images %IMG_DESC_8%
punjabi77
11-25 11:47 AM
My Dear Punjabi Bretheren,
Let me help you understand why I think your question reeks not only of idiocracy, but also utter disregard for even basic moral and common sense.
You wanted to buy a home, live in it for 2 years, sell it and make money. Nothing wrong with it. But, now that the market if not favorable to you, think you are not responsible for payment, and want to foreclose. All I'm saying is you are responsible for your actions; the act of buying a house, making sure you take care of it (read the contract where it says you are to take care and maintain the house to a reasonable standard), paying your monthly mortgage, insuring your home, and paying back the loan with interest by the end of the loan term. You signed the contract. You were ready to reap profits by the sale if there was equity on the home. Likewise you are to assume responsibility of payment if the home value depreciates. This is common sense. This is how the world has been. This is what they teach you as a kid. Why in the world are you complaining about depreciation when you knew this is a possibility when you bought the house?????????????????
Foreclosing is not illegal. But in your case it is unethical. I'm not even sure if your lender will let you foreclose when you don't have a real financial burden to make regular payments. You are losing 20Gs only. I assume you are capable of paying your monthly payments. You want to relocate to get a better paying job. I do not think the lender will let you of the hook so easily. And why should they? They shouldn't. They should make you pay every single penny that you owe to them!
And your questions about returning items to the store; you prove again that your a dishonest man! No, you cannot return a used item. It is wrong. Nothing legal about it. Who told you it is legal??? Now you may go back to the store and pretend like you didn't use it, or that the item is defective, and pass it off, but that's YOU!!!! In your own little dishonest mind everything that is in normal circumstances considered wrong is perfectly fine! You and your buddies here like "kumar1", "leo2606", think that it is fine to return used merchandise. You are all a bunch of dishonest people who didn't learn about right and wrong while growing up. Its not too late, go learn!
Go read this article. Returning used items is fraud!!!!!!!!! It just makes me mad how you could have even imagined that returning a used item was ok!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/09/AR2006120900018.html
Dude..
your name speaks for itself.. Slegde_Hammer..meaning bahut bara Hathoda..
you know whom we call a Hathoda.. yup.. u got it..
what part of my message you did not understand.. i am here to explore my options..not to learn what is ethical and unethical..
i see uho have so many posts in ur name.. may be u have spent time on this forum just to let people know if they are ethical or unethical..
i dont know u.. u dont know me.. whats the point of calling someone unethical.. dishonest..
grow up man.. not everyone is happy listening to ur philosphy..i think it is time for you to realize that..
dont send any more messages and personlize them.. you have not given a single valid option.. it is an open forum, i cannot ask you to stop.. but i created this thread to explore my options and not to read all the silly stuff you are writing..
Let me help you understand why I think your question reeks not only of idiocracy, but also utter disregard for even basic moral and common sense.
You wanted to buy a home, live in it for 2 years, sell it and make money. Nothing wrong with it. But, now that the market if not favorable to you, think you are not responsible for payment, and want to foreclose. All I'm saying is you are responsible for your actions; the act of buying a house, making sure you take care of it (read the contract where it says you are to take care and maintain the house to a reasonable standard), paying your monthly mortgage, insuring your home, and paying back the loan with interest by the end of the loan term. You signed the contract. You were ready to reap profits by the sale if there was equity on the home. Likewise you are to assume responsibility of payment if the home value depreciates. This is common sense. This is how the world has been. This is what they teach you as a kid. Why in the world are you complaining about depreciation when you knew this is a possibility when you bought the house?????????????????
Foreclosing is not illegal. But in your case it is unethical. I'm not even sure if your lender will let you foreclose when you don't have a real financial burden to make regular payments. You are losing 20Gs only. I assume you are capable of paying your monthly payments. You want to relocate to get a better paying job. I do not think the lender will let you of the hook so easily. And why should they? They shouldn't. They should make you pay every single penny that you owe to them!
And your questions about returning items to the store; you prove again that your a dishonest man! No, you cannot return a used item. It is wrong. Nothing legal about it. Who told you it is legal??? Now you may go back to the store and pretend like you didn't use it, or that the item is defective, and pass it off, but that's YOU!!!! In your own little dishonest mind everything that is in normal circumstances considered wrong is perfectly fine! You and your buddies here like "kumar1", "leo2606", think that it is fine to return used merchandise. You are all a bunch of dishonest people who didn't learn about right and wrong while growing up. Its not too late, go learn!
Go read this article. Returning used items is fraud!!!!!!!!! It just makes me mad how you could have even imagined that returning a used item was ok!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/09/AR2006120900018.html
Dude..
your name speaks for itself.. Slegde_Hammer..meaning bahut bara Hathoda..
you know whom we call a Hathoda.. yup.. u got it..
what part of my message you did not understand.. i am here to explore my options..not to learn what is ethical and unethical..
i see uho have so many posts in ur name.. may be u have spent time on this forum just to let people know if they are ethical or unethical..
i dont know u.. u dont know me.. whats the point of calling someone unethical.. dishonest..
grow up man.. not everyone is happy listening to ur philosphy..i think it is time for you to realize that..
dont send any more messages and personlize them.. you have not given a single valid option.. it is an open forum, i cannot ask you to stop.. but i created this thread to explore my options and not to read all the silly stuff you are writing..
