route, but at least you'd be working as opposed to doing nothing valuable to push forward your career when being illegally in the country waiting for the petition to become current ..
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: thesevenyearitch on April 15, 2007, 12:00:23 AM
inertia, pretty much everyone would not mind working, but you want to be compensated for what you are worth -- so that with a touch of sardonic humor it can be proved that sometimes you can earn a lot of money by just working ..
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: faceoff on April 17, 2007, 11:29:48 PM

inertia, pretty much everyone would not mind working, but you want to be compensated for what you are worth -- so that with a touch of sardonic humor it can be proved that sometimes you can earn a lot of money by just working ..


I think it was Mr. Gekko who said, \"The richest 1% of this country owns half our country\'s wealth, $5,000,000,000,000. One third of that comes from hard work, two thirds comes from inheritance, interest on interest accumulating to widows and idiot sons and what I do, stock and real estate speculation. It\'s bull. You got 90% of the American public out there with little or no net worth. I create nothing. I ownn,\" wasn\'t he?
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: norepi on April 24, 2007, 12:19:04 AM

I think it was Mr. Gekko who said, "The richest 1% of this country owns half our country's wealth, $5,000,000,000,000. One third of that comes from hard work, two thirds comes from inheritance, interest on interest accumulating to widows and idiot sons and what I do, stock and real estate speculation. It's bull. You got 90% of the American public out there with little or no net worth. I create nothing. I own," wasn't he?


Who's Mr. Gekko?
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: cheaperbythe12 on April 24, 2007, 01:53:12 AM
(http://www.mtsu.edu/~sigchi/gordon.jpg)

Gordon Gekko is a fictional character from the popular 1987 movie "Wall Street." Gekko was played by Michael Douglas, in a performance that was to win him an Oscar for Best Actor. In the film, naďve stock broker Bud Fox, played by Charlie Sheen, comes to work for the ultra-aggressive, power-hungry Gekko. Gekko is based loosely on arbitrageur Ivan Boesky who gave a speech on greed at the University of California in 1986, and real-life activist investor/corporate raider Carl Icahn. In 2002 Gordon Gekko was named one of the Fifteen Richest Fictional Characters according to Forbes who attributed him with 650 million dollars. In 2003, the AFI named him number 24 of the top 50 movie villains of all time.

"Greed is good" speech

Gekko's famous "Greed is good" speech was, to many, an excellent representation of the state of investment banking in the late 1980s. Gekko has since become a symbol of 1980s corporate greed. While the producers of the movie "Wall Street" hopefully intended to portray this character as a villain, ironically enough, thanks to this movie, Gordon Gekko became a source of inspiration for countless number of investment bankers around the world. It has often been suggested that Wall Street turned out to be a most effective recruitment tool for the investment banking industry. In addition, Gekko's diatribe against corporate mismanagement is just as relevant in the 21st century as in the 1980s. Gekko made the argument against well-entrenched corporate managers, saying they were taking advantage of shareholders. He contrasted the role of early American business leaders like the Carnegies and Mellons who only managed businesses in which they had significant investments with that of well paid company senior executives who owned very little of a company's stock, and hence had little stake in the company's performance.

He asserted to shareholders at a company meeting:

Quote
"You own the company. That's right -- you, the stockholder. And you are all being royally screwed over by these, these bureaucrats, with their luncheons, their hunting and fishing trips, their corporate jets and golden parachutes ... Teldar Paper has thirty-three different vice presidents, each earning over 200,000 dollars a year. Now, I have spent the last 2 months analyzing what all these guys do, and I still can't figure it out. One thing I do know is that our paper company lost $110,000,000 last year, and I'll bet that half of that was spent in all the paperwork going back and forth between all these vice presidents."

He declared that as an asset stripper he was "not a destroyer of companies" but a "liberator of them." And most famously in the film, he asserted:

Quote
"The point is, ladies and gentleman, that 'greed' -- for lack of a better word -- is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms -- greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge -- has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed -- you mark my words -- will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA."

Gekko's clothing selections were both a nod to 1980s corporate culture fashion trends and an innovator in those trends. The colorful suspenders, shiny shoulder-padded suits and permanently slicked-back hair became the official look of power and fortune. His wardrobe was provided by Alan Flusser.
Title: Representative quotes
Post by: cheaperbythe12 on April 24, 2007, 01:55:42 AM
Quote
"It's all about the bucks kid, the rest is conversation."


Quote
"And if you need a friend, get a dog."
 

Quote
"And I'm not talking about some four-hundred thousand dollar a year, working Wall Street stiff, flying first-class, being comfortable, I'm talking about liquid. Rich enough to buy your own jet, rich enough not to waste time. Fifty, a hundred-million dollars Buddy, a player."
 

Quote
"That's the thing about wasps, they love animals, can't stand people."
 

Quote
"We make the rules, pal. The news, war, peace, famine, upheaval, the price of a paper clip. We pick that rabbit out of a hat while everybody sits around wondering how the hell we did it. Now you're not naďve enough to think that we're living in a democracy, are you, Buddy? It's the free market, and you're part of it."
Title: Re: Read the thread closer!
Post by: allbusiness on April 26, 2007, 11:42:06 PM

[...]

Most companies don't interview F-1 students because they know they have only 1 year of OPT (practical training) and they do not sponsor H1-B visas for many reasons. They are unfamiliar with the process and know that hiring an American is much easier. Other employers may fear that international students will sooner or later want to return to the home country and training costs them (upwards of $8,000) Many employers expect employees to have excellent communication skills. Even though international students can speak and write English pretty well, it is often not at the level of American employees.


As I understand it, top programs certify their international students for their CitiAssist Loan Program. These schools have set this up with the Student Loan Corporation (a subsidiary of Citibank) for quite a long time with Citibank granting preferred lender status to students of top schools. All such students are guaranteed loans approval, without a co-signer and regardless of nationality.

Now it is also a well-known fact that only 50% of international students arrange for H-1B visas to work in the US. Half of them are compelled to go back to their home countries. What happens to the student loans they took out in the US? Just curious, you know ..
Title: Congressional probe of student loans widens
Post by: per click on April 30, 2007, 07:33:01 PM

Now it is also a well-known fact that only 50% of international students arrange for H-1B visas to work in the US. Half of them are compelled to go back to their home countries. What happens to the student loans they took out in the US? Just curious, you know ..



Fri Apr 27, 2007 4:52AM EDT
By Kevin Drawbaugh

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Congressional investigators probing the $85 billion student loan market pushed into new areas on Thursday by raising concerns about collection tactics and seeking an inquiry into possible conflicts of interest inside the U.S. Education Department. Edward Kennedy, chairman of the Senate education committee, wrote to the heads of two major student loan firms expressing concerns about allegedly abusive loan collection tactics.

"I am concerned that several private lenders may be engaging in harsh and inappropriate tactics with regard to borrowers whose payments are overdue ... tactics that are prohibited by federal law and regulations," Kennedy wrote in a letter to Tim Fitzpatrick, chief executive officer of Sallie Mae, the nation's largest student lender. Senate investigators have obtained information indicating lenders may have told a borrower's spouse that the borrower would go to jail if he did not pay, which is "a blatantly false assertion," said Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat. Investigators are also looking into whether lenders have refused to negotiate with borrowers on payment deferment, called borrowers on the job after being told to stop, harassed borrowers' neighbors, family and co-workers and used profane language to intimidate borrowers.

Kennedy asked Fitzpatrick to provide information about Sallie Mae's collection practices under the federally guaranteed student loan system. Sallie Mae spokesman Tom Joyce said, "It is a shame that Senator Kennedy's staff is continuing to investigate through press releases ... The media received this letter before we did." He said Sallie Mae is proud of helping college graduates avoid loan defaults and keep healthy credit ratings through its debt counseling efforts. He said the company will cooperate with Kennedy's request for information.

EDUCATION DEPARTMENT INQUIRY

Also known as SLM Corp., Sallie Mae has been swept up in an expanding inquiry by state and congressional officials, which has led to allegations of misconduct and conflicts of interest across the student loan industry. Kennedy also wrote a letter highlighting his concerns about collection practices to Michael Dunlap, chief executive of Nelnet Inc., another student loan group. Separately, the chairman of the House of Representatives education committee on Thursday asked for an internal inquiry at the Education Department into possible conflicts of interest among department employees, lenders and others.

California Democrat George Miller made his request in a letter to department Inspector General John Higgins. Kennedy asked Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings on Wednesday to hand over to his office the personnel files and financial disclosure reports for 27 Education Department employees, including Chief of Staff James Manning. Earlier this month, a manager in the department's financial aid office was put on leave pending a review of his ownership of stock in Education Lending Group Inc., former parent of Student Loan Xpress, now a unit of CIT Group Inc..

Along with Kennedy and Miller, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo has been leading a campaign to shake up the student loan business. Testifying before Miller's committee on Wednesday, Cuomo said criminal charges may result from his inquiry into ties between banks that lend money to college students and individual university financial aid officers. Investigators have said some college aid officers took payments and perks from lenders in exchange for placing the companies on "preferred lender" lists shown to students. As the inquiry has progressed, major lenders -- including Citigroup, Sallie Mae, JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America -- have agreed to a code of conduct recommended by Cuomo that bans school-lender financial ties, "preferred lender" list payments and lender gifts to college employees.
Title: Re: Congressional probe of student loans widens
Post by: rudelaw on May 02, 2007, 10:11:47 PM

Now it is also a well-known fact that only 50% of international students arrange for H-1B visas to work in the US. Half of them are compelled to go back to their home countries. What happens to the student loans they took out in the US? Just curious, you know ..


Senate investigators have obtained information indicating lenders may have told a borrower's spouse that the borrower would go to jail if he did not pay, which is "a blatantly false assertion," said Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat. Investigators are also looking into whether lenders have refused to negotiate with borrowers on payment deferment, called borrowers on the job after being told to stop, harassed borrowers' neighbors, family and co-workers and used profane language to intimidate borrowers.

Title: Re: Congressional probe of student loans widens
Post by: k k on May 03, 2007, 09:43:32 PM


Senate investigators have obtained information indicating lenders may have told a borrower's spouse that the borrower would go to jail if he did not pay, which is "a blatantly false assertion," said Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat. Investigators are also looking into whether lenders have refused to negotiate with borrowers on payment deferment, called borrowers on the job after being told to stop, harassed borrowers' neighbors, family and co-workers and used profane language to intimidate borrowers.


I like best the "profane language" part! ;)
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: Troy on July 08, 2007, 09:01:46 PM

Find some lousy woman, they usually do it for around $5K. Most marriage fraud involves one transaction: A US citizen accepts a one-time payment to actually marry the foreigner. Usually they sponsor the immigrant, go through with a wedding, and live as roommates, or at least set-up a joint home and accounts that make them appear to live together. It is these cases which are the hardest to uncover, since doing so would require a great deal of private investigation and manpower.


Be careful, however! My neighbor is being deported back to his native Check Republic because during his AOS procedure they discovered he had entered the country on a fake B-2 visa. They were reviewing all the visa applications made in Prague between 1999 and 2002 at the time when Alexander Meerovich served as a consular officer (eventually he pled guilty to visa fraud). He acknowledges that he sold at least 85 fraudulent visas over a two year period while serving as deputy consul general at the US Embassy. This neighbor tells he paid a Check citizen working in the Embassy some $10,000 to get the visa. Looks like they were all in the game, the consular officer himself included.
Title: Re: Read the thread closer!
Post by: height on July 09, 2007, 04:45:41 PM

As I understand it, top programs certify their international students for their CitiAssist Loan Program. These schools have set this up with the Student Loan Corporation (a subsidiary of Citibank) for quite a long time with Citibank granting preferred lender status to students of top schools. All such students are guaranteed loans approval, without a co-signer and regardless of nationality.

Now it is also a well-known fact that only 50% of international students arrange for H-1B visas to work in the US. Half of them are compelled to go back to their home countries. What happens to the student loans they took out in the US? Just curious, you know ..


;)
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: rhombot on July 09, 2007, 04:50:21 PM
tageroo.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: r a m s e y on July 09, 2007, 09:24:34 PM

inertia, pretty much everyone would not mind working, but you want to be compensated for what you are worth -- so that with a touch of sardonic humor it can be proved that sometimes you can earn a lot of money by just working ..


??
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: ActiveXControl on July 10, 2007, 04:04:41 PM

Be careful, however! My neighbor is being deported back to his native Check Republic because during his AOS procedure they discovered he had entered the country on a fake B-2 visa. They were reviewing all the visa applications made in Prague between 1999 and 2002 at the time when Alexander Meerovich served as a consular officer (eventually he pled guilty to visa fraud). He acknowledges that he sold at least 85 fraudulent visas over a two year period while serving as deputy consul general at the US Embassy. This neighbor tells he paid a Check citizen working in the Embassy some $10,000 to get the visa. Looks like they were all in the game, the consular officer himself included.


