Mahatma
08-09 01:55 PM
This is my view about how USCIS has messed up in name check delays.
Name check PROGRAM that they might be using takes into account phoenetic spelling of FIRST and LAST NAME. Now just imagine, if your name is broken into 100 different spelling combinations and when your entire BIRTH YEAR IS checked against the databse--it will be surprising if there are no HITS. And to resolve those hits, pre-1995 records needs to be serached manually. There is no responsibility or time commitment by FBI or USCIS for the delay.
This might be true for Asian names. The argument is-- the names in the databse are translations and therefore, they need to check accordingly.
I BET they are not doing this for AMERICAN names, I mean for passport approval, they do not apply phoenetic program. I remember that FBI testimony included the discussion that they have set up appropriate filters for passport applicants (american citizens) so that unnecessary hits are avoided. Now this is my view and a discussion point. I may be wrong too.
In effect, Indian and Chinese professionals are deprived of immigration benefits.
Equally controversial is per country limitations in EB categories. If you do not select based on country of origin, you should not be subjected to per country limits because you are working for an american company and you are going to be american. Any demographic adjustment need to be made in diversity visa lottery.
This retrogression in effect deprives Indian and Chinese professionals of their benefits.
Justice and fairness has it that these problems need to be addressed. Abundant common sense and deeply practical approach that USA has, I am sure above problems will find attention. This great nation has always supported JUST and FAIR rules.
Name check PROGRAM that they might be using takes into account phoenetic spelling of FIRST and LAST NAME. Now just imagine, if your name is broken into 100 different spelling combinations and when your entire BIRTH YEAR IS checked against the databse--it will be surprising if there are no HITS. And to resolve those hits, pre-1995 records needs to be serached manually. There is no responsibility or time commitment by FBI or USCIS for the delay.
This might be true for Asian names. The argument is-- the names in the databse are translations and therefore, they need to check accordingly.
I BET they are not doing this for AMERICAN names, I mean for passport approval, they do not apply phoenetic program. I remember that FBI testimony included the discussion that they have set up appropriate filters for passport applicants (american citizens) so that unnecessary hits are avoided. Now this is my view and a discussion point. I may be wrong too.
In effect, Indian and Chinese professionals are deprived of immigration benefits.
Equally controversial is per country limitations in EB categories. If you do not select based on country of origin, you should not be subjected to per country limits because you are working for an american company and you are going to be american. Any demographic adjustment need to be made in diversity visa lottery.
This retrogression in effect deprives Indian and Chinese professionals of their benefits.
Justice and fairness has it that these problems need to be addressed. Abundant common sense and deeply practical approach that USA has, I am sure above problems will find attention. This great nation has always supported JUST and FAIR rules.
wallpaper Download Free Mobile
karl65
08-11 12:35 PM
I called today to help a friend who has been stuck in namecheck status for almost a year and a half and spoke to an immigration officer who calmly explained to me that the name check isn't done only nationally but also "internationally" meaning, not only do they do a background check on you in the US, they also look you up in your country of origin. In all my time reading about this I have never heard her version before, so I had assumed the namecheck was only done at the national level. No wonder it's taking so long, with the FBI waiting for a response from those countries. :(
Unfortunately it is true. I have read that this check is done especially for people whose country is consider in risk. For example I am from Peru. My country has drug traffic problems, so my name must be checked with the Peruvian police records too.
That�s life!!!!!!
Unfortunately it is true. I have read that this check is done especially for people whose country is consider in risk. For example I am from Peru. My country has drug traffic problems, so my name must be checked with the Peruvian police records too.
That�s life!!!!!!
caliguy
10-06 01:16 AM
@ fatjoe
Well, I dont think politeness works with USCIS, but do we really have a choice?
Yes, lets write to Secretary Napolitino. I will also send a copy of the letter to the first lady. I am not sure what else we can do besides that.
Once I get the sequence to call TSC using the POJ method, I will try calling them tomorrow.
Well, I dont think politeness works with USCIS, but do we really have a choice?
Yes, lets write to Secretary Napolitino. I will also send a copy of the letter to the first lady. I am not sure what else we can do besides that.