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
drona
07-09 11:57 PM
Thanks gdhiren! Please take pictures if possible!
Please post your message at the thread below as that is where the group is coordinating the event tomorrow.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6287
Please post your message at the thread below as that is where the group is coordinating the event tomorrow.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6287
fatjoe
10-27 09:57 AM
Merely congratulating you may not be enough, I guess. However, congratulations from the bottom of my heart.
Your numbers seem to be record breaking. Very well written post too.
Your numbers seem to be record breaking. Very well written post too.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
tnite
01-03 10:25 AM
Not sure I understand this line
>>
If things continue this bad, am planning to use my AP to travel back to the US.
>>
How can you come back to US w/out passport?
VO doesnt keep your passport if a via not issued at the time of the interview . He gives it back after the interview. Once you receive the email , you have to go the VFS office and then had in the passport.
>>
If things continue this bad, am planning to use my AP to travel back to the US.
>>
How can you come back to US w/out passport?
VO doesnt keep your passport if a via not issued at the time of the interview . He gives it back after the interview. Once you receive the email , you have to go the VFS office and then had in the passport.
more...
nitinba
06-29 05:19 PM
Yes attorneys are all going for long weekends upto July 4th and why not they already made hell lot of money, dammit man it sucks bigtime
vkrishn
09-23 12:33 AM
Let me give you an example and you would understand my point. USCIS Customer Services Directorate received 16 million calls from the public and 300,000 from Members of Congress. Add to it, all other items people do to get attention for their case and think that by sending an email or a phone call from Senator or by a lawyer, the officer will realize his mistake and quickly open the file and approve it. If you look at the responses people post to their inquiries, you would see that most responses are standard. USCIS is not just approving 140K greencards but more than a million greencards, hundreds of thousands of H1 and other visa types, EADs etc...every year. Greencards do not get issued on the day date gets current. It is not a automatic process. There is lot of human work involved and many people do not understand that or spend time understanding it. They would rather waste their time either on useless task of tracking or calling customer service every single day.
Pappu,
I doubt things would have materialized if i just kept waiting and here is why.
July 12th: I opened a SR to check on my I485. Purpose was to see if Namecheck was cleared. I wish USCIS gave me that info easily on the website.
July 29th: I get a response by email that they cannot find my I140. I was told to call back with I140 receipt number. This is a bizarre response as i don't know how they accepted my I485 in August 2007 when they can't find my I140.
So i call back and i was told to wait 30 days from July 29th to give the I140 receipt number since its not been 30 days since first receipt. They were counting 30 days from response they sent on july 29th. Now what do i do?
Aug 3rd i went to Infopass and showed them my I140 and I485. They told me i can see your I140 but i cannot say whether this is the I140 linked to I485 because case is at NSC.
So i went to my cognresswoman and based on her enquiry, the PD linked to my I1485 on USCIS system was Feb 16th 2007 instead of Feb 16th 2006. Her office faxed the I140 approval notice and made USCIS correct this error.
I tried checking with USCIS through NCSC and Infopass to see if the PD and category linked to my I485 is correct about 5-6 times and never got a correct response.
If congresswoman's office had not helped correct the PD with USCIS i doubt my case would have even been picked up for adjudication.
Only good thing i got at Infopass was that during my last visit, IO was indian. She told me to write to NSC with a copy of I485 and approved I140 letting them know that PD is current for the past 35 days. She told me that she is not sure why its not been picked up for adjudication as Namecheck and fingerprints were valid and i was pre adjudicated. She was not able to find out if the PD and category linked to my I485 was correct.
When there is no clear transparency, i don't see anything wrong in contacting the necessary people to check on your case.
Pappu,
I doubt things would have materialized if i just kept waiting and here is why.
July 12th: I opened a SR to check on my I485. Purpose was to see if Namecheck was cleared. I wish USCIS gave me that info easily on the website.
July 29th: I get a response by email that they cannot find my I140. I was told to call back with I140 receipt number. This is a bizarre response as i don't know how they accepted my I485 in August 2007 when they can't find my I140.
So i call back and i was told to wait 30 days from July 29th to give the I140 receipt number since its not been 30 days since first receipt. They were counting 30 days from response they sent on july 29th. Now what do i do?
Aug 3rd i went to Infopass and showed them my I140 and I485. They told me i can see your I140 but i cannot say whether this is the I140 linked to I485 because case is at NSC.
So i went to my cognresswoman and based on her enquiry, the PD linked to my I1485 on USCIS system was Feb 16th 2007 instead of Feb 16th 2006. Her office faxed the I140 approval notice and made USCIS correct this error.
I tried checking with USCIS through NCSC and Infopass to see if the PD and category linked to my I485 is correct about 5-6 times and never got a correct response.
If congresswoman's office had not helped correct the PD with USCIS i doubt my case would have even been picked up for adjudication.
Only good thing i got at Infopass was that during my last visit, IO was indian. She told me to write to NSC with a copy of I485 and approved I140 letting them know that PD is current for the past 35 days. She told me that she is not sure why its not been picked up for adjudication as Namecheck and fingerprints were valid and i was pre adjudicated. She was not able to find out if the PD and category linked to my I485 was correct.