Nothing surprising! The State Department actually CLOSED the US consulate in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico some years back for similar reasons. It investigated allegations that the consulate illegally sold visas to a number of people. It was the 6th busiest US consulate in the world, issuing 117,000 visas. According to Mexican police, they heard rumors that Mexican citizens were being approached by consulate employees with offers to sell visas. They passed the information on to the US government. The most of the documents sold were either tourist visas or border crossing cards. The names of those who bought visas were entered into lookout lists and distributed to law enforcement agencies.

Miguel Partida, a visa officer and a US citizen, was charged with conspiracy to commit visa fraud while working at the consulate. Three Mexicans were charged in the case as well. The defendants were Sergio Genaro Ochoa-Alarcon 31, Benjamin Antonio Ayala-Morales, 34 and Ramon Alberto Torres-Galvin, 34. The men worked as visa clerks at the US consulate. All in custody.

According to the indictment against Partida, agents of the Diplomatic Security Service initiated an investigation the previous year into allegations that Consulate employees were involved in a scheme to provide visas and border crossing cards in exchange for money. Visas were apparently bought for around $1,500 without the required interviews and without a determination that the person was qualified for a visa. The US consulate in Nuevo Laredo issued 100,000 visas, but federal authorities have refused to state how many visas were sold in the alleged scheme. Authorities did say, however, that they believed the scheme was directed by a woman in Mexico named Margarita Martinez Ramirez.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: aon on July 12, 2007, 12:59:00 AM
It's not just consulates on foreign soil that do this kind of thing. Some time ago an official of the Miami USCIS (INS as was called back then) and a paralegal matchmaker are were charged in a scheme to help hundreds of illegal aliens gain green cards through sham marriages. Jose Luis Cintron and his partner in the scheme allegedly charged $5,000 to $10,000 to each immigrant. Cintron would conduct the green card interview and apply a loose standard to ensure the application was successful. Cintron and Rico's activities were discovered when investigators used a police informant who posed as a potential customer. Rico allegedly provided false bills and other evidence to show a couple was living together. The informant then met his "sham" wife and Cintron at the house of Rico. The informant paid the spouse $3,000, $3,000 to Cintron and $4,000 to Rico.

INS agents raided Cintron's home as well as the home office of paralegal Guillermo Rico and recovered more than $200,000 in cash and checks. He earned $50,000 a year in his job. Cintron was arrested and released on a $150,000 bond. According to prosecutors, he had been involved in at least 500 cases since 1999 and the INS reviewed every single case he worked on to see which were legitimate and which were not..

So how did they find out about this incredible scheme? Last summer, according to "The Herald," investigators used a confidential Miami-Dade police informant who approached Rico about setting up a sham marriage and obtaining the legal residency through Cintron. Rico took care of the fabrication of fake papers including utility bills, lease arrangements, etc. Cintron got $3K, the spouse got $3K, and $4K went to Mr. Rico. For $10K, permanent residency in the United States. According to the complaint, two other "cooperating" sources cut similar deals with Mr. Rico. Good immigration attorneys can pretty much always find ways to do things legally, and I bet almost all of these folks could have found a willing employer to do a skilled worker EB-3 labor certification for them. For $5K, Kim and Lorenzo could process that labor certification and continue their invisible existence in Miami as illegal aliens until 245(i) happened, as their cases slowly cooked on the back burner. And odds were excellent that some incarnation of a 245(i) extension would happen allowing a remedy for their overstay.
Title: Czech Republic
Post by: so basically on July 15, 2007, 04:37:00 AM

[...] My neighbor is being deported back to his native Check Republic because during his AOS procedure they discovered he had entered the country on a fake B-2 visa. They were reviewing all the visa applications made in Prague between 1999 and 2002 at the time when Alexander Meerovich served as a consular officer (eventually he pled guilty to visa fraud). He acknowledges that he sold at least 85 fraudulent visas over a two year period while serving as deputy consul general at the US Embassy. This neighbor tells he paid a Check citizen working in the Embassy some $10,000 to get the visa. Looks like they were all in the game, the consular officer himself included.


So you pursued the "easy way out" when spelling the Republic's name, huh?
Title: Re: Read the thread closer!
Post by: horus on July 17, 2007, 05:43:43 PM

As I understand it, top programs certify their international students for their CitiAssist Loan Program. These schools have set this up with the Student Loan Corporation (a subsidiary of Citibank) for quite a long time with Citibank granting preferred lender status to students of top schools. All such students are guaranteed loans approval, without a co-signer and regardless of nationality.

Now it is also a well-known fact that only 50% of international students arrange for H-1B visas to work in the US. Half of them are compelled to go back to their home countries. What happens to the student loans they took out in the US? Just curious, you know ..


Chase is also very generous with int'l students.
Title: No big deal!
Post by: theblackemma on July 24, 2007, 03:38:53 PM

Be careful, however! My neighbor is being deported back to his native Check Republic because during his AOS procedure they discovered he had entered the country on a fake B-2 visa. They were reviewing all the visa applications made in Prague between 1999 and 2002 at the time when Alexander Meerovich served as a consular officer (eventually he pled guilty to visa fraud). He acknowledges that he sold at least 85 fraudulent visas over a two year period while serving as deputy consul general at the US Embassy. This neighbor tells he paid a Check citizen working in the Embassy some $10,000 to get the visa. Looks like they were all in the game, the consular officer himself included.


Arnold Schwarzenegger faced heat over his immigration records and work history during his campaign to become the next Governor of California. Schwarzenegger entered the US in 1968 on a B-1 visa, which allows a select group of visitors, such as training athletes, to come into the United States for brief periods of business. Under this rule, "a non-immigrant in B-1 status may not receive a salary from a U.S. source for services rendered in connection with his or her activities in the United States." However, the rules do allow immigrants to receive "actual reasonable expenses," such as money for food and hotel rooms. In his 1977 autobiography, Schwarzenegger stated that he worked out an agreement with Joe Weider to come to America. Under this agreement, Schwarzenegger provided Weider information about how he trained, while Weider provided Schwarzenegger with an apartment, a car, and payment of a weekly salary.

Weider stated that the weekly salary was $200. A spokesman for Schwarzenegger said that he was only paid $65 per week. At the end of last week, Weider stated that he could not remember the details of the business deal. After questioning about half-dozen immigration attorneys on whether this payment would have been allowable, the Mercury News reported that his visa would likely have been barred under these circumstances. However, some attorneys noted the more rigorous application procedures that are now present for the immigration process. In the 1960s, the procedures were much more lax than they are now.

Schwarzenegger attorney Tom Hiltachk said Schwarzenegger received an H-2 visa, which allowed him to work in this country, in November 1969 -- after more than a year in the United States. He became a permanent resident in 1974 and a citizen in 1983. In addition, Schwarzenegger's new ad campaign on a Spanish-language radio station announced his humble beginnings in America as a bricklayer. Several immigration attorneys also believe that he violated the terms of his H-2 work visa by launching this bricklaying business in 1971. According to further reports by the Mercury News, immigration attorneys across the country said Schwarzenegger would have been barred by visa restrictions from starting his own business. Moreover, there is no record that Schwarzenegger and the Italian bodybuilder that he paired up with ever received a required state contractor's license. In addition, following this latest immigration issue, Hiltachk said it is unclear what type of visa Schwarzenegger had when he started the bricklaying business. But whether Schwarzenegger had an H-2 or another temporary visa, immigration attorneys said, the bodybuilder would have been barred from doing any work as a bricklayer or handyman.

"If they come into the United States to pick tomatoes, they can't go out and work at McDonald's," said Nancy Alby, an assistant center director at the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Naturalization Services, who spoke in general about H-2 visas and did not comment specifically on Schwarzenegger's case. "They have to do exactly what they were let into the United States to do." The immigration issue fires up a debate over Schwarzenegger's support for Proposition 187, a 1994 ballot measure that sought to keep illegal immigrants from receiving some state educational and social services. He also vows to fight a new law that allows illegal immigrants to get driver's licenses. Schwarzenegger has said that immigrants must follow the rules like he did.

The federal government and the Bureau of Immigration and Citizenship Services declined to discuss Schwarzenegger's immigration file or release his full file. Only a one-page article was released to the Mercury News when they requested the information.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: NewHere on July 25, 2007, 03:10:51 AM
Quote
If you got a PhD (along with a JD perhaps) it would actually be much easier for you to stay here, PhD's don't count against the H-1B (skilled worker visa) quota and they are much easier to hire for companies, then you could get a green card after a few years.

I'm curious. What does this mean? I'm a foreign student too, starting a JD program this fall, but I have a PhD. Will this somehow magically make it easier to obtain a work visa a few years down the road?
Title: ONLY IN AMERICA!!!
Post by: K a r i on August 10, 2007, 02:37:17 AM

"If they come into the United States to pick tomatoes, they can't go out and work at McDonald's," said Nancy Alby, an assistant center director at the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Naturalization Services, who spoke in general about H-2 visas and did not comment specifically on Schwarzenegger's case. "They have to do exactly what they were let into the United States to do." The immigration issue fires up a debate over Schwarzenegger's support for Proposition 187, a 1994 ballot measure that sought to keep illegal immigrants from receiving some state educational and social services. He also vows to fight a new law that allows illegal immigrants to get driver's licenses. Schwarzenegger has said that immigrants must follow the rules like he did.


Schwarzenegger is a complete a s s h o l e that could became governor only in America! ONLY IN AMERICA!
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: sladkaya on August 10, 2007, 08:16:00 AM
Quote
If you got a PhD (along with a JD perhaps) it would actually be much easier for you to stay here, PhD's don't count against the H-1B (skilled worker visa) quota and they are much easier to hire for companies, then you could get a green card after a few years.

I'm curious. What does this mean? I'm a foreign student too, starting a JD program this fall, but I have a PhD. Will this somehow magically make it easier to obtain a work visa a few years down the road?

I believe that a J.D. is considered to be the same level as a Ph.D. for immigration visa purposes.  But it is not exempt from H-1 quota.  Master's and Ph.D. degree holders (who received their degree from a US institution) have an additional 20,000 per year H-1B quota.  While that makes your chances to get an H-1B better, I believe the quota was exhausted in two weeks this time, but at least it's not a lottery like regular H-1B quota.

The previous poster is probably thinking of the H-1B quota exemption for non-profit employees.  That is, if you go to work for the government or a non-profit research institution after you graduate with your J.D., you can apply for an H-1B immediately and have nearly 100% of getting it (assuming your paperwork is in order).

Either way, once you graduate, you'll have a year of practical training, which is plenty of time for your firm to get all documents in order and have them ready to file on the first day H-1 applications are accepted (currently it's April 1 of each year).


If I confused you more than I helped, go to immigrationportal.com and search for H-1 visa info - it's a pretty good resource.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: NewHere on August 10, 2007, 04:17:28 PM
Thank you, sladkaya. That was perfectly clear.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: probe on April 27, 2011, 11:16:51 AM

[...]

It is more likely than not that you will not be granted the student visa [...]

[...]

All in all, you can give the student visa a try (you've nothing to lose) but unfortunately the CIS does not really care you may have been accepted by a recognized school.


Actually, for the sake of truth, it was more likely than not that s/he WOULD be granted the student visa...

The CIS does care you are accepted by a school, be it a brand-name one or not.

The fact that all the tuition money would have gone by the time the student visa app would be adjudicated is a strong indicator for the immigration that you are not just filing to be in legal status (although that is a possibility, it is more likely than not that the visa will be granted, as I said).
Title: Re: .....
Post by: füle on April 29, 2011, 01:34:23 PM
Some really good advice, are you a lawyer, probe?
Title: Re: ONLY IN AMERICA!!!
Post by: mini 6 on May 10, 2011, 12:54:15 PM

"If they come into the United States to pick tomatoes, they can't go out and work at McDonald's," said Nancy Alby, an assistant center director at the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Naturalization Services, who spoke in general about H-2 visas and did not comment specifically on Schwarzenegger's case. "They have to do exactly what they were let into the United States to do." The immigration issue fires up a debate over Schwarzenegger's support for Proposition 187, a 1994 ballot measure that sought to keep illegal immigrants from receiving some state educational and social services. He also vows to fight a new law that allows illegal immigrants to get driver's licenses. Schwarzenegger has said that immigrants must follow the rules like he did.


Schwarzenegger is a complete a s s h o l e that could became governor only in America! ONLY IN AMERICA!

Amen, Kari!
Title: Re: .....
Post by: R Deutch on December 27, 2011, 12:45:46 AM

Some really good advice, are you a lawyer, probe?


What difference does it make, füle, whether s/he's a lawyer or not, as long as is giving good advice?!
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: Lovdie on December 28, 2011, 08:44:01 PM

Be careful, however! My neighbor is being deported back to his native Check Republic because during his AOS procedure they discovered he had entered the country on a fake B-2 visa. They were reviewing all the visa applications made in Prague between 1999 and 2002 at the time when Alexander Meerovich served as a consular officer (eventually he pled guilty to visa fraud). He acknowledges that he sold at least 85 fraudulent visas over a two year period while serving as deputy consul general at the US Embassy. This neighbor tells he paid a Check citizen working in the Embassy some $10,000 to get the visa. Looks like they were all in the game, the consular officer himself included.