Once I get the sequence to call TSC using the POJ method, I will try calling them tomorrow.
2011 Awesome SPACE HD Mobile
bigboy007
09-25 07:22 PM
how to send an email to Lofgren her website only talks about CA certain areas. Any idea please guys do u have her direct email id , i am sending email , fax along with my area congressmen. Trying something to think out of blue.
more...
gvenkat
09-23 08:20 PM
Yes I am curious to know where eb-3 would be next year last quater
If there are 62K Eb-3 India applications I'm sure no one can file anything for Eb-3 what stops USCIS from clearing these.. This Data is flawed or If we are reading this wrong
If there are 62K Eb-3 India applications I'm sure no one can file anything for Eb-3 what stops USCIS from clearing these.. This Data is flawed or If we are reading this wrong
krupa
04-25 01:48 PM
50% rule applicable only to an organization which has more than 50 employees.
Since most of the consulting companies employees strength is less than 50 ( I believe) the rule of 50% rule will not be applicable and they can file application till they reach 50.
Since most of the consulting companies employees strength is less than 50 ( I believe) the rule of 50% rule will not be applicable and they can file application till they reach 50.
more...
PBECVictim
06-29 05:35 PM
I am joining Law Suit. I am leaving this country, if they make it 'U' for Eb2 and Eb3 for India.
2010 Download free Mobile Wallpaper
ksurjan
07-09 08:45 PM
Thanks for the comments...I'll personally come and see you off at the airport when you are ready to leave. I gusess you have your bags packed already.
Just so you know we are not begging for GC we've earned it.
Hello all
I am a silent visitor of this website.
Just my 2 cents... Don't think USA is like India where you can do something forcefully. Why don't you guys understand the real problem of USCIS.
Do you think that by sending flower to USCIS will force them to make EB2/EB3 current for 2005/2006/2007 guys??
Please try to understand their problem.
Also India is the great. Why don't you guys just think that India is your home country where you are born and brought up. Why you people can't just wait and watch?? If nothing happens to the so called GC, then why don't you think to pack up and go back to India???????
My sincere request, please don't do rally, you might be arrested......you never know what they can do..... Don't you think that, it is better to go back to India rather than being embarrassed here in US???
Isn't it a shame on us to go for Rally to get GC?????:D
Just think that you will get it when time comes, otherwise pack up.
Please don't take much tension as life is very short. I am assuring you all, nothing will happen with law suit and flower campaign.Don't irritate USCIS by doing all this please.
EB2 India
PD-2005-May
I140 approved-Sept 2006
Just so you know we are not begging for GC we've earned it.
Hello all
I am a silent visitor of this website.
Just my 2 cents... Don't think USA is like India where you can do something forcefully. Why don't you guys understand the real problem of USCIS.
Do you think that by sending flower to USCIS will force them to make EB2/EB3 current for 2005/2006/2007 guys??
Please try to understand their problem.
Also India is the great. Why don't you guys just think that India is your home country where you are born and brought up. Why you people can't just wait and watch?? If nothing happens to the so called GC, then why don't you think to pack up and go back to India???????
My sincere request, please don't do rally, you might be arrested......you never know what they can do..... Don't you think that, it is better to go back to India rather than being embarrassed here in US???
Isn't it a shame on us to go for Rally to get GC?????:D
Just think that you will get it when time comes, otherwise pack up.
Please don't take much tension as life is very short. I am assuring you all, nothing will happen with law suit and flower campaign.Don't irritate USCIS by doing all this please.
EB2 India
PD-2005-May
I140 approved-Sept 2006
more...
ysnraju
06-20 11:51 PM
Yes!! You can work now it self. It is legal under some circumstances please see Murthy website with AC21 FAQ :http://www.murthy.com/news/UDac21qa.html
Question 2 : I lost my job before the 180-day period. Can I still use portability? TOP
Quite possibly, provided the I-485 remains in pending (unadjudicated) status for at least 180 days. It is the I-485 processing time that is important, not when the beneficiary changes positions. This is because the "green card" (GC) is based upon a future job offer. The person is not required to have worked for the GC-sponsoring employer prior to filing or obtaining the GC. Accordingly, it appears the AC21 law did not intend to change the prior law, which only requires a future job offer with respect to the GC sponsorship in employment-based cases. Please refer to the disclaimer at the end of this page, since, at the time of this writing, the regulations have not been published.