When there is no clear transparency, i don't see anything wrong in contacting the necessary people to check on your case.
more...
bestin
04-01 11:23 AM
Guys do not feed the freeloaders by telling anything you are reading in the donor forum. Let these people help themselves by signing up for recurring contributions if they want helpful nformation about their EB2 PD movemement. We are still not meeting of our advocacy day amount. It is all because most people want free lunches. This needs to stop. The 200 people going to DC tomorrow are going to speak for you and me for yours and mine greencard. They are taking time off and spending own money for you and me. Nothing is free in this world. IV is also doing this for you and me and we are taking it for granted. Let people do some good deed today if they want to know good information
I am not sure if u were born as an idiot or became an idiot after being turning a so called "donor".
To be frank I stopped contributing as and when IV started having donor forums.
There are thousands of websites and forums througout the internet to get info and what VKBris posted may not even come close to what Q and Teddy and so many others used to share as a group.
Now coming on to freebies,What benefit does IV provide to past contributors.I have contributed in the past, have been active at the initial stages,have spent my own money and booked airtickets to meet senators.Been a leader in a state chapter.But later realised that it was not worth for this forum which has partitions among so called donors.
Why the heck does any one want to see in a home page about posts on a donor forum.Just hide it and keep it among yourself and discuss .
Now red may follow,and a possible ban.
I am not sure if u were born as an idiot or became an idiot after being turning a so called "donor".
To be frank I stopped contributing as and when IV started having donor forums.
There are thousands of websites and forums througout the internet to get info and what VKBris posted may not even come close to what Q and Teddy and so many others used to share as a group.
Now coming on to freebies,What benefit does IV provide to past contributors.I have contributed in the past, have been active at the initial stages,have spent my own money and booked airtickets to meet senators.Been a leader in a state chapter.But later realised that it was not worth for this forum which has partitions among so called donors.
Why the heck does any one want to see in a home page about posts on a donor forum.Just hide it and keep it among yourself and discuss .
Now red may follow,and a possible ban.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
addsf345
10-08 05:23 PM
competition is good for consumers: link (http://www.teleblend.com/products.html)
Teleblend (formerly SunRocket) came out with this plan today.
NEW! Global Unlimited Plan$24.95/month*
Unlimited calling to 47 countries including India, China, Mexico, Russia, and so much more.
International Retail rates apply outside of Global countries
Activation Fee $29.95 plus $9.95 Shipping fee for New Device:eek:
Activation Fee of $5.95 with existing approved Device:confused:
$39.99 Early Termination Fee (No refund) :(
Over 15 features such as CallerID, CallWaiting, VoiceMail and more
Emergency 911 Services
Great international rates
*Minimum 1 year contract required.:mad:
I am happy I switched to vonage just last week - enjoying the call quality. If vonage and teleblend cost same, I better be with a bigger VOIP company.
Teleblend (formerly SunRocket) came out with this plan today.
NEW! Global Unlimited Plan$24.95/month*
Unlimited calling to 47 countries including India, China, Mexico, Russia, and so much more.
International Retail rates apply outside of Global countries
Activation Fee $29.95 plus $9.95 Shipping fee for New Device:eek:
Activation Fee of $5.95 with existing approved Device:confused:
$39.99 Early Termination Fee (No refund) :(
Over 15 features such as CallerID, CallWaiting, VoiceMail and more
Emergency 911 Services
Great international rates
*Minimum 1 year contract required.:mad:
I am happy I switched to vonage just last week - enjoying the call quality. If vonage and teleblend cost same, I better be with a bigger VOIP company.
more...
eb3_2004
08-20 02:33 PM
It is not true. The orignal text in IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT says "Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraph (1), to qualified immigrants who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare of the United States, an d whose services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United States.
"
The item mentioned above is for EB2, meaning any spill over to EB2 is from unused EB1.
for EB3 the ACT mentions the following
Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (1) and (2), to the following classes of aliens who are not described in paragraph (2):
The meaning is EB3 gets all unused from EB1 and EB2... This is the catch, does this mean spillover from EB1 after EB2 catches up (or) spillover from EB1 even if EB2 is not current..
If they have done spillover from EB1 to EB3, even when EB2 is not current...we can give this a try.
Sorry for the confusion...Just got excited and went over the allocation of visas from the ACT
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
"
The item mentioned above is for EB2, meaning any spill over to EB2 is from unused EB1.
for EB3 the ACT mentions the following
Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (1) and (2), to the following classes of aliens who are not described in paragraph (2):
The meaning is EB3 gets all unused from EB1 and EB2... This is the catch, does this mean spillover from EB1 after EB2 catches up (or) spillover from EB1 even if EB2 is not current..
If they have done spillover from EB1 to EB3, even when EB2 is not current...we can give this a try.
Sorry for the confusion...Just got excited and went over the allocation of visas from the ACT
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
jasmin45
07-13 07:24 AM
The whole controversy involving Lou Dobbs and leprosy started with a “60 Minutes” segment a few weeks ago.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/30/business/30leonside.html
Robert Caplin for The New York Times
Lou Dobbs was at the anchor desk for CNN’s 2006 election coverage.