Nothing surprising! The State Department actually CLOSED the US consulate in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico some years back for similar reasons. It investigated allegations that the consulate illegally sold visas to a number of people. It was the 6th busiest US consulate in the world, issuing 117,000 visas. According to Mexican police, they heard rumors that Mexican citizens were being approached by consulate employees with offers to sell visas. They passed the information on to the US government. The most of the documents sold were either tourist visas or border crossing cards. The names of those who bought visas were entered into lookout lists and distributed to law enforcement agencies.

Miguel Partida, a visa officer and a US citizen, was charged with conspiracy to commit visa fraud while working at the consulate. Three Mexicans were charged in the case as well. The defendants were Sergio Genaro Ochoa-Alarcon 31, Benjamin Antonio Ayala-Morales, 34 and Ramon Alberto Torres-Galvin, 34. The men worked as visa clerks at the US consulate. All in custody.

According to the indictment against Partida, agents of the Diplomatic Security Service initiated an investigation the previous year into allegations that Consulate employees were involved in a scheme to provide visas and border crossing cards in exchange for money. Visas were apparently bought for around $1,500 without the required interviews and without a determination that the person was qualified for a visa. The US consulate in Nuevo Laredo issued 100,000 visas, but federal authorities have refused to state how many visas were sold in the alleged scheme. Authorities did say, however, that they believed the scheme was directed by a woman in Mexico named Margarita Martinez Ramirez.


They say the Tijuana consulate is notorious when it comes to this stuff!
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: say it dont pay it on January 01, 2012, 11:41:28 PM

Be careful, however! My neighbor is being deported back to his native Check Republic because during his AOS procedure they discovered he had entered the country on a fake B-2 visa. They were reviewing all the visa applications made in Prague between 1999 and 2002 at the time when Alexander Meerovich served as a consular officer (eventually he pled guilty to visa fraud). He acknowledges that he sold at least 85 fraudulent visas over a two year period while serving as deputy consul general at the US Embassy. This neighbor tells he paid a Check citizen working in the Embassy some $10,000 to get the visa. Looks like they were all in the game, the consular officer himself included.


Nothing surprising! The State Department actually CLOSED the US consulate in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico some years back for similar reasons. It investigated allegations that the consulate illegally sold visas to a number of people. It was the 6th busiest US consulate in the world, issuing 117,000 visas. According to Mexican police, they heard rumors that Mexican citizens were being approached by consulate employees with offers to sell visas. They passed the information on to the US government. The most of the documents sold were either tourist visas or border crossing cards. The names of those who bought visas were entered into lookout lists and distributed to law enforcement agencies.

Miguel Partida, a visa officer and a US citizen, was charged with conspiracy to commit visa fraud while working at the consulate. Three Mexicans were charged in the case as well. The defendants were Sergio Genaro Ochoa-Alarcon 31, Benjamin Antonio Ayala-Morales, 34 and Ramon Alberto Torres-Galvin, 34. The men worked as visa clerks at the US consulate. All in custody.

According to the indictment against Partida, agents of the Diplomatic Security Service initiated an investigation the previous year into allegations that Consulate employees were involved in a scheme to provide visas and border crossing cards in exchange for money. Visas were apparently bought for around $1,500 without the required interviews and without a determination that the person was qualified for a visa. The US consulate in Nuevo Laredo issued 100,000 visas, but federal authorities have refused to state how many visas were sold in the alleged scheme. Authorities did say, however, that they believed the scheme was directed by a woman in Mexico named Margarita Martinez Ramirez.


They say the Tijuana consulate is notorious when it comes to this stuff!


Some months ago a Russian couple (young professionals who could have had some kind of future in their own country) moved in the apartment building I live in with my family. They are very open people who do not hesitate to tell one some pretty fine details of their life - so there you have it: they told us they came from Russia on temporary tourist visas that they bought $10,000 a piece from the US Consulate people in their country. They sold their house for some $30,000 and used that money to buy two tourist visas and pay for their travel expenses to the US.

Now I understand that the US is considered to be by many people around the world as the place where their dreams will come true and where they will be able to better themselves (in all meanings of the term). But is that really the case? My question is, how do these people decide to go ahead and sell their house to buy a tourist visa to enter this country - and go underground for years working menial jobs, hoping they will be able to "make it"?! (I have heard it may well take some 5, or even 10 years, for illegal immigrants to get permanent residency (green card) - how much are they supposed to pay for it, I'd guess there is another fee to pay to get it, isn't it?) I mean, you have here a lot of American folks who are having a hard time keeping their houses, having to go thru foreclosures - are you trying to tell me these new immigrants are going to have a better life here, although it may take some 10-15 years?!

Even if they do, it's just not worth the trouble to go that route, taken into account the enormous amount of time to adjust to the new culture and establish themselves economically. To me, it's simply incomprehensible that one would pay $10,000 to buy a visa to enter the country, only to subject oneself to a calvary of pain and suffering to make ends meet for years and years on end!
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: Question or Answer on January 02, 2012, 08:56:04 PM

I have been admitted by a great program -- the thing is that I need a student visa and I was told I may face difficulties to get it given the fact that a family member of mine has already filed a petition to get me a green card (immigration considers it proof of intent to remain in the U.S.) Do I go back to my native country to apply for the student visa as per the standard procedure, or do I apply for the visa from within the U.S., no matter what? Also, will it make a difference that I have been accepted at a well-known, brand name school?


From outside or inside the US you're gonna have a hard time getting a student visa because of the petition your relative has filed on your behalf. The standard of review is the same in both cases (consular processing or CIS processing), the only difference is that if you apply from within the US you can stay here even if your student visa application gets denied.

It is more likely than not that you will not be granted the student visa, I had a friend of mine in the same situation and he was compelled to stay illegally in the country for years before he adjusted status to permanent resident after his relative petition became current and he could actually file for AOS (adjustment of status). He couldn't go back to his native country as he was already illegally in the US for close to a year and he would trigger the 10-year reentry bar had he gone back to his country and process the green card from there.

All in all, you can give the student visa a try (you've nothing to lose) but unfortunately the CIS does not really care you may have been accepted by a recognized school.


If you have an immigrant petition already filed on your behalf, you should apply for an H1-B (work) visa which is considered dual-intent by the immigration, as opposed to an F-1 (student) visa which is a temporary non-immigrant visa.
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: surepiro on January 08, 2012, 06:38:58 PM

From outside or inside the US you're gonna have a hard time getting a student visa because of the petition your relative has filed on your behalf. The standard of review is the same in both cases (consular processing or CIS processing), the only difference is that if you apply from within the US you can stay here even if your student visa application gets denied.

It is more likely than not that you will not be granted the student visa, I had a friend of mine in the same situation and he was compelled to stay illegally in the country for years before he adjusted status to permanent resident after his relative petition became current and he could actually file for AOS (adjustment of status). He couldn't go back to his native country as he was already illegally in the US for close to a year and he would trigger the 10-year reentry bar had he gone back to his country and process the green card from there.

All in all, you can give the student visa a try (you've nothing to lose) but unfortunately the CIS does not really care you may have been accepted by a recognized school.


If you have an immigrant petition already filed on your behalf, you should apply for an H1-B (work) visa which is considered dual-intent by the immigration, as opposed to an F-1 (student) visa which is a temporary non-immigrant visa.


I've worked for a while as leg assistant for a couple of immigration attys. Here it is my take on this: to get an H1-B visa, one has to be in legal immigration status - that is to say, not be in the US illegally (without any status at all). That said, one would also to take into account that, while it may seem a good idea to switch to H1-B visa status (in which one can be for up to 7 years) until time to adjust status based on the relative immigrant petition comes, getting the actual H1-B visa stamp to reenter the country may be tricky.

Let's assume one is here on a B-2 visa status (the B-2 tourist visa is the most popular visa used to enter the US to visit and tour) and finds an employer willing to file an H1-B petition on his/her behalf. Foreign citizens in the U.S. under the B-2 visa are expected to be in the country only for a short, temporary visit - with the foreign citizen having made statements to the consular officer regarding the recreational purposes of the trip and its temporary duration. When one seeks a change of the visa status after entering the U.S. while being on a B-2 visa, the application filed with the Immigration Service for the change of status to H-1B may be approved - the problem, however, can rear its head when the foreign citizen goes abroad and seeks a new H-1B visa stamp in his passport.

At that time, a consular officer may examine the previous B-2 visa stamp. He may note that the foreign national now has H-1B status and then assume that person, when applying for the B-2 visa, intended all along that s/he would change his status. The officer may assume that the foreign national never intended to return home at the end of the B-2 duration and pretend that the applicant acted fraudulently, and finally decide to deny the application for an H-1B visa stamp leaving our H-1B guy/gal stranded overseas. 

To avoid this, it is important that when one plans to work or study in the US, s/he should not use the B-2 tourist visa as an initial way to enter the U.S. Rather, it is much less risky to apply for an H-1B at the outset, prior to entering the US.
Title: Re: .....
Post by: surepiro on January 08, 2012, 07:08:13 PM
That does not mean, of course, that there's no other way to handle the matter. The H1-B visa is usually the first option given to foreign citizens since it is relatively easy to get. However, the foreign citizen may decide to go for the green card option right from the beginning, bypassing the H1-B process. This is done via the Labor Certification petition filed on behalf of the immigrant by his/her employer.

Until the grandfathering 245(i) section expired, one did not even have to be in legal immigration status (that is to say, s/he could be in the country even illegally) when filing the actual Adjustment of Status (green card) application with the Immigration Service, as long as the labor certification application was filed on or before Jan 14, 1998. Furthermore, the "alien-based" reading of the section provided that the pre-January 15th filing allowed the foreign citizen to use 245(i) as the vehicle for adjustment, with the basis for the adjustment having been obtained through a different filing, such as a family-based, labor certification petition or a DV (diversity visa) lottery application, submitted and approved AFTER January 14, 1998. The foreign citizen paid an additional $1,000 penalty fee to the Immigration under this section.

It takes several years for a regular labor certification application (EB-3) to mature into an actual green card. Your attorneys, though, should be able to handle the matter expeditiously by looking into other categories such as EB-2, for instance, which do not necessarily require a Labor Certification to be filed beforehand. Applicants may apply for an exemption, known as a National Interest Waiver. Professionals holding an advanced degree (beyond a baccalaureate degree), or a baccalaureate degree and at least 5 years experience in the profession fall in the first subgroup. The other subgroup is for persons with "exceptional ability" in the sciences, arts, or business, with the "exceptional ability" standard set not that high, as one would tend to think at first.
Title: Re: .....
Post by: Incitatus on January 22, 2012, 06:11:12 PM
Wow - some great posts related to immigration matters here. My husband and I came to the U.S. on immigrant visas after hubby won the D-V (Diversity Lottery) several years ago. I was not legally married to my husband (had not yet gotten a marriage license) by the time he got the notice he was assigned a visa lottery. Neither did we legally married when he sent the first response to the (NVC) National Visa Center shortly after. We only got legally married in August of that year, 4 months after he listed me as her spouse on the NVC forms. The reason why I did not legally marry to my husband from the very beginning (since I began to live with my-hubby-to-be, in August) and my mother left for the States (September), was that I was counting on my parents who went to the US to get me too there, after my permanent resident mother (she won a D-V Lottery the year before) would have hopefully arranged something for me; although all she's able to do, in actuality, was just petitioning on my behalf in January of next year - she filed the I-130 with INS, immigrant relative petition for an unmarried child 21+

That petition would take years to mature into an actual green card, but we all were optimistic nevertheless; and there you have it - in April, my husband gets that notification letter from the NVC letting him know he had won the D-V lottery. From that point on, we were concerned that the Consular officer would accuse my husband during the interview for misrepresentation because of my hubby having claimed me arbitrarily as his wife on the NVC forms (initially in February when originally applied for, and then again in May) - given the fact that we only got the marriage license 4 months after he made the statements on the NVC forms (August). We remained anxious 'til the day of the interview, April of next year, but the Consular Officer was surprisingly over-friendly towards us, with him granting us the immigrant visas and without enquiring at all as to our marriage timing.

Truth-be-told, we were anxious also because we could not disclose to the Consular officer that the two of us had lived in a neighboring country for some time - my mother-in-law paid a friend of hers for us to be issued two brand-new passports, so that we did not have to show at all the neighboring country's entering visas we had gotten during the years on our old passports. We had been on and off illegally in that country, so we could not get clearances from that country's police for the time period we lived there. This is something that almost all the people who win the American green card lottery do - it's not smth we did to hide some kind of "major crime" committed or anything like that. We were hearing that those people who admitted to the Consulate that they had been in other countries, besides their home country, were required to submit police clearances from those neighboring countries' authorities, something difficult and time-consuming, since we had also been there illegally - the way such a thing is handled in our native country is to simply pay the municipal employees for a new passport (easily accomplished and for not too much money) and then appear with the new passport before the Consular officer.