Question 3 : I never worked for my sponsoring employer. It was a future job offer. Can I use AC21 portability? TOP
Yes, under the same circumstances as Question 2.
Question 2 : I lost my job before the 180-day period. Can I still use portability? TOP
Quite possibly, provided the I-485 remains in pending (unadjudicated) status for at least 180 days. It is the I-485 processing time that is important, not when the beneficiary changes positions. This is because the "green card" (GC) is based upon a future job offer. The person is not required to have worked for the GC-sponsoring employer prior to filing or obtaining the GC. Accordingly, it appears the AC21 law did not intend to change the prior law, which only requires a future job offer with respect to the GC sponsorship in employment-based cases. Please refer to the disclaimer at the end of this page, since, at the time of this writing, the regulations have not been published.
Question 3 : I never worked for my sponsoring employer. It was a future job offer. Can I use AC21 portability? TOP
Yes, under the same circumstances as Question 2.
hair All Mobile Wallpapers
SunnySurya
08-07 01:53 PM
First let me state that I need people like you to proceed and hence I will be happy to answer the points you rasied to the best of my ability:
We all agree that there is severe backlog. Only way the backlog will alleviate is by increasing visa numbers, which not going to happen any time sooner.
So some people (and I know around 10 of them) what they are doing is the following:
They got the chance to file their 485 last July , which is pending. They are now contacting several small desi consulting firms to file for their fresh labor in EB2 category. Once their labor is filled and new I-140 is approved, they plan to attach new I-140 to the original 485 and hence effectively convering to Eb2 category but with priority dates in 2002 and 2003 (because original I-140 had that priority). Worst, they would never join that desi consulting firm...
This how the system is being gamed. If I know 10 such cases, I am sure there must be thousand like that.Now you tell me , isn't that unfair to the people already in Eb2 line as well as the ones who do not know how to game the system
By the way: If any one is interested, I know of three such consulting firms that can do for you for a fee.
Sunnysurya,
I am not arguing or obstinately stating my view. I am genuinely confused.
I am not sure how it is unfair on EB2. Didn't these folks apply for GC before us legally and stand in line sincerely (no labor subs) AND gather pertinent work exp and education?
I understand you are working on getting the numbers. I would wait to hear from you with those numbers.
It is one thing to feel wronged seeing a few examples of people abusing the porting but quite another to have a lawsuit alleging that this is a widespread activity and it is causing grievous delays for the ones waiting in EB2. I really don't believe it and feel it is insulting to a large majority of highly skilled and hard working immigrants who have/will legally port their EB3 PDs to EB2.
Regards.
We all agree that there is severe backlog. Only way the backlog will alleviate is by increasing visa numbers, which not going to happen any time sooner.
So some people (and I know around 10 of them) what they are doing is the following:
They got the chance to file their 485 last July , which is pending. They are now contacting several small desi consulting firms to file for their fresh labor in EB2 category. Once their labor is filled and new I-140 is approved, they plan to attach new I-140 to the original 485 and hence effectively convering to Eb2 category but with priority dates in 2002 and 2003 (because original I-140 had that priority). Worst, they would never join that desi consulting firm...
This how the system is being gamed. If I know 10 such cases, I am sure there must be thousand like that.Now you tell me , isn't that unfair to the people already in Eb2 line as well as the ones who do not know how to game the system
By the way: If any one is interested, I know of three such consulting firms that can do for you for a fee.
Sunnysurya,
I am not arguing or obstinately stating my view. I am genuinely confused.
I am not sure how it is unfair on EB2. Didn't these folks apply for GC before us legally and stand in line sincerely (no labor subs) AND gather pertinent work exp and education?
I understand you are working on getting the numbers. I would wait to hear from you with those numbers.