Related Articles
Immigrants and Prison (May 30, 2007)
Bush Takes On Conservatives Over Immigration (May 30, 2007)
Reader Responses (May 30, 2007)
Episodes of "Lou Dobbs Tonight"
"60 Minutes" of May 6, 2007 Leprosy Statistics The segment was a profile of Mr. Dobbs, and while doing background research for it, a “60 Minutes” producer came across a 2005 news report from Mr. Dobbs’s CNN program on contagious diseases. In the report, one of Mr. Dobbs’s correspondents said there had been 7,000 cases of leprosy in this country over the previous three years, far more than in the past.
When Lesley Stahl of “60 Minutes” sat down to interview Mr. Dobbs on camera, she mentioned the report and told him that there didn’t seem to be much evidence for it.
“Well, I can tell you this,” he replied. “If we reported it, it’s a fact.”
With that Orwellian chestnut, Mr. Dobbs escalated the leprosy dispute into a full-scale media brouhaha. The next night, back on his own program, the same CNN correspondent who had done the earlier report, Christine Romans, repeated the 7,000 number, and Mr. Dobbs added that, if anything, it was probably an underestimate. A week later, the Southern Poverty Law Center — the civil rights group that has long been critical of Mr. Dobbs — took out advertisements in The New York Times and USA Today demanding that CNN run a correction.
Finally, Mr. Dobbs played host to two top officials from the law center on his program, “Lou Dobbs Tonight,” where he called their accusations outrageous and they called him wrong, unfair and “one of the most popular people on the white supremacist Web sites.”
We’ll get to the merits of the charges and countercharges shortly, but first it’s worth considering why, beyond entertainment value, all this matters. Over the last few years, Lou Dobbs has transformed himself into arguably this country’s foremost populist. It’s an odd role, given that he spent the 1980s and ’90s buttering up chief executives on CNN, but he’s now playing it very successfully. He has become a voice for the real economic anxiety felt by many Americans.
The audience for his program has grown 72 percent since 2003, and CBS — yes, the same network that broadcasts “60 Minutes” — just hired him as a commentator on “The Early Show.” Many elites, as Mr. Dobbs likes to call them, despise him, but others see him as a hero. His latest book, “War on the Middle Class,” was a best seller and received a sympathetic review in this newspaper. Mario Cuomo has said Mr. Dobbs is “addicted to economic truth.”
Mr. Dobbs argues that the middle class has many enemies: corporate lobbyists, greedy executives, wimpy journalists, corrupt politicians. But none play a bigger role than illegal immigrants. As he sees it, they are stealing our jobs, depressing our wages and even endangering our lives.
That’s where leprosy comes in.
“The invasion of illegal aliens is threatening the health of many Americans,” Mr. Dobbs said on his April 14, 2005, program. From there, he introduced his original report that mentioned leprosy, the flesh-destroying disease — technically known as Hansen’s disease — that has inspired fear for centuries.
According to a woman CNN identified as a medical lawyer named Dr. Madeleine Cosman, leprosy was on the march. As Ms. Romans, the CNN correspondent, relayed: “There were about 900 cases of leprosy for 40 years. There have been 7,000 in the past three years.”
“Incredible,” Mr. Dobbs replied.
Mr. Dobbs and Ms. Romans engaged in a nearly identical conversation a few weeks ago, when he was defending himself the night after the “60 Minutes” segment. “Suddenly, in the past three years, America has more than 7,000 cases of leprosy,” she said, again attributing the number to Ms. Cosman.
To sort through all this, I called James L. Krahenbuhl, the director of the National Hansen’s Disease Program, an arm of the federal government. Leprosy in the United States is indeed largely a disease of immigrants who have come from Asia and Latin America. And the official leprosy statistics do show about 7,000 diagnosed cases — but that’s over the last 30 years, not the last three.
The peak year was 1983, when there were 456 cases. After that, reported cases dropped steadily, falling to just 76 in 2000. Last year, there were 137.
“It is not a public health problem — that’s the bottom line,” Mr. Krahenbuhl told me. “You’ve got a country of 300 million people. This is not something for the public to get alarmed about.” Much about the disease remains unknown, but researchers think people get it through prolonged close contact with someone who already has it.
What about the increase over the last six years, to 137 cases from 76? Is that significant?
“No,” Mr. Krahenbuhl said. It could be a statistical fluctuation, or it could be a result of better data collection in recent years. In any event, the 137 reported cases last year were fewer than in any year from 1975 to 1996.
So Mr. Dobbs was flat-out wrong. And when I spoke to him yesterday, he admitted as much, sort of. I read him Ms. Romans’s comment — the one with the word “suddenly” in it — and he replied, “I think that is wrong.” He then went on to say that as far as he was concerned, he had corrected the mistake by later broadcasting another report, on the same night as his on-air confrontation with the Southern Poverty Law Center officials. This report mentioned that leprosy had peaked in 1983.
Of course, he has never acknowledged on the air that his program presented false information twice. Instead, he lambasted the officials from the law center for saying he had. Even yesterday, he spent much of our conversation emphasizing that there really were 7,000 cases in the leprosy registry, the government’s 30-year database. Mr. Dobbs is trying to have it both ways.