We also arranged for (fake) Employment Verification Letters where it was stated by (fake) employers that we had been employed in our home country (having had, thus, lived there all the time), so that it would appear that we had not been outside our home country at any time (to put it differently, we covered gaps in our employment history). These latter two are done regularly by almost all people who win the lottery in our country, and the consulate people themselves know deep down themselves that such things happen all too often.

Now, this piece of neighbor * & ^ % keeps telling me what we've done is considered "fraud." I mean, come on, a lot of water has flown under the bridge, not to mention the fact that we have by now 2 children born in this country (US citizens). Do you think we might be having problems were someone to reopen the case and note these "minor inconsistencies"?
Title: Re: "Material" Misrepresentations & Immigration Fraud
Post by: Any questions? on January 22, 2012, 09:27:57 PM

Wow - some great posts related to immigration matters here. My husband and I came to the U.S. on immigrant visas after hubby won the D-V (Diversity Lottery) several years ago. I was not legally married to my husband (had not yet gotten a marriage license) by the time he got the notice he was assigned a visa lottery. Neither did we legally married when he sent the first response to the (NVC) National Visa Center shortly after. We only got legally married in August of that year, 4 months after he listed me as her spouse on the NVC forms. The reason why I did not legally marry to my husband from the very beginning (since I began to live with my-hubby-to-be, in August) and my mother left for the States (September), was that I was counting on my parents who went to the US to get me too there, after my permanent resident mother (she won a D-V Lottery the year before) would have hopefully arranged something for me; although all she's able to do, in actuality, was just petitioning on my behalf in January of next year - she filed the I-130 with INS, immigrant relative petition for an unmarried child 21+


Excuse me - just to make sure I'm getting this right - why did ya have to find a man (the-hubby-to-be) after your parents immigrated to the States?! Why couldn't you stay single and wait that way for the time to come to join your parents?! I would have to go ahead and assume you're from some kind of Muslim country where women are expected to have "their man"! Are you guys afraid there men will harass, rape and kill you, were you to walk alone in the streets?! Hell, you even say you found him in August, just one month before your parents would leave for the US - pardon my French, but wouldn't one be justified to go on a hunch and say that your people arranged for you to engage 'a nobody', somebody very likely beyond your level, just because time dictated that?!

But then again - it's just doesn't add up - from what I know, in these countries, where women are considered to be their man's property, living temporarily with a man as husband and wife is frowned upon and is considered unacceptable. You are flat out saying that that was basically your plan - were your parents to have arranged in some type or form for you to go to the US, you would stop living with him right away to join your parents in the States. Unless you were some kind of SuperGirl who didn't much care about notions and taboos, you'd still be faced with your own country's people who more likely than not would not see your previous arrangement sympathetically. In fact, that's what your hubby might have counted on - that you would not, in actuality, leave him, reason why he tolerated at first when agreeing not to enter into a marriage contract (in the hope, that with the passing of time, he'd get there - the important thing was that he got you in hand, getting a much better deal than he could have ever dreamed of). As for America, little did he care, although he'd eventually get that as well, sooner or later, via you.

I'm kinda perplexed as to what kind of "arrangement" this was, with this "hubby-to-be," as you call him. You are saying it yourself that the petition that your mother filed on your behalf would take years to materialize into a green card - would you continue on the concubinage path with your boyfriend/husband/whatever you choose to call him? Would you have any children with him? I would assume No, since your wait time to immigrate to the US would be even longer. So all these sacrifices (because they are considered to be "sacrifices" in those countries) just to be able to come to the US - and then, when immigrants actually arrive here, they figure it out how wrong they were to have made all those insane decisions, back in their native countries where/when they thought America was the "land of milk and honey"!

Was all that worth it?! Spending years with a man beyond your level, compromising your real marital (and probably) professional life, all these in the name of a dream (America)? Or even worse, ending up with that very man, just like it turned out, when that Cheetah was handed a stupid lottery?!
Title: Re: "Material" Misrepresentations & Immigration Fraud
Post by: Any questions? on January 22, 2012, 09:29:05 PM

That petition would take years to mature into an actual green card, but we all were optimistic nevertheless; and there you have it - in April, my husband gets that notification letter from the NVC letting him know he had won the D-V lottery. From that point on, we were concerned that the Consular officer would accuse my husband during the interview for misrepresentation because of my hubby having claimed me arbitrarily as his wife on the NVC forms (initially in February when originally applied for, and then again in May) - given the fact that we only got the marriage license 4 months after he made the statements on the NVC forms (August). We remained anxious 'til the day of the interview, April of next year, but the Consular Officer was surprisingly over-friendly towards us, with him granting us the immigrant visas and without inquiring at all as to our marriage timing.


Now on to legal staff - Yes, you have made misrepresentations amounting to immigration fraud, if that's what you really wanna know. There's no doubt at all that the officer (Consular officer) was aware of the fact that your marriage began legally after your husband claimed you as his wife on the NVC Forms.

However, by law, not all misrepresentations result in a person's automatic ineligibility for a visa. In order for an alien to be ineligible for a visa based on fraud or misrepresentation, the following elements must exist:

1. There has been a misrepresentation made by the applicant.
2. The representation was willfully made.
3. The alien uses fraud to receive a benefit under the Immigration Act (i.e. visa, entry into the U.S., labor certification, adjustment of status, etc.).
4. The fact misrepresented is material. If the misrepresentation is not "material," the person may still be eligible for a visa.


Truth-be-told, we were anxious also because we could not disclose to the Consular officer that the two of us had lived in a neighboring country for some time - my mother-in-law paid a friend of hers for us to be issued two brand-new passports, so that we did not have to show at all the neighboring country's entering visas we had gotten during the years on our old passports. We had been on and off illegally in that country, so we could not get clearances from that country's police for the time period we lived there. This is something that almost all the people who win the American green card lottery do - it's not smth we did to hide some kind of "major crime" committed or anything like that. We were hearing that those people who admitted to the Consulate that they had been in other countries, besides their home country, were required to submit police clearances from those neighboring countries' authorities, something difficult and time-consuming, since we had also been there illegally - the way such a thing is handled in our native country is to simply pay the municipal employees for a new passport (easily accomplished and for not too much money) and then appear with the new passport before the Consular officer.

We also arranged for (fake) Employment Verification Letters where it was stated by (fake) employers that we had been employed in our home country (having had, thus, lived there all the time), so that it would appear that we had not been outside our home country at any time (to put it differently, we covered gaps in our employment history). These latter two are done regularly by almost all people who win the lottery in our country, and the consulate people themselves know deep down themselves that such things happen all too often.


In determining whether or not a person made a "material" misrepresentation, the following rules apply:

a) The misrepresentation must be a positive or affirmative statement or act made by the alien. "Silence or the failure to volunteer information does not in itself constitute a misrepresentation"
b) The alien's misrepresentation must have been before a U.S. government official (i.e. a U.S. Consular Officer or an INS Officer). Misrepresentations made to officials of other countries' governments may not constitute "misrepresentation" for purposes of finding a person ineligible for a U.S. visa.
c) If a person made a misrepresentation, but timely retracted that misrepresentation, then a "timely retraction will serve to purge a misrepresentation and remove it from further consideration as a ground for...ineligibility."
d) Only misrepresentations of material facts constitute grounds for ineligibility of a visa.
e) 'In order for a misrepresentation to be considered "material," the truth of the matter (or alien's circumstances) must lead to a proper finding of ineligibility for a visa. However, if the truth would still support a finding that the alien is eligible for a visa, then the misrepresented fact is not material.

The Immigration starts deportation proceedings against thousands of aliens who entered the United States through misrepresentation or fraud. Examples of such misrepresentation include the use of false passports, visas or even the failure to disclose marital status or children. Discovery by the INS of an alien's misrepresentation usually happens at the alien's "green card" interview. When discovered, the INS officer will inform the alien of the availability of an I-601 waiver (pardon) for this particular violation of immigration law.


Now, this piece of neighbor * & ^ % keeps telling me what we've done is considered "fraud." I mean, come on, a lot of water has flown under the bridge, not to mention the fact that we have by now 2 children born in this country (US citizens). Do you think we might be having problems were someone to reopen the case and note these "minor inconsistencies"?

Title: Re: "Material" Misrepresentations & Immigration Fraud
Post by: I n c i t a t u s on January 22, 2012, 11:51:24 PM

Wow - some great posts related to immigration matters here. My husband and I came to the U.S. on immigrant visas after hubby won the D-V (Diversity Lottery) several years ago. I was not legally married to my husband (had not yet gotten a marriage license) by the time he got the notice he was assigned a visa lottery. Neither did we legally married when he sent the first response to the (NVC) National Visa Center shortly after. We only got legally married in August of that year, 4 months after he listed me as her spouse on the NVC forms. The reason why I did not legally marry to my husband from the very beginning (since I began to live with my-hubby-to-be, in August) and my mother left for the States (September), was that I was counting on my parents who went to the US to get me too there, after my permanent resident mother (she won a D-V Lottery the year before) would have hopefully arranged something for me; although all she's able to do, in actuality, was just petitioning on my behalf in January of next year - she filed the I-130 with INS, immigrant relative petition for an unmarried child 21+


Excuse me - just to make sure I'm getting this right - why did ya have to find a man (the-hubby-to-be) after your parents immigrated to the States?! Why couldn't you stay single and wait that way for the time to come to join your parents?! I would have to go ahead and assume you're from some kind of Muslim country where women are expected to have "their man"! Are you guys afraid there men will harass, rape and kill you, were you to walk alone in the streets?! Hell, you even say you found him in August, just one month before your parents would leave for the US - pardon my French, but wouldn't one be justified to go on a hunch and say that your people arranged for you to engage 'a nobody', somebody very likely beyond your level, just because time dictated that?!

But then again - it's just doesn't add up - from what I know, in these countries, where women are considered to be their man's property, living temporarily with a man as husband and wife is frowned upon and is considered unacceptable. You are flat out saying that that was basically your plan - were your parents to have arranged in some type or form for you to go to the US, you would stop living with him right away to join your parents in the States. Unless you were some kind of SuperGirl who didn't much care about notions and taboos, you'd still be faced with your own country's people who more likely than not would not see your previous arrangement sympathetically. In fact, that's what your hubby might have counted on - that you would not, in actuality, leave him, reason why he tolerated at first when agreeing not to enter into a marriage contract (in the hope, that with the passing of time, he'd get there - the important thing was that he got you in hand, getting a much better deal than he could have ever dreamed of). As for America, little did he care, although he'd eventually get that as well, sooner or later, via you.

I'm kinda perplexed as to what kind of "arrangement" this was, with this "hubby-to-be," as you call him. You are saying it yourself that the petition that your mother filed on your behalf would take years to materialize into a green card - would you continue on the concubinage path with your boyfriend/husband/whatever you choose to call him? Would you have any children with him? I would assume No, since your wait time to immigrate to the US would be even longer. So all these sacrifices (because they are considered to be "sacrifices" in those countries) just to be able to come to the US - and then, when immigrants actually arrive here, they figure it out how wrong they were to have made all those insane decisions, back in their native countries where/when they thought America was the "land of milk and honey"!

Was all that worth it?! Spending years with a man beyond your level, compromising your real marital (and probably) professional life, all these in the name of a dream (America)? Or even worse, ending up with that very man, just like it turned out, when that Cheetah was handed a stupid lottery?!


"Any questions" - listen to me, you b i t c h - you are stupid if you think I only cared to come to the U'S ... I did not mention in my first post that I came to the U'S along with my hubby on B-2 visas a couple of months before we were supposed to go for the green card interviews (that actually changed later, as the b i t c h e s postponed the interviews' dates). We stayed 40 days in the U'S at my parents' apartment. It was when an immigration attorney told us that we would  probably not be able to process the lottery visa from within the U'S, that we left the U'S and went back to our native country to have the lottery visa interview.

Now, if my only intention was to get to this country (U'S), would I have left and go back to my native country together with my husband?! There was no guarantee whatsoever that we'd get the immigrant visas from there (we had those stupid issues that you know) and the B-2 visas we used to enter the U'S were single-entry - so we could not get back to the U'S. And yet, we decided to go back to our native country, no matter what the results of the @ # ! * i n g green card interview would be.

Because we did not want to remain illegally in the U'S like b i t c h e s, after our visitor visas would have expired. We said, we're better off in our native country, being full-right citizens, rather than illegally in the U'S.

I am sorry but your guessing wrong, I loved and I love my husband - I was not left by my parents in his "protective custody," until my visa number would have become current, as you say. We did not much care whether we'd get the lottery visas to reenter this country one more time, or not - were it not like that, we would have not chosen to go back to our native country and process the green card lottery from there. There was probably enough time for our lottery to be processed from within the U'S (although there were slight chances we couldn't process it from here and we had to go back to our native country - but even if we'd not get the m u t h a @ # ! * i g green card because of staying here and not going back, we'd still be here in the U'S, albeit illegally). And yet, we went back - and, of course, not because this immigration attorney held a knife to our necks threatening to cut our throats open were we to decide contrary to what he advised us to do!