I have been somewhat taken aback about how shameless he has been during the whole dispute, so I spent some time reading transcripts from old episodes of “Lou Dobbs Tonight.” The way he handled leprosy, it turns out, is not all that unusual.
For one thing, Mr. Dobbs has a somewhat flexible relationship with reality. He has said, for example, that one-third of the inmates in the federal prison system are illegal immigrants. That’s wrong, too. According to the Justice Department, 6 percent of prisoners in this country are noncitizens (compared with 7 percent of the population). For a variety of reasons, the crime rate is actually lower among immigrants than natives.
Second, Mr. Dobbs really does give airtime to white supremacy sympathizers. Ms. Cosman, who is now deceased, was a lawyer and Renaissance studies scholar, never a medical doctor or a leprosy expert. She gave speeches in which she said that Mexican immigrants had a habit of molesting children. Back in their home villages, she would explain, rape was not as serious a crime as cow stealing. The Southern Poverty Law Center keeps a list of other such guests from “Lou Dobbs Tonight.”
Finally, Mr. Dobbs is fond of darkly hinting that this country is under attack. He suggested last week that the new immigration bill in Congress could be the first step toward a new nation — a “North American union” — that combines the United States, Canada and Mexico. On other occasions, his program has described a supposed Mexican plot to reclaim the Southwest. In one such report, one of his correspondents referred to a Utah visit by Vicente Fox, then Mexico’s president, as a “Mexican military incursion.”
When I asked Mr. Dobbs about this yesterday, he said, “You’ve raised this to a level that frankly I find offensive.”
The most common complaint about him, at least from other journalists, is that his program combines factual reporting with editorializing. But I think this misses the point. Americans, as a rule, are smart enough to handle a program that mixes opinion and facts. The problem with Mr. Dobbs is that he mixes opinion and untruths. He is the heir to the nativist tradition that has long used fiction and conspiracy theories as a weapon against the Irish, the Italians, the Chinese, the Jews and, now, the Mexicans.
There is no denying that this country’s immigration system is broken. But it defies belief — and a whole lot of economic research — to suggest that the problems of the middle class stem from illegal immigrants. Those immigrants, remember, are largely non-English speakers without a high school diploma. They have probably hurt the wages of native-born high school dropouts and made everyone else better off.
More to the point, if Mr. Dobbs’s arguments were really so good, don’t you think he would be able to stick to the facts? And if CNN were serious about being “the most trusted name in news,” as it claims to be, don’t you think it would be big enough to issue an actual correction?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/30/business/30leonside.html
Robert Caplin for The New York Times
Lou Dobbs was at the anchor desk for CNN’s 2006 election coverage.
Related Articles
Immigrants and Prison (May 30, 2007)
Bush Takes On Conservatives Over Immigration (May 30, 2007)
Reader Responses (May 30, 2007)
Episodes of "Lou Dobbs Tonight"
"60 Minutes" of May 6, 2007 Leprosy Statistics The segment was a profile of Mr. Dobbs, and while doing background research for it, a “60 Minutes” producer came across a 2005 news report from Mr. Dobbs’s CNN program on contagious diseases. In the report, one of Mr. Dobbs’s correspondents said there had been 7,000 cases of leprosy in this country over the previous three years, far more than in the past.
When Lesley Stahl of “60 Minutes” sat down to interview Mr. Dobbs on camera, she mentioned the report and told him that there didn’t seem to be much evidence for it.
“Well, I can tell you this,” he replied. “If we reported it, it’s a fact.”
With that Orwellian chestnut, Mr. Dobbs escalated the leprosy dispute into a full-scale media brouhaha. The next night, back on his own program, the same CNN correspondent who had done the earlier report, Christine Romans, repeated the 7,000 number, and Mr. Dobbs added that, if anything, it was probably an underestimate. A week later, the Southern Poverty Law Center — the civil rights group that has long been critical of Mr. Dobbs — took out advertisements in The New York Times and USA Today demanding that CNN run a correction.
Finally, Mr. Dobbs played host to two top officials from the law center on his program, “Lou Dobbs Tonight,” where he called their accusations outrageous and they called him wrong, unfair and “one of the most popular people on the white supremacist Web sites.”
We’ll get to the merits of the charges and countercharges shortly, but first it’s worth considering why, beyond entertainment value, all this matters. Over the last few years, Lou Dobbs has transformed himself into arguably this country’s foremost populist. It’s an odd role, given that he spent the 1980s and ’90s buttering up chief executives on CNN, but he’s now playing it very successfully. He has become a voice for the real economic anxiety felt by many Americans.
The audience for his program has grown 72 percent since 2003, and CBS — yes, the same network that broadcasts “60 Minutes” — just hired him as a commentator on “The Early Show.” Many elites, as Mr. Dobbs likes to call them, despise him, but others see him as a hero. His latest book, “War on the Middle Class,” was a best seller and received a sympathetic review in this newspaper. Mario Cuomo has said Mr. Dobbs is “addicted to economic truth.”
Mr. Dobbs argues that the middle class has many enemies: corporate lobbyists, greedy executives, wimpy journalists, corrupt politicians. But none play a bigger role than illegal immigrants. As he sees it, they are stealing our jobs, depressing our wages and even endangering our lives.
That’s where leprosy comes in.