So, would you please give some credit where credit's due, Any Questions?!
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: GiuGiaku on January 23, 2012, 06:53:20 PM

Some months ago a Russian couple (young professionals who could have had some kind of future in their own country) moved in the apartment building I live in with my family. They are very open people who do not hesitate to tell one some pretty fine details of their life - so there you have it: they told us they came from Russia on temporary tourist visas that they bought $10,000 a piece from the US Consulate people in their country. They sold their house for some $30,000 and used that money to buy two tourist visas and pay for their travel expenses to the US.

Now I understand that the US is considered to be by many people around the world as the place where their dreams will come true and where they will be able to better themselves (in all meanings of the term). But is that really the case? My question is, how do these people decide to go ahead and sell their house to buy a tourist visa to enter this country - and go underground for years working menial jobs, hoping they will be able to "make it"?! (I have heard it may well take some 5, or even 10 years, for illegal immigrants to get permanent residency (green card) - how much are they supposed to pay for it, I'd guess there is another fee to pay to get it, isn't it?) I mean, you have here a lot of American folks who are having a hard time keeping their houses, having to go thru foreclosures - are you trying to tell me these new immigrants are going to have a better life here, although it may take some 10-15 years?!

Even if they do, it's just not worth the trouble to go that route, taken into account the enormous amount of time to adjust to the new culture and establish themselves economically. To me, it's simply incomprehensible that one would pay $10,000 to buy a visa to enter the country, only to subject oneself to a calvary of pain and suffering to make ends meet for years and years on end!


Exactly - Coming to this country in such a manner only makes sense for blue-collar guys who have no real opportunities in their own native countries.

But for white-collar professionals, especially if they're in their 40s or 50s, it just doesn't make sense to immigrate at all (be it legally or illegally).
Title: Re: .....
Post by: GiuGiaku on January 23, 2012, 11:09:00 PM

[...]

Now, if my only intention was to get to this country (U'S), would I have left and go back to my native country together with my husband?! There was no guarantee whatsoever that we'd get the immigrant visas from there (we had those stupid issues that you know) and the B-2 visas we used to enter the U'S were single-entry - so we could not get back to the U'S. And yet, we decided to go back to our native country, no matter what the results of the @ # ! * i n g green card interview would be.

Because we did not want to remain illegally in the U'S like b i t c h e s, after our visitor visas would have expired. We said, we're better off in our native country, being full-right citizens, rather than illegally in the U'S.

[...] There was probably enough time for our lottery to be processed from within the U'S (although there were slight chances we couldn't process it from here and we had to go back to our native country - but even if we'd not get the m u t h a @ # ! * i n g green card because of staying here and not going back, we'd still be here in the U'S, albeit illegally). And yet, we went back - and, of course, not because this immigration attorney held a knife to our necks threatening to cut our throats open were we to decide contrary to what he advised us to do!


Incitatus - don't you worry about the b i t c h e s!

By going back to your country - regardless of the fact that you might not be able to come back here again (given the issues with the lottery application) - you made a statement that you did not much @ # ! * i n g care about America!

Too bad for some others who sell their a s s e s just to get a visa like yours to enter this country to be @ # ! * e d the * & ^ % out of!
Title: Re: .....
Post by: breach of contract on January 27, 2012, 05:30:22 PM

[...] why did ya have to find a man (the-hubby-to-be) after your parents immigrated to the States?! Why couldn't you stay single and wait that way for the time to come to join your parents?! I would have to go ahead and assume you're from some kind of Muslim country where women are expected to have "their man"! Are you guys afraid there men will harass, rape and kill you, were you to walk alone in the streets?! Hell, you even say you found him in August, just one month before your parents would leave for the US - pardon my French, but wouldn't one be justified to go on a hunch and say that your people arranged for you to engage 'a nobody', somebody very likely beyond your level, just because time dictated that?!


Any Questions, have you ever been in any of these countries? Gaza Strip, let's say, places where there is no real government and people take the law in their hands? You assume it's everywhere like here in the US, where no one dares to even look at you, let alone to harass you sexually and the like. I wouldn't suspect that her people were on to something, just because the woman married her husband in a rush, so to speak, so that she would not be alone in her country after her parents would immigrate here. Try to be a little bit less judgmental and try to account for the vast cultural differences between people!
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: applewasp on February 05, 2012, 11:46:12 AM

Be careful, however! My neighbor is being deported back to his native Check Republic because during his AOS procedure they discovered he had entered the country on a fake B-2 visa. They were reviewing all the visa applications made in Prague between 1999 and 2002 at the time when Alexander Meerovich served as a consular officer (eventually he pled guilty to visa fraud). He acknowledges that he sold at least 85 fraudulent visas over a two year period while serving as deputy consul general at the US Embassy. This neighbor tells he paid a Check citizen working in the Embassy some $10,000 to get the visa. Looks like they were all in the game, the consular officer himself included.


Nothing surprising! The State Department actually CLOSED the US consulate in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico some years back for similar reasons. It investigated allegations that the consulate illegally sold visas to a number of people. It was the 6th busiest US consulate in the world, issuing 117,000 visas. According to Mexican police, they heard rumors that Mexican citizens were being approached by consulate employees with offers to sell visas. They passed the information on to the US government. The most of the documents sold were either tourist visas or border crossing cards. The names of those who bought visas were entered into lookout lists and distributed to law enforcement agencies.

Miguel Partida, a visa officer and a US citizen, was charged with conspiracy to commit visa fraud while working at the consulate. Three Mexicans were charged in the case as well. The defendants were Sergio Genaro Ochoa-Alarcon 31, Benjamin Antonio Ayala-Morales, 34 and Ramon Alberto Torres-Galvin, 34. The men worked as visa clerks at the US consulate. All in custody.

According to the indictment against Partida, agents of the Diplomatic Security Service initiated an investigation the previous year into allegations that Consulate employees were involved in a scheme to provide visas and border crossing cards in exchange for money. Visas were apparently bought for around $1,500 without the required interviews and without a determination that the person was qualified for a visa. The US consulate in Nuevo Laredo issued 100,000 visas, but federal authorities have refused to state how many visas were sold in the alleged scheme. Authorities did say, however, that they believed the scheme was directed by a woman in Mexico named Margarita Martinez Ramirez.


They say the Tijuana consulate is notorious when it comes to this stuff!


Actually all Mexican consulates are rumored to be like this!
Title: Re: .....
Post by: penda on February 06, 2012, 12:02:42 PM

[...]

That petition would take years to mature into an actual green card, but we all were optimistic nevertheless; and there you have it - in April, my husband gets that notification letter from the NVC letting him know he had won the D-V lottery. From that point on, we were concerned that the Consular officer would accuse my husband during the interview for misrepresentation because of my hubby having claimed me arbitrarily as his wife on the NVC forms (initially in February when originally applied for, and then again in May) - given the fact that we only got the marriage license 4 months after he made the statements on the NVC forms (August). We remained anxious 'til the day of the interview, April of next year, but the Consular Officer was surprisingly over-friendly towards us, with him granting us the immigrant visas and without inquiring at all as to our marriage timing.

Truth-be-told, we were anxious also because we could not disclose to the Consular officer that the two of us had lived in a neighboring country for some time - my mother-in-law paid a friend of hers for us to be issued two brand-new passports, so that we did not have to show at all the neighboring country's entering visas we had gotten during the years on our old passports. We had been on and off illegally in that country, so we could not get clearances from that country's police for the time period we lived there. This is something that almost all the people who win the American green card lottery do - it's not smth we did to hide some kind of "major crime" committed or anything like that.

We were hearing that those people who admitted to the Consulate that they had been in other countries, besides their home country, were required to submit police clearances from those neighboring countries' authorities, something difficult and time-consuming, since we had also been there illegally - the way such a thing is handled in our native country is to simply pay the municipal employees for a new passport (easily accomplished and for not too much money) and then appear with the new passport before the Consular officer.

We also arranged for (fake) Employment Verification Letters where it was stated by (fake) employers that we had been employed in our home country (having had, thus, lived there all the time), so that it would appear that we had not been outside our home country at any time (to put it differently, we covered gaps in our employment history). These latter two are done regularly by almost all people who win the lottery in our country, and the consulate people themselves know deep down themselves that such things happen all too often.


Incitatus, what you mention in regard to your issue with the lottery application: It was my understanding that the DV "lottery" is as much "lottery" as apple is an orange. The people are selected for specific (political, ethnic, racial, and religious) reasons, and the state dept. is aware that most other cultures and countries have other values of certain moral issues. Little "white" lies are not significant enough to guarantee such a drastic punishment such as, say, "deportation."

Here it is a post on how people from foreign countries have not too much of a problem submitting, say, a birth certificate which is a bit altered.


I find the latter part hard to believe! Presenting a fake birth certificate to the SSA people to obtain a legit SSN?! Do you know what penalties are in place for doing that?! Would you have the balls to actually go some place and ask for that?!

We've sure have heard about people from foreign countries (Mexico, being the obvious example) having an easy time submitting altered birth certificates (not totally fake, they just might have needed to change, e.g., their birth year, so that they'd fall within a certain age-limit in order to qualify for a particular benefit). In these cultures that's something quite 'doable', so to speak, with legal repercussions in case of detection being minuscule.

But not in the States!

Title: Re: .....
Post by: sed cena on February 07, 2012, 01:38:04 PM
Don't be stupid Incitatus - if there have been years and years by now, you're probably okay. I mean, who's gonna look up such a thing at this point in time, when the actual physical files have been destroyed?
Title: Re: .....
Post by: K a r e n on February 24, 2012, 11:40:18 AM

[...]

That petition would take years to mature into an actual green card, but we all were optimistic nevertheless; and there you have it - in April, my husband gets that notification letter from the NVC letting him know he had won the D-V lottery. From that point on, we were concerned that the Consular officer would accuse my husband during the interview for misrepresentation because of my hubby having claimed me arbitrarily as his wife on the NVC forms (initially in February when originally applied for, and then again in May) - given the fact that we only got the marriage license 4 months after he made the statements on the NVC forms (August). We remained anxious 'til the day of the interview, April of next year, but the Consular Officer was surprisingly over-friendly towards us, with him granting us the immigrant visas and without inquiring at all as to our marriage timing.

Truth-be-told, we were anxious also because we could not disclose to the Consular officer that the two of us had lived in a neighboring country for some time - my mother-in-law paid a friend of hers for us to be issued two brand-new passports, so that we did not have to show at all the neighboring country's entering visas we had gotten during the years on our old passports. We had been on and off illegally in that country, so we could not get clearances from that country's police for the time period we lived there. This is something that almost all the people who win the American green card lottery do - it's not smth we did to hide some kind of "major crime" committed or anything like that.

We were hearing that those people who admitted to the Consulate that they had been in other countries, besides their home country, were required to submit police clearances from those neighboring countries' authorities, something difficult and time-consuming, since we had also been there illegally - the way such a thing is handled in our native country is to simply pay the municipal employees for a new passport (easily accomplished and for not too much money) and then appear with the new passport before the Consular officer.

We also arranged for (fake) Employment Verification Letters where it was stated by (fake) employers that we had been employed in our home country (having had, thus, lived there all the time), so that it would appear that we had not been outside our home country at any time (to put it differently, we covered gaps in our employment history). These latter two are done regularly by almost all people who win the lottery in our country, and the consulate people themselves know deep down themselves that such things happen all too often.


Incitatus, what you mention in regard to your issue with the lottery application: It was my understanding that the DV "lottery" is as much "lottery" as apple is an orange. The people are selected for specific (political, ethnic, racial, and religious) reasons, and the state dept. is aware that most other cultures and countries have other values of certain moral issues. Little "white" lies are not significant enough to guarantee such a drastic punishment such as, say, "deportation."


You have done quite a few things, no doubt about it, but I'd like to let you know that,

There's a waiver, the Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility, is used by applicants for immigrant visas, non-immigrant fiancé visas, V visas, and adjustment of status to request a waiver of the following grounds of inadmissibility in the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) - should the ICE move ahead and try to deport the aliens:

Title: Re: .....
Post by: Flatbush on February 26, 2012, 02:07:13 PM

Nothing surprising! The State Department actually CLOSED the US consulate in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico some years back for similar reasons. It investigated allegations that the consulate illegally sold visas to a number of people. It was the 6th busiest US consulate in the world, issuing 117,000 visas. According to Mexican police, they heard rumors that Mexican citizens were being approached by consulate employees with offers to sell visas. They passed the information on to the US government. The most of the documents sold were either tourist visas or border crossing cards. The names of those who bought visas were entered into lookout lists and distributed to law enforcement agencies.

Miguel Partida, a visa officer and a US citizen, was charged with conspiracy to commit visa fraud while working at the consulate. Three Mexicans were charged in the case as well. The defendants were Sergio Genaro Ochoa-Alarcon 31, Benjamin Antonio Ayala-Morales, 34 and Ramon Alberto Torres-Galvin, 34. The men worked as visa clerks at the US consulate. All in custody.