“The invasion of illegal aliens is threatening the health of many Americans,” Mr. Dobbs said on his April 14, 2005, program. From there, he introduced his original report that mentioned leprosy, the flesh-destroying disease — technically known as Hansen’s disease — that has inspired fear for centuries.
According to a woman CNN identified as a medical lawyer named Dr. Madeleine Cosman, leprosy was on the march. As Ms. Romans, the CNN correspondent, relayed: “There were about 900 cases of leprosy for 40 years. There have been 7,000 in the past three years.”
“Incredible,” Mr. Dobbs replied.
Mr. Dobbs and Ms. Romans engaged in a nearly identical conversation a few weeks ago, when he was defending himself the night after the “60 Minutes” segment. “Suddenly, in the past three years, America has more than 7,000 cases of leprosy,” she said, again attributing the number to Ms. Cosman.
To sort through all this, I called James L. Krahenbuhl, the director of the National Hansen’s Disease Program, an arm of the federal government. Leprosy in the United States is indeed largely a disease of immigrants who have come from Asia and Latin America. And the official leprosy statistics do show about 7,000 diagnosed cases — but that’s over the last 30 years, not the last three.
The peak year was 1983, when there were 456 cases. After that, reported cases dropped steadily, falling to just 76 in 2000. Last year, there were 137.
“It is not a public health problem — that’s the bottom line,” Mr. Krahenbuhl told me. “You’ve got a country of 300 million people. This is not something for the public to get alarmed about.” Much about the disease remains unknown, but researchers think people get it through prolonged close contact with someone who already has it.
What about the increase over the last six years, to 137 cases from 76? Is that significant?
“No,” Mr. Krahenbuhl said. It could be a statistical fluctuation, or it could be a result of better data collection in recent years. In any event, the 137 reported cases last year were fewer than in any year from 1975 to 1996.
So Mr. Dobbs was flat-out wrong. And when I spoke to him yesterday, he admitted as much, sort of. I read him Ms. Romans’s comment — the one with the word “suddenly” in it — and he replied, “I think that is wrong.” He then went on to say that as far as he was concerned, he had corrected the mistake by later broadcasting another report, on the same night as his on-air confrontation with the Southern Poverty Law Center officials. This report mentioned that leprosy had peaked in 1983.
Of course, he has never acknowledged on the air that his program presented false information twice. Instead, he lambasted the officials from the law center for saying he had. Even yesterday, he spent much of our conversation emphasizing that there really were 7,000 cases in the leprosy registry, the government’s 30-year database. Mr. Dobbs is trying to have it both ways.
I have been somewhat taken aback about how shameless he has been during the whole dispute, so I spent some time reading transcripts from old episodes of “Lou Dobbs Tonight.” The way he handled leprosy, it turns out, is not all that unusual.
For one thing, Mr. Dobbs has a somewhat flexible relationship with reality. He has said, for example, that one-third of the inmates in the federal prison system are illegal immigrants. That’s wrong, too. According to the Justice Department, 6 percent of prisoners in this country are noncitizens (compared with 7 percent of the population). For a variety of reasons, the crime rate is actually lower among immigrants than natives.
Second, Mr. Dobbs really does give airtime to white supremacy sympathizers. Ms. Cosman, who is now deceased, was a lawyer and Renaissance studies scholar, never a medical doctor or a leprosy expert. She gave speeches in which she said that Mexican immigrants had a habit of molesting children. Back in their home villages, she would explain, rape was not as serious a crime as cow stealing. The Southern Poverty Law Center keeps a list of other such guests from “Lou Dobbs Tonight.”
Finally, Mr. Dobbs is fond of darkly hinting that this country is under attack. He suggested last week that the new immigration bill in Congress could be the first step toward a new nation — a “North American union” — that combines the United States, Canada and Mexico. On other occasions, his program has described a supposed Mexican plot to reclaim the Southwest. In one such report, one of his correspondents referred to a Utah visit by Vicente Fox, then Mexico’s president, as a “Mexican military incursion.”
When I asked Mr. Dobbs about this yesterday, he said, “You’ve raised this to a level that frankly I find offensive.”
The most common complaint about him, at least from other journalists, is that his program combines factual reporting with editorializing. But I think this misses the point. Americans, as a rule, are smart enough to handle a program that mixes opinion and facts. The problem with Mr. Dobbs is that he mixes opinion and untruths. He is the heir to the nativist tradition that has long used fiction and conspiracy theories as a weapon against the Irish, the Italians, the Chinese, the Jews and, now, the Mexicans.
There is no denying that this country’s immigration system is broken. But it defies belief — and a whole lot of economic research — to suggest that the problems of the middle class stem from illegal immigrants. Those immigrants, remember, are largely non-English speakers without a high school diploma. They have probably hurt the wages of native-born high school dropouts and made everyone else better off.
More to the point, if Mr. Dobbs’s arguments were really so good, don’t you think he would be able to stick to the facts? And if CNN were serious about being “the most trusted name in news,” as it claims to be, don’t you think it would be big enough to issue an actual correction?
more...
royus77
06-20 05:15 PM
please clear the doubt .. Affidavit of support is it I-134 or 864?