According to the indictment against Partida, agents of the Diplomatic Security Service initiated an investigation the previous year into allegations that Consulate employees were involved in a scheme to provide visas and border crossing cards in exchange for money. Visas were apparently bought for around $1,500 without the required interviews and without a determination that the person was qualified for a visa. The US consulate in Nuevo Laredo issued 100,000 visas, but federal authorities have refused to state how many visas were sold in the alleged scheme. Authorities did say, however, that they believed the scheme was directed by a woman in Mexico named Margarita Martinez Ramirez.


They say the Tijuana consulate is notorious when it comes to this stuff!


Some months ago a Russian couple (young professionals who could have had some kind of future in their own country) moved in the apartment building I live in with my family. They are very open people who do not hesitate to tell one some pretty fine details of their life - so there you have it: they told us they came from Russia on temporary tourist visas that they bought $10,000 a piece from the US Consulate people in their country. They sold their house for some $30,000 and used that money to buy two tourist visas and pay for their travel expenses to the US.

Now I understand that the US is considered to be by many people around the world as the place where their dreams will come true and where they will be able to better themselves (in all meanings of the term). But is that really the case? My question is, how do these people decide to go ahead and sell their house to buy a tourist visa to enter this country - and go underground for years working menial jobs, hoping they will be able to "make it"?! (I have heard it may well take some 5, or even 10 years, for illegal immigrants to get permanent residency (green card) - how much are they supposed to pay for it, I'd guess there is another fee to pay to get it, isn't it?) I mean, you have here a lot of American folks who are having a hard time keeping their houses, having to go thru foreclosures - are you trying to tell me these new immigrants are going to have a better life here, although it may take some 10-15 years?!

Even if they do, it's just not worth the trouble to go that route, taken into account the enormous amount of time to adjust to the new culture and establish themselves economically. To me, it's simply incomprehensible that one would pay $10,000 to buy a visa to enter the country, only to subject oneself to a calvary of pain and suffering to make ends meet for years and years on end!


I understand the visa may cost like $10K - thing is no one would go to the point of selling the house to buy visas - I mean, come on, people are not that stupid to believe they will have it good in America! They're able to distinguish between the inflated America we all see on TV and the real America they've heard from their co-nationals and the like!
Title: Re: .....
Post by: c o l o m b u s on February 29, 2012, 04:02:41 PM

[...]

That petition would take years to mature into an actual green card, but we all were optimistic nevertheless; and there you have it - in April, my husband gets that notification letter from the NVC letting him know he had won the D-V lottery. From that point on, we were concerned that the Consular officer would accuse my husband during the interview for misrepresentation because of my hubby having claimed me arbitrarily as his wife on the NVC forms (initially in February when originally applied for, and then again in May) - given the fact that we only got the marriage license 4 months after he made the statements on the NVC forms (August). We remained anxious 'til the day of the interview, April of next year, but the Consular Officer was surprisingly over-friendly towards us, with him granting us the immigrant visas and without inquiring at all as to our marriage timing.

Truth-be-told, we were anxious also because we could not disclose to the Consular officer that the two of us had lived in a neighboring country for some time - my mother-in-law paid a friend of hers for us to be issued two brand-new passports, so that we did not have to show at all the neighboring country's entering visas we had gotten during the years on our old passports. We had been on and off illegally in that country, so we could not get clearances from that country's police for the time period we lived there. This is something that almost all the people who win the American green card lottery do - it's not smth we did to hide some kind of "major crime" committed or anything like that.

We were hearing that those people who admitted to the Consulate that they had been in other countries, besides their home country, were required to submit police clearances from those neighboring countries' authorities, something difficult and time-consuming, since we had also been there illegally - the way such a thing is handled in our native country is to simply pay the municipal employees for a new passport (easily accomplished and for not too much money) and then appear with the new passport before the Consular officer.

We also arranged for (fake) Employment Verification Letters where it was stated by (fake) employers that we had been employed in our home country (having had, thus, lived there all the time), so that it would appear that we had not been outside our home country at any time (to put it differently, we covered gaps in our employment history). These latter two are done regularly by almost all people who win the lottery in our country, and the consulate people themselves know deep down themselves that such things happen all too often.


Incitatus, what you mention in regard to your issue with the lottery application: It was my understanding that the DV "lottery" is as much "lottery" as apple is an orange. The people are selected for specific (political, ethnic, racial, and religious) reasons, and the state dept. is aware that most other cultures and countries have other values of certain moral issues. Little "white" lies are not significant enough to guarantee such a drastic punishment such as, say, "deportation."


You have done quite a few things, no doubt about it, but I'd like to let you know that,

There's a waiver, the Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility, is used by applicants for immigrant visas, non-immigrant fiancé visas, V visas, and adjustment of status to request a waiver of the following grounds of inadmissibility in the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) - should ICE move ahead and try to deport the aliens:

  • Section 212(a)(1)   – health-related grounds;
  • Section 212(a)(2) – criminal and related grounds,
  • Section 212(a)(3)(D) - immigrant membership in a totalitarian party;
  • Section 212(a)(6)(C) – misrepresentation in immigration matters;
  • Section 212(a)(6)(E) - smugglers;
  • Section 212(a)(6)(F) - subject to civil penalty;
  • Section 212(a)(9)(B)   – unlawful presence in the U.S. for at least 180 days, beginning on or after April 1, 1997, followed by departure from the U.S.

I believe I-601 is for those who apply for the green thing, not for those who already have it - or may even have become USCs.
Title: Re: Momentum
Post by: Dhorothea on March 03, 2012, 03:21:12 PM

Don't be stupid Incitatus - if there have been years and years by now, you're probably okay. I mean, who's gonna look up such a thing at this point in time, when the actual physical files have been destroyed?


sed cena - one may think there's no momentum at this point in time - that the Immigration Service won't reopen the case after so many years - but Incitatus is better off taking the necessary precautions.

The waiver thing, mentioned by the last poster, for example, is worth taking notes on.
Title: Re: "Sins of the Mother"
Post by: Dhorothea on March 03, 2012, 04:27:00 PM
Quote
Quote

(http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/8159/260x195sinsofthemotherlke7.jpg)

Kevin Coe, born Frederick Harlan Coe on Feb. 2, 1947, is a convicted rapist from Spokane, Washington, often referred to in the news media as the "South Hill Rapist". He has been in custody since conviction in 1981. Starting on September 15, 2008 the State of Washington held a "civil commitment" trial before a jury wherein it argued that he should be declared a sexually violent predator and confined indefinitely; jury selection began that day, and testimony commenced September 29. As of May, 2008, he is still a suspect in dozens of rapes. His notoriety is due to much more than the fact of his statuses as a suspect and convict. The number of victims he has been suspected of having raped is unusually large; his convictions received an unusual amount of attention from appeals courts; his mother was convicted for hiring a hit man against her son's judge and prosecutor after the initial convictions; and the bizarre relationship between Coe and his mother became the subject of a nonfiction book by the widely read writer on crime, Jack Olsen. "Sins of the Mother" is the title of the movie depicting the story.

In 1981 Coe, a radio announcer by profession, gained regional renown when he was arrested as the suspect in up to 43 rapes which had been perpetrated in Spokane between 1978 and 1981. Many of the rapes involved an extreme level of physical injury to the victims, and the police suspected them to be the work of a single offender, who came to be dubbed the "South Hill rapist". It was suggested that Kevin was mad at his mother for treating him like dirt, and that he was displacing his anger towards her onto his victims, the women he raped and hurt.


Ruth was a total lunatic, overbearing, very protective of Fred - she's rightly portrayed in the movie as the tragico-comical woman she was.


My impression is Ruth just couldn't help it - that's the way she was! She's under the impression she could do whatever she wanted to, manipulate this, manipulate that, no matter who that person was! Couldn't have acted differently with Kevin too!


I have to enter here this other post, too, since the thread it pertains to has been locked down.

Exactly my impression, Any - you can just imagine what kind of unbelievable woman she was - in her mind, arranging contracts even for the judge/prosecutor to be killed was okay, because of the way they handled her son's trial!

Title: Re: Momentum
Post by: bfi on March 05, 2012, 12:31:59 PM

Don't be stupid Incitatus - if there have been years and years by now, you're probably okay. I mean, who's gonna look up such a thing at this point in time, when the actual physical files have been destroyed?


sed cena - one may think there's no momentum at this point in time - that the Immigration Service won't reopen the case after so many years - but Incitatus is better off taking the necessary precautions.

The waiver thing, mentioned by the last poster, for example, is worth taking notes on.


Not really, dhorothea - there's no momentum now that they're USCs even.

To deport them now, first the Immigration has to revoke their US Citizenships. For a naturalized citizen, US citizenship can be revoked only through a judicial action, that is, a suit filed in court. Generally, these suits are filed in a federal district court. Typically, the suit is filed in the district court where you live or reside.

The government must prove its case against you by evidence that is clear, unequivocal, convincing and doesn't leave any doubt that your citizenship should be revoked. If it's successful, your certificate of citizenship will be revoked immediately.

But that's a long (and rare) process - the US citizenship is usually revoked only in extreme cases.
Title: Re: FA v. Privacy: Chelsea Clinton
Post by: stayover on March 08, 2012, 11:40:15 AM
Quote
Quote

(http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/6683/captdf84ec60488a4f9696brm2.jpg)

(http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/1025/capt63f6673f36d94644b5cgs2.jpg)

They also hinted broadly that daughter Chelsea Clinton would be speaking Tuesday evening.


I never get the point of politicians' children addressing crowds such as DNC's - I guess they do it to introduce their children to politics early on!


A curious fact about Chelsea during the White House years of Bill Clinton was that the matter of Chelsea's privacy was debated in the press, and most media outlets concluded that she should be off-limits due to her age. But when Clinton was 13 her appearance became a matter of ridicule for some satirists and commentators, including comments by Rush Limbaugh and the comedy writers of Saturday Night Live.

In 1995, freelance writer Tom Gogola released a tape of songs purportedly recorded by Clinton which commented upon notable people and included lyrics like "let's inhale"; the tape proved to be a hoax. Gogola defended the tape, saying "None of it had to do with being mean to Chelsea. Satire is satire."


No doubt about it, penda, in the States there is a very strong culture of free debate supported and protected by the First Amendment rights.
Title: Re: Nagarjuna & Buddhist Thought
Post by: Tahiri on March 09, 2012, 03:50:40 PM
Quote
Quote
Quote

(http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/5056/h9fmkh1dxrembjz7t2x8anrgw6.jpg)

Buddha paved the way for Asia's greatest Indian philosopher, who was to be called "The Second Buddha." His name was Nagarjuna, and many modern scholars have found that his philosophy has much in common with Derrida's "deconstruction." He wrote about Emptiness, saying that anything that is Empty is devoid of self-essence. Or in Sanskrit what is called svabhava. The cup seems to exist all by itself, and not to be dependent on, or related to, anything else. But is this a drawing of a cup or of two faces? Or is it a drawing of both, or of neither? Perhaps it is just a two-dimensional series of lines! The important point is that we cannot see both the cup and faces simultaneously. Each image appears to possess svabhava or self-essence. Each image appears to be a self-sufficient, self-existent, discrete image. But they don't possess self-essence! There is an intimate, subtle relationship between the faces and the cup. One cannot exist without the other. They depend on each other.


wtf man - what does this has to do with legal reasoning - maybe I am a bit dense but i just don't see any connection


socall, I don't think the poster you're quoting is "that" serious when saying what he's saying in the first place - you can easily notice his attitude when talking about the whole thing ..


creme caramel, I'm not sure the poster was kinda joking, but I have to tell you this: Nagarjuna is famous among Buddhist thinkers and I think I saw a post drawing a parallel between his way of thinking and Greek philosophers (a tetralemma kind of thing, I believe)

Here it is:


Nagarjuna was an important Buddhist teacher and philosopher. His tetralemma is famous with its logical propositions:

X (affirmation)
non-X (negation)
X and non-X (both)
neither X nor non-X (neither)

Now, the tetralemma is a figure that features prominently in the classical logic of the Greeks. It states that with reference to any a logical proposition X, there are four possibilities

X (affirmation)
¬ X (negation)
X Λ ¬ X both (eqiv.)
¬ (X ∨ ¬ X) (neither)



Flatbush, there are definitely close parallels between existentialism and Buddhism, for instance. Steven W. Laycock, for example, has written a book "Nothingness and Emptiness: A Buddhist Engagement With the Ontology of Jean-Paul Sartre."

This sustained and distinctively Buddhist challenge to the ontology of Jean-Paul Sartre's "Being and Nothingness" resolves, that which has been called, the incoherence implicit in the Sartrean conception of nothingness by opening to a Buddhist vision of emptiness.
Title: Re: Practicing Low ...
Post by: Romina on March 10, 2012, 03:42:25 PM
Quote
Quote
Quote

Which posts, L Liberti, the ones commenting on the anal thing? These ones?

Quote
Quote
Quote

Freud himself who was to declare to Fliess in a letter dated 16 January 1898, that money did not form the object of an infantile wish which is why, as the well-known saying puts it, money proves incapable of "making one happy" as an adult. Yet, it can nevertheless give the impression of doing so, to the extent that it is capable as we know from Freudian metapsychology of functioning as the unconscious substitute and equivalent for any "object" whatsoever that is invested by the libido of the subject, be this oral, phallic or, especially, anal. [...]

On a material level, faeces represent for children their first possessions of value. Indeed, if children tend at first, roughly between the ages of 2 and 3, to take an auto-erotic pleasure in defecating (the first phase of the anal stage), they subsequently discover, around the age of 3 or 4, that they can obtain a more intense excitation by holding back their stool (the second phase of the anal stage). This is the source of the pleasure adults take in holding onto money, valuable objects or, yet again, time (as shown by the character-traits of avarice and parsimony, as well as the pleasure of hoarding or saving), in accordance with the equation of money and excrement. [...]

[...] In the most extreme case, according to the psycho-analytical argument that is often put forward, an overly active or precocious repression of the child's psychosexual development during the anal stage -- especially at the moment of toilet training -- can lead to the development, in later life, of a veritable obsessional (or, as it was sometimes called, anal) neurosis. Since the pathbreaking work of Oskar Pfister on the psychical structure of classical capitalism and the financial mind, an entire current of thought (Reich, Fromm, etc.) has endeavored to locate within the capitalist system the indices of a collective obsessional neurotic syndrome. Just as the child is under the illusion of the omnipotence of his or her excrements, so the capitalist would tend to believe that his or her money gives him or her the power -- and, above all, the right -- to do whatever he or she so desires.



So basically,

money = * & ^ %
capitalism = anal



Wow - it's unbelievable how much you learn on these boards!


For the sake of truth, there's more to the story, appropriate! When anality becomes a perversion in an individual it can result in a danger to that individual, and as a cultural phenomenon, to humanity. There is a clearly defined link between the anal-sadistic phase of sexuality and cruelty. An "instinct of cruelty" appears in Freud's "Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality," stating that there is an intimate connection between cruelty and the sexual instinct; whether active or passive, it also stems from the drive for mastery. Like mastery, cruelty involves the use of the object simply as a means of satisfaction. Sadism involves a pleasure derived from the object's suffering. The deriving of sexual gratification from inflicting pain or emotional abuse on others.

After the introduction of the death drive in 1920, the drive for cruelty gave way to the "destructive drive," understood as an external deflection of the death drive and described as aggressive when directed at objects. If it is taken up by the ego, the ego itself becomes cruel or sadistic. The ego then risks not only losing the object's love but also being subjected to the reprimands of the Superego. This agency, which equates with moral conscience, can demonstrate an extreme cruelty, according to the need for aggression aroused by present/past frustrations. Rebellious by nature towards what is nevertheless the necessary process of civilization, the human being is always able to display a "cruel aggressiveness" if circumstances allow it.

Contempt, indifference towards the object, cruelty, as well as false emblems of masculinity, faceless bureaucracy, violence, torture, the jackboot and the whip. Freud described the psychosexual development of the child, how he progresses from the anal-sadistic phase to the phallic (genital) one, at the end of which the Oedipus complex finds resolution. It is the smashing/destruction, a developmental arrest at the anal-sadistic phase, as opposed to resolution of the Oedipus complex, that characterizes Western culture.



Funny that you mention the "homo-economicus to homo-sexualis" thing


So basically sexual repression is effectuated for economic purposes?



No doubt about it, two feasts, sexual repression comes into play because of the economic factor.


I don't know where the words I put here went ... did the mouse 8  'em? :) ... so what I was sayin' was that the $ thing sure factors in the equation, but it's not that simple, when you look it from a broad er perspective - I mean, you have these Superego things and the like that the quoted posts mention - you can try to look into it a little bit deeper, if that's your thing
Title: Re: Misrepresentations and Immigration Fraud
Post by: garçon on March 11, 2012, 07:00:06 PM

Wow - some great posts related to immigration matters here. My husband and I came to the U.S. on immigrant visas after hubby won the D-V (Diversity Lottery) several years ago. I was not legally married to my husband (had not yet gotten a marriage license) by the time he got the notice he was assigned a visa lottery. Neither did we legally married when he sent the first response to the (NVC) National Visa Center shortly after. We only got legally married in August of that year, 4 months after he listed me as her spouse on the NVC forms. The reason why I did not legally marry to my husband from the very beginning (since I began to live with my-hubby-to-be, in August) and my mother left for the States (September), was that I was counting on my parents who went to the US to get me too there, after my permanent resident mother (she won a D-V Lottery the year before) would have hopefully arranged something for me; although all she's able to do, in actuality, was just petitioning on my behalf in January of next year - she filed the I-130 with INS, immigrant relative petition for an unmarried child 21+


Excuse me - just to make sure I'm getting this right - why did ya have to find a man (the-hubby-to-be) after your parents immigrated to the States?! Why couldn't you stay single and wait that way for the time to come to join your parents?! I would have to go ahead and assume you're from some kind of Muslim country where women are expected to have "their man"! Are you guys afraid there men will harass, rape and kill you, were you to walk alone in the streets?! Hell, you even say you found him in August, just one month before your parents would leave for the US - pardon my French, but wouldn't one be justified to go on a hunch and say that your people arranged for you to engage 'a nobody', somebody very likely beyond your level, just because time dictated that?!

But then again - it's just doesn't add up - from what I know, in these countries, where women are considered to be their man's property, living temporarily with a man as husband and wife is frowned upon and is considered unacceptable. You are flat out saying that that was basically your plan - were your parents to have arranged in some type or form for you to go to the US, you would stop living with him right away to join your parents in the States. Unless you were some kind of SuperGirl who didn't much care about notions and taboos, you'd still be faced with your own country's people who more likely than not would not see your previous arrangement sympathetically. In fact, that's what your hubby might have counted on - that you would not, in actuality, leave him, reason why he tolerated at first when agreeing not to enter into a marriage contract (in the hope, that with the passing of time, he'd get there - the important thing was that he got you in hand, getting a much better deal than he could have ever dreamed of). As for America, little did he care, although he'd eventually get that as well, sooner or later, via you.

I'm kinda perplexed as to what kind of "arrangement" this was, with this "hubby-to-be," as you call him. You are saying it yourself that the petition that your mother filed on your behalf would take years to materialize into a green card - would you continue on the concubinage path with your boyfriend/husband/whatever you choose to call him? Would you have any children with him? I would assume No, since your wait time to immigrate to the US would be even longer. So all these sacrifices (because they are considered to be "sacrifices" in those countries) just to be able to come to the US - and then, when immigrants actually arrive here, they figure it out how wrong they were to have made all those insane decisions, back in their native countries where/when they thought America was the "land of milk and honey"!

Was all that worth it?! Spending years with a man beyond your level, compromising your real marital (and probably) professional life, all these in the name of a dream (America)? Or even worse, ending up with that very man, just like it turned out, when that Cheetah was handed a stupid lottery?!


"Any questions" - listen to me, you b i t c h - you are stupid if you think I only cared to come to the U'S ... I did not mention in my first post that I came to the U'S along with my hubby on B-2 visas a couple of months before we were supposed to go for the green card interviews (that actually changed later, as the b i t c h e s postponed the interviews' dates). We stayed 40 days in the U'S at my parents' apartment. It was when an immigration attorney told us that we would  probably not be able to process the lottery visa from within the U'S, that we left the U'S and went back to our native country to have the lottery visa interview.

Now, if my only intention was to get to this country (U'S), would I have left and go back to my native country together with my husband?! There was no guarantee whatsoever that we'd get the immigrant visas from there (we had those stupid issues that you know) and the B-2 visas we used to enter the U'S were single-entry - so we could not get back to the U'S. And yet, we decided to go back to our native country, no matter what the results of the @ # ! * i n g green card interview would be.

Because we did not want to remain illegally in the U'S like b i t c h e s, after our visitor visas would have expired. We said, we're better off in our native country, being full-right citizens, rather than illegally in the U'S.

I am sorry but your guessing wrong, I loved and I love my husband - I was not left by my parents in his "protective custody," until my visa number would have become current, as you say. We did not much care whether we'd get the lottery visas to reenter this country one more time, or not - were it not like that, we would have not chosen to go back to our native country and process the green card lottery from there. There was probably enough time for our lottery to be processed from within the U'S (although there were slight chances we couldn't process it from here and we had to go back to our native country - but even if we'd not get the m u t h a @ # ! * i g green card because of staying here and not going back, we'd still be here in the U'S, albeit illegally). And yet, we went back - and, of course, not because this immigration attorney held a knife to our necks threatening to cut our throats open were we to decide contrary to what he advised us to do!

So, would you please give some credit where credit's due, Any Questions?!


This woman is unbelievable - I counted four or five times where she's committed fraud and she won't stop calling other people evil - Incitatus, would you please take a look in the mirror?!

And then, come here to tell us how unfair people are, and what b i t c h e s people who tell you the truth are!

A lil' bit of self-reflection wouldn't hurt at all!

It's never too late .. or is it?!
Title: Re: .....
Post by: Merci on March 12, 2012, 01:06:15 PM
True, such a long time has gone - I just do not get why Incitatus would be so preoccupied in the first place to come here and post her story!

Wouldn't have gone thru the pains of hearing people talking * & ^ % about her, as they deem appropriate to!

Looks like to me this is a self-created problem - and the more you talk about it, the worse it becomes.

Unless she already has an open case!
Title: Re: .....
Post by: l i n o l e u m on March 13, 2012, 04:33:05 PM

But she also sees a life beyond the global horizon, saying, "I think that I am a pretty normal, average person, despite all of the hype. And I am very interested in spending time with my friends and my family and not being on the merry-go-round all the time."

That brings up an issue no woman wants to hear from friends, Clinton notes with a chuckle. "My friends call and email saying, 'Oh, my gosh, I saw you on television. You looked so tired.' Which I send back saying, 'Gee, thanks a lot.' But I know, because if you work around the clock like we do, that's just inevitable. So I do try to take some time, long weekends, take some deep breathing. I do exercise, yoga, those kinds of things. But no, I'm never tired about the work. It's just the physical challenge."

"I was just walking through the mall here and had some young women come up and shout at me and tell me how much they appreciated me. And I think for young women and not so young women, there is a connection. They know that I've spent a lot of time working on women's issues and they care about what I'm doing and what it might mean for them."


No doubt she could have chosen to not take the job up - that it was her own decision to become SOS for the Obama administration.

I tend to think she wanted to make some kind of statement in politics as a woman, before it was too late. She could not become the first woman President, but at least she would not be remembered just as the First Lady during the husband days.


I hope she doesn't change her mind!!!
Title: Re: .....
Post by: b e ç k a on March 21, 2012, 12:02:36 PM

[...]

That petition would take years to mature into an actual green card, but we all were optimistic nevertheless; and there you have it - in April, my husband gets that notification letter from the NVC letting him know he had won the D-V lottery. From that point on, we were concerned that the Consular officer would accuse my husband during the interview for misrepresentation because of my hubby having claimed me arbitrarily as his wife on the NVC forms (initially in February when originally applied for, and then again in May) - given the fact that we only got the marriage license 4 months after he made the statements on the NVC forms (August). We remained anxious 'til the day of the interview, April of next year, but the Consular Officer was surprisingly over-friendly towards us, with him granting us the immigrant visas and without inquiring at all as to our marriage timing.

Truth-be-told, we were anxious also because we could not disclose to the Consular officer that the two of us had lived in a neighboring country for some time - my mother-in-law paid a friend of hers for us to be issued two brand-new passports, so that we did not have to show at all the neighboring country's entering visas we had gotten during the years on our old passports. We had been on and off illegally in that country, so we could not get clearances from that country's police for the time period we lived there. This is something that almost all the people who win the American green card lottery do - it's not smth we did to hide some kind of "major crime" committed or anything like that.

We were hearing that those people who admitted to the Consulate that they had been in other countries, besides their home country, were required to submit police clearances from those neighboring countries' authorities, something difficult and time-consuming, since we had also been there illegally - the way such a thing is handled in our native country is to simply pay the municipal employees for a new passport (easily accomplished and for not too much money) and then appear with the new passport before the Consular officer.

We also arranged for (fake) Employment Verification Letters where it was stated by (fake) employers that we had been employed in our home country (having had, thus, lived there all the time), so that it would appear that we had not been outside our home country at any time (to put it differently, we covered gaps in our employment history). These latter two are done regularly by almost all people who win the lottery in our country, and the consulate people themselves know deep down themselves that such things happen all too often.


Incitatus, what you mention in regard to your issue with the lottery application: It was my understanding that the DV "lottery" is as much "lottery" as apple is an orange. The people are selected for specific (political, ethnic, racial, and religious) reasons, and the state dept. is aware that most other cultures and countries have other values of certain moral issues. Little "white" lies are not significant enough to guarantee such a drastic punishment such as, say, "deportation."