Its I-134 document
Its I-134 document
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
glus
01-16 09:59 AM
If you entered on AP and your I485 is pending, you cannot fell out-of-status as you are being considered in "Adjustment of status" status. This is somehow a special kind of a status. The only problem one may have is if the I-485 is denied for any reason. At that point you fell out of status. That's the reason many choose to enter on h1 instead AP. Then, even if I485 is denied, a person who entered on H1 is still in H1 legal status. Hence, it is generally advisable to enter and maintain an non-immigrant status while i485 is pending.
Regards,
I am not an attorney. If you need a legal advise, seek an immigration attorney.
Regards,
I am not an attorney. If you need a legal advise, seek an immigration attorney.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
kshitijnt
05-10 06:14 PM
It is not true that all the H1bs are creating jobs. For one example I worked in a big garment company and they laid off hundreds of people(around 800) 4 years back and did offshoring 90% with 10% H1b and L1 to Infosys. This would have created less than 10 new admin jobs for setting up office here but it displaced 800 jobs plus all the new projects(jobs) go to Infosys and US government lost millions in taxes for a private company to save a few million dollars. But if a H1b is a real innovator or investor then he could create scores of new jobs but those guys are very less. They should be identified and rewarded by faster GC process.
But real intention of H1b when it was created was to fill shortage of skills but not for competing with citizens in rate. If the real intention is to compete globally then that needs to be revealed while lobbying with Senators. There is nothing wrong with immigrants or H1b persons. Most abuses are done and enouraged by employers. Corporations prefers a person always to be in H1b so they want more H1b quota and less gc so that they can exploit people.
Basically H1b numbers and offshoring needs to be increased when demand is high(Really it was needed on 1999 and 2000) and it needs to be decreased when demand is low. Also today also there is shortage of skills in a few areas. System should handle those also.
Well there are different examples you can cite all the time to turn the argument in your favor. By themselves H1Bs in that status can not create jobs, because they are bound to the employer. However there is no denying that a lot of them such as those who graduated from US universities with masters degrees, those from IIT or IIMs are smart and bright individuals. I know at least 2 Indians , family friends that after getting their green cards, started companies on their own and now employ hundreds locally if not thousands.And let me tell you these are not desi consulting cos. The very premise of tying an H1 to employer is wrong, not the individual by himself. Instead if there is point/skill based immigration system then it will ensure only the brightest will come inside the country. Currently the decision to hire the immigrant rests with an employer and hence we see systematic corruption to some degree.
Also what I said was companies are profit oriented business entities. Of course they will want to hire people who best benefit their business. Nobody is stopping a local from proving that.
But real intention of H1b when it was created was to fill shortage of skills but not for competing with citizens in rate. If the real intention is to compete globally then that needs to be revealed while lobbying with Senators. There is nothing wrong with immigrants or H1b persons. Most abuses are done and enouraged by employers. Corporations prefers a person always to be in H1b so they want more H1b quota and less gc so that they can exploit people.
Basically H1b numbers and offshoring needs to be increased when demand is high(Really it was needed on 1999 and 2000) and it needs to be decreased when demand is low. Also today also there is shortage of skills in a few areas. System should handle those also.
Well there are different examples you can cite all the time to turn the argument in your favor. By themselves H1Bs in that status can not create jobs, because they are bound to the employer. However there is no denying that a lot of them such as those who graduated from US universities with masters degrees, those from IIT or IIMs are smart and bright individuals. I know at least 2 Indians , family friends that after getting their green cards, started companies on their own and now employ hundreds locally if not thousands.And let me tell you these are not desi consulting cos. The very premise of tying an H1 to employer is wrong, not the individual by himself. Instead if there is point/skill based immigration system then it will ensure only the brightest will come inside the country. Currently the decision to hire the immigrant rests with an employer and hence we see systematic corruption to some degree.
Also what I said was companies are profit oriented business entities. Of course they will want to hire people who best benefit their business. Nobody is stopping a local from proving that.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
gcnirvana
06-20 02:59 PM
This is the number in red on your visa stamp in ur passport. Mine is 8-digits long. Even if ur visa stamp has expired you've to provide that number.
Hope this helps!
Hi,
I am filing up form 485 and on Part 3 Section - Processing Information, there is a question asking for Nonimmigrant Visa Number.
Any clue about this?
Thanks in advance,
Kalpen
Hope this helps!
Hi,
I am filing up form 485 and on Part 3 Section - Processing Information, there is a question asking for Nonimmigrant Visa Number.
Any clue about this?
Thanks in advance,
Kalpen
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
Macaca
12-05 03:59 PM
JUAN GONZALEZ: Now, Lou, you�ve been well known for years now, especially dealing with the issue of American corporations exporting jobs and criticizing that whole process of exporting American jobs overseas.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And your�but also the criticism of it, that as I�ve seen it as, oftentimes does not deal with the impact so much of what this globalization on those countries themselves. In other words, you criticize NAFTA for sending so many jobs overseas, but not with the impact so much that it�s having on Mexico and on these other countries that are the other end of this free trade.
LOU DOBBS: Juan, that may be because I�m a television journalist, limited in my intellect, as well as my time.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, on this show, we don�t have commercials, so we have a lot of time to get into the issues.
LOU DOBBS: The reality is that, of course, NAFTA is, in my judgment, at least deleterious to the interests of the Mexican people and to the state of Mexico. One only has to look at the empty villages in particularly southern Mexico to examine the impact of the agricultural policies within NAFTA. One only has to look at the maquiladoras across northern Mexico to see the impact on a society that is already 50% impoverished, education levels still where they were thirty years ago in Mexico.
But my perspective is an American one. And I won�t presume to speak for Mexico, as Felipe Calderon does presume to speak to the United States for Americans on American policy. The reality is that NAFTA doesn�t work for this country. It doesn�t work for Mexico.
But I am not one of those people�as Amy was talking about, my detractors. The suggestion I�m anti-immigrant, for example, is absurd. I would support an increase in lawful immigration and have said so repeatedly and have no problem whatsoever with current levels of immigration, which, by the way, are the highest levels of immigration in the world�in fact, more than the rest of the world combined. We bring in more than two million people. But the issue is one that the United States does not have a foreign policy toward Mexico. We�re paternalistic and condescending toward Mexico in our dealings with Mexico, both corporately and politically. And it�s time for that to change.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And your�but also the criticism of it, that as I�ve seen it as, oftentimes does not deal with the impact so much of what this globalization on those countries themselves. In other words, you criticize NAFTA for sending so many jobs overseas, but not with the impact so much that it�s having on Mexico and on these other countries that are the other end of this free trade.
LOU DOBBS: Juan, that may be because I�m a television journalist, limited in my intellect, as well as my time.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, on this show, we don�t have commercials, so we have a lot of time to get into the issues.
LOU DOBBS: The reality is that, of course, NAFTA is, in my judgment, at least deleterious to the interests of the Mexican people and to the state of Mexico. One only has to look at the empty villages in particularly southern Mexico to examine the impact of the agricultural policies within NAFTA. One only has to look at the maquiladoras across northern Mexico to see the impact on a society that is already 50% impoverished, education levels still where they were thirty years ago in Mexico.
But my perspective is an American one. And I won�t presume to speak for Mexico, as Felipe Calderon does presume to speak to the United States for Americans on American policy. The reality is that NAFTA doesn�t work for this country. It doesn�t work for Mexico.
But I am not one of those people�as Amy was talking about, my detractors. The suggestion I�m anti-immigrant, for example, is absurd. I would support an increase in lawful immigration and have said so repeatedly and have no problem whatsoever with current levels of immigration, which, by the way, are the highest levels of immigration in the world�in fact, more than the rest of the world combined. We bring in more than two million people. But the issue is one that the United States does not have a foreign policy toward Mexico. We�re paternalistic and condescending toward Mexico in our dealings with Mexico, both corporately and politically. And it�s time for that to change.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
Hassan11
05-24 09:04 AM
Cheran,
Did you go through the medical exam yourself??
Is there another blood work required besides the one for HIV and Syphilis?? Thanks
Did you go through the medical exam yourself??
Is there another blood work required besides the one for HIV and Syphilis?? Thanks
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
sheela
11-06 02:31 PM
I spoke to IO this morning regarding NC clearance for my family (7/2 filers). I was told whereas, my derivative's (wife and daughter) names have been cleared but there is no information on my clearance. She furthur told me the names were submitted on 8/30/07 and was told to wait for another month or so.
Guys: What is your take on this? I have started worrying now. Although they say 120 day processing time- My understanding is you are either cleared in few days or get stuck in the hole.
Guys: What is your take on this? I have started worrying now. Although they say 120 day processing time- My understanding is you are either cleared in few days or get stuck in the hole.
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
guest_mister_08
08-12 12:06 PM
Got CPO mail today morning 9.45AM (PST)
HURRAYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Opened SR on 08/11/2010
PD: 28th Nov 05
RD : 07/16/2007
ND: 08/25/2007
HURRAYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Opened SR on 08/11/2010
PD: 28th Nov 05
RD : 07/16/2007
ND: 08/25/2007
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
chandrajp
05-22 09:57 AM
I am in a similar situation. I applied just 95 days before. My lawyer "forgot" and I applied in a rush in the end. I am hoping it will not be a problem.
My understanding is that you will remain in status even if you do not have EAD or AP. However you cannot work.
I have a meeting with my lawyer on wednesday. I will be asking her about this. I am hoping for peace of mind that this does not become an issue.
I checked with somebody in the forum like you and he got it in 2 and 1/2 months. I checked in the USCIS web site. It says you have to apply 6 months in advance. I did not know about this since I got it in a month last year when my case was in CSC.
My understanding is that you will remain in status even if you do not have EAD or AP. However you cannot work.
I have a meeting with my lawyer on wednesday. I will be asking her about this. I am hoping for peace of mind that this does not become an issue.
I checked with somebody in the forum like you and he got it in 2 and 1/2 months. I checked in the USCIS web site. It says you have to apply 6 months in advance. I did not know about this since I got it in a month last year when my case was in CSC.
smisachu
09-25 12:04 PM
Never mind. I found it...:)
This link is not working. (Page not found). can someone repost.
Thanks
This link is not working. (Page not found). can someone repost.
Thanks
ramus
06-29 04:45 PM
wonder what would have made them change the dates? They even haven't seen any application yet?
0 comments:
Post a Comment