You have done quite a few things, no doubt about it, but I'd like to let you know that,

There's a waiver, the Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility, is used by applicants for immigrant visas, non-immigrant fiancé visas, V visas, and adjustment of status to request a waiver of the following grounds of inadmissibility in the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) - should ICE move ahead and try to deport the aliens:

  • Section 212(a)(1)   – health-related grounds;
  • Section 212(a)(2) – criminal and related grounds,
  • Section 212(a)(3)(D) - immigrant membership in a totalitarian party;
  • Section 212(a)(6)(C) – misrepresentation in immigration matters;
  • Section 212(a)(6)(E) - smugglers;
  • Section 212(a)(6)(F) - subject to civil penalty;
  • Section 212(a)(9)(B)   – unlawful presence in the U.S. for at least 180 days, beginning on or after April 1, 1997, followed by departure from the U.S.

I believe I-601 is for those who apply for the green thing, not for those who already have it - or may even have become USCs.


I did check the matter thoroughly, colo, there's definitely a waiver available, even after you've gotten the green card (with the CIS having you placed on deportation proceedings afterwards).
Title: Re: The Fifth: Self-Incrimination
Post by: Frank s on March 24, 2012, 01:36:18 PM

Wow - some great posts related to immigration matters here. My husband and I came to the U.S. on immigrant visas after hubby won the D-V (Diversity Lottery) several years ago. I was not legally married to my husband (had not yet gotten a marriage license) by the time he got the notice he was assigned a visa lottery. Neither did we legally married when he sent the first response to the (NVC) National Visa Center shortly after. We only got legally married in August of that year, 4 months after he listed me as her spouse on the NVC forms. The reason why I did not legally marry to my husband from the very beginning (since I began to live with my-hubby-to-be, in August) and my mother left for the States (September), was that I was counting on my parents who went to the US to get me too there, after my permanent resident mother (she won a D-V Lottery the year before) would have hopefully arranged something for me; although all she's able to do, in actuality, was just petitioning on my behalf in January of next year - she filed the I-130 with INS, immigrant relative petition for an unmarried child 21+


Excuse me - just to make sure I'm getting this right - why did ya have to find a man (the-hubby-to-be) after your parents immigrated to the States?! Why couldn't you stay single and wait that way for the time to come to join your parents?! I would have to go ahead and assume you're from some kind of Muslim country where women are expected to have "their man"! Are you guys afraid there men will harass, rape and kill you, were you to walk alone in the streets?! Hell, you even say you found him in August, just one month before your parents would leave for the US - pardon my French, but wouldn't one be justified to go on a hunch and say that your people arranged for you to engage 'a nobody', somebody very likely beyond your level, just because time dictated that?!

But then again - it's just doesn't add up - from what I know, in these countries, where women are considered to be their man's property, living temporarily with a man as husband and wife is frowned upon and is considered unacceptable. You are flat out saying that that was basically your plan - were your parents to have arranged in some type or form for you to go to the US, you would stop living with him right away to join your parents in the States. Unless you were some kind of SuperGirl who didn't much care about notions and taboos, you'd still be faced with your own country's people who more likely than not would not see your previous arrangement sympathetically. In fact, that's what your hubby might have counted on - that you would not, in actuality, leave him, reason why he tolerated at first when agreeing not to enter into a marriage contract (in the hope, that with the passing of time, he'd get there - the important thing was that he got you in hand, getting a much better deal than he could have ever dreamed of). As for America, little did he care, although he'd eventually get that as well, sooner or later, via you.

I'm kinda perplexed as to what kind of "arrangement" this was, with this "hubby-to-be," as you call him. You are saying it yourself that the petition that your mother filed on your behalf would take years to materialize into a green card - would you continue on the concubinage path with your boyfriend/husband/whatever you choose to call him? Would you have any children with him? I would assume No, since your wait time to immigrate to the US would be even longer. So all these sacrifices (because they are considered to be "sacrifices" in those countries) just to be able to come to the US - and then, when immigrants actually arrive here, they figure it out how wrong they were to have made all those insane decisions, back in their native countries where/when they thought America was the "land of milk and honey"!

Was all that worth it?! Spending years with a man beyond your level, compromising your real marital (and probably) professional life, all these in the name of a dream (America)? Or even worse, ending up with that very man, just like it turned out, when that Cheetah was handed a stupid lottery?!


"Any questions" - listen to me, you b i t c h - you are stupid if you think I only cared to come to the U'S ... I did not mention in my first post that I came to the U'S along with my hubby on B-2 visas a couple of months before we were supposed to go for the green card interviews (that actually changed later, as the b i t c h e s postponed the interviews' dates). We stayed 40 days in the U'S at my parents' apartment. It was when an immigration attorney told us that we would  probably not be able to process the lottery visa from within the U'S, that we left the U'S and went back to our native country to have the lottery visa interview.

Now, if my only intention was to get to this country (U'S), would I have left and go back to my native country together with my husband?! There was no guarantee whatsoever that we'd get the immigrant visas from there (we had those stupid issues that you know) and the B-2 visas we used to enter the U'S were single-entry - so we could not get back to the U'S. And yet, we decided to go back to our native country, no matter what the results of the @ # ! * i n g green card interview would be.

Because we did not want to remain illegally in the U'S like b i t c h e s, after our visitor visas would have expired. We said, we're better off in our native country, being full-right citizens, rather than illegally in the U'S.

I am sorry but your guessing wrong, I loved and I love my husband - I was not left by my parents in his "protective custody," until my visa number would have become current, as you say. We did not much care whether we'd get the lottery visas to reenter this country one more time, or not - were it not like that, we would have not chosen to go back to our native country and process the green card lottery from there. There was probably enough time for our lottery to be processed from within the U'S (although there were slight chances we couldn't process it from here and we had to go back to our native country - but even if we'd not get the m u t h a @ # ! * i g green card because of staying here and not going back, we'd still be here in the U'S, albeit illegally). And yet, we went back - and, of course, not because this immigration attorney held a knife to our necks threatening to cut our throats open were we to decide contrary to what he advised us to do!

So, would you please give some credit where credit's due, Any Questions?!


This woman is unbelievable - I counted four or five times where she's committed fraud and she won't stop calling other people evil - Incitatus, would you please take a look in the mirror?!

And then, come here to tell us how unfair people are, and what b i t c h e s people who tell you the truth are!

A lil' bit of self-reflection wouldn't hurt at all!

It's never too late .. or is it?!


garcon, I believe you're taking a moral stance, here - because we all know that, in practice, no one would go to the official and say such and such and such - I mean, that would be totally stupid, wouldn't it? That's what those people are there for, to check the truthfulness of the statements you make. As it was mentioned here, already, Incitatus' stuff is small potatoes  ... they're not looking for those kinds of things, when doing the interview and the like!

Remember Martha Stewart?! Eventually, the judge threw away the most important part of the charges, that for insider trading - she was basically found guilty on the obstructing of the investigation thing, because she lied. Now, why does the accused have to cooperate with an investigation against oneself? Is it not this called self-incrimination, and hence unconstitutional?!
Title: Re: practicing law as a non-U.S. citizen
Post by: shameless on March 27, 2012, 01:24:38 PM
Quote

[...]

The fundamental theme of our historical period, domination, readily implies that of liberation as the objective to be achieved (given the fact that themes of any era are always interacting dialectically with their opposites) It is by means of critical thinking that individuals will be able to understand the world in totality, not in fragments, achieving a clearer perception of the whole. To this end, a dialectical method of thought, exemplified in the analysis of a "coded" situation is presented. The "decoding" on the part of students/learners will guarantee moving from the part to the whole and then returning to the parts, so that the Subject recognizes oneself in the coded concrete situation and recognizes the latter as a situation in which he finds himself, as well as with the other people; accomplished as it should, this makes possible for the abstract to be "transported" to the concrete realm, by the critical perception of the subject himself. The task of the teacher becomes the "representing" of the universe of themes to the people from whom it was initially received -- presented to them as a "problem."


I'm familiar with the method - the thing is that placing the workers in these coding/decoding situations for them to actually appreciate the deep * & ^ % they're in won't work - unless it's being done all the time, or at least for a very long time, say 10 years or so.

http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/index.php?topic=3003243.msg5397556#msg5397556


say it don't pay it, are you saying that the "teacher" has to have the "workers" gathered in a classroom kind of thing - and surveying their reactions and the like in response to the "themes" mentioned?! Like do this, every day, for 10 years in a raw?!

I would really be interested (irony aside!) how this's supposed to work! I mean, really!

As you can see, I'd not be totally dismissive of this kind of thing, as I understand it - so, any takers?!
Title: Re: Delusional Disorder & Latent Homosexuality
Post by: copain on March 30, 2012, 03:10:46 PM
Quote


Horrible indeed! The core of the syndrome is that the affected person has a delusional belief that another person, usually of higher social status, is secretly in love with them. The sufferer may also believe that the subject of their delusion secretly communicates their love by subtle methods such as body posture, arrangement of household objects and other seemingly innocuous acts (or, if the person is a public figure, through clues in the media). The object of the delusion usually has little or no contact with the delusional person, who often believes that the object initiated the fictional relationship. Erotomanic delusions are typically found as the primary symptom of delusional disorder, or in the context of schizophrenia.

Occasionally the subject of the delusion may not actually exist, although more commonly, the subjects are media figures such as popular singers, actors and politicians. Erotomania has been cited as one cause for stalking or harassment campaigns. The assassination attempt of Ronald Reagan by John Hinckley, Jr. was reported to have been driven by an erotomanic delusion that the death of the president would cause actress Jodie Foster to publicly declare her love for Hinckley. Late night comedian David Letterman and retired astronaut Story Musgrave were the targets of delusional Margaret Mary Ray. Other reported celebrity targets of erotomania include Madonna, Steven Spielberg, Zachary Quinto, Britney Spears, Barbara Mandrell, and Linda Ronstadt.



There's a not-very-accurate belief that the delusional disorder (paranoia) is almost always linked with homosexuality. That's not really the case. Take a look at this post:

Quote

[...] The paranoid preoccupation with homosexuality has sometimes been explained as reflecting "unconscious homosexual impulses." This locution is misleading, in that it is not usually genital urges that stimulate homophobia; it is loneliness and the wish for a soulmate. Because as children we were comfortable with peers of the same sex before we became comfortable with opposite-sex peers, and because people of the same sex are more like us than people of the opposite sex, when we are withdrawn from everyone, we are attracted to someone of the same sex. Unfortunately, the patient becomes aware of this attraction, misinterprets it as homosexuality, and this sets off the defenses. In other words, at the core of the self-experience of paranoid people is a profound emotional isolation and need for a "consensual validation" from a "chum."


http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/index.php?topic=3001479.msg5399040#msg5399040



I believe it's the exact opposite, Flat -

Paranoids = latent/fear of Homosexuality
Need to deny oneself Homosexual Desires = development of Paranoid Delusions

Take a look at this other thingy thing:

Quote

Take Hitler: They say there is insufficient evidence that Hitler was an overt homosexual. But it seemed clear he had latent homosexual tendencies, and that he worried a lot about them. He was terribly concerned, for example, lest he give the impression of showing feminine traits - which, indeed, he did. A colleague of the himself-homosexual English diplomat and historian Sir Harold Nicolson, spoke of Hitler as being "the most profoundly feminine man that he had ever met, and that there were moments when he became almost effeminate."

Hitler also revealed fears of homosexuality by protesting so much that he had no feminine characteristics whatsoever. He was totally masculine - tough, hard, cold, ruthless, brutal. His tendency to think in terms of disjunctive stereotypes about men and women (strong, iron-willed, effective males vs. weak, emotional, incompetent female) is in itself revealing. Such thinking demonstrates a strong conflict and confusion between masculine and feminine natures. To him, sexual differences appeared as exaggerated and mutually exclusive opposites, as roles to be played, rather as natural attributes of human personality. In Hitler's case, as in Himmler's, the fantasized tough male role developed into sadism, murder and destruction.

The question of Hitler's latent homosexuality can also be approached indirectly. It can be stated with some confidence that Hitler must have had latent homosexual tendencies because he showed clear indications of paranoia. This does not mean that all homosexuals are paranoid, but it does mean that all paranoids have fears of homosexuality. The direct connection between homosexuality and paranoia was first noticed by Freud, who concluded that paranoia "invariably arises from an attempt to subdue an unduly powerful homosexual wish."

There is a terrifically strong need to deny homosexuality; the very thought of sexual contact with another man is "completely intolerable." Moreover, the need felt by a paranoid for approval is especially acute; his megalomania is in itself an expression of his need for proof that he is important. There is a high incidence of constipation in paranoid individuals. All paranoids have strong anal components, problems with order and cleanliness, and obsessions with purity and vice, as well as impurity and infections of others. Anal sadistic fantasies are directed towards the father, because he is seen as the rival for the mother's love; the intensity of the drive to be loved is supported mainly "by the intense need to neutralize and erotisize a tremendous hate." When the unconscious hate is so great, the attempt to erotisize it fails, and the individual turns to sadism.

While homosexual feeling and paranoid delusions may be in bitter conflict, both are, in a sense, dependent on each other and are defenses against one another. Thus, it seems quite possible that Hitler developed paranoid delusions, in part, to fight his homosexual feelings. As long as he persecuted and attacked homosexuals, he felt he was successfully combating his own inadmissible inclinations toward homosexuality.

http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/index.php?topic=3002012.msg5398379#msg5398379