It is one thing to feel wronged seeing a few examples of people abusing the porting but quite another to have a lawsuit alleging that this is a widespread activity and it is causing grievous delays for the ones waiting in EB2. I really don't believe it and feel it is insulting to a large majority of highly skilled and hard working immigrants who have/will legally port their EB3 PDs to EB2.
Regards.
more...
gautamkini
06-18 01:58 PM
NO They have to be in the US for AOS filing.
can i get her here on tourist visa and file for I485...my H1B extension is in process. the lawyer said it may take 4 months.. it was filed 15 days ago...
gautam
can i get her here on tourist visa and file for I485...my H1B extension is in process. the lawyer said it may take 4 months.. it was filed 15 days ago...
gautam
hot free download mobile
eager_immi
07-18 01:58 PM
Can we all take a month from his list of trancscripts and read through his transcripts and see which one has the H1B mistatement. I think he said this sometime in 2005 or 2006 we only need 24 participants.
'http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ldt.html
'http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ldt.html
more...
house tattoo Free Mobile Wallpapers
aadimanav
09-16 10:07 AM
Called most of the people in the list.
Most of the time it was voice mail.
Person from Brad Sherman office mentioned that congressman was supporting the bill.
Person from Robert C. Scott office mentioned that she did know the position but the congressman had supported these kinds of bills in the past.
Most of the time it was voice mail.
Person from Brad Sherman office mentioned that congressman was supporting the bill.
Person from Robert C. Scott office mentioned that she did know the position but the congressman had supported these kinds of bills in the past.
tattoo Free Mobile Phone Wallpapers,
makemygc
06-29 07:09 PM
I'm not getting this. If DOS/USCIS wants to retrogress the current dates then why they will wait for july2nd or 3rd. As they know people will file their applications by 29th june or they will try to deliver their applications by 2nd of july. So,if this rumour is really true then they would have posted revised bulletin in this week only , latest by today only, so that people will stop filling applications. So guys relax and keep doing whatever you were doing and file your applications by 2nd july.
There is nothing in our hands or even in lawyers.Lets wait n watch!!! keep hope
I was thinking on the same line. Why to wait at the last moment and that too when today they allowed the medical examinations to be done outside the local area. I guess, time to chill out, have some beer (i'm already having) and worry on monday. We anyway can't do anything about it on sat-sun.
There is nothing in our hands or even in lawyers.Lets wait n watch!!! keep hope
I was thinking on the same line. Why to wait at the last moment and that too when today they allowed the medical examinations to be done outside the local area. I guess, time to chill out, have some beer (i'm already having) and worry on monday. We anyway can't do anything about it on sat-sun.
more...
pictures 2010 Download free mobile
nish
06-16 10:09 AM
Thanks for your reply.
what is the meaning of staff augmentation case? He work at client place and client is administered project.The s/w tool is copyright by client.The reason for asking him to come back is that prior to this company he worked for another company for two years. He left his old company before 5 year. when he joined his current company he has provided all the document mentioned in checklist such as offer letter, exp and releiving letter and last two month pay stub and they did BG for same document.During 5 years career he worked for diff client and everytime they did BG for him before putting him in project and there was no problem happen in his BG. recently his current employer find something wrong about his prior company and they asked him to provide more evidance for prior company.now he don't have any contact of his prior employer and he does not have any more evidnace for showing their company.
Because of this reason they are asking him to come back home country from last two week.He told his company that he tryed to connect his prior employer but he can not make out and he don't have anything more to show the company.
Please suggest what he can do in this situation.
If anyone come across in this situation then please reply to my question.
Appericiate your help in advacne
what is the meaning of staff augmentation case? He work at client place and client is administered project.The s/w tool is copyright by client.The reason for asking him to come back is that prior to this company he worked for another company for two years. He left his old company before 5 year. when he joined his current company he has provided all the document mentioned in checklist such as offer letter, exp and releiving letter and last two month pay stub and they did BG for same document.During 5 years career he worked for diff client and everytime they did BG for him before putting him in project and there was no problem happen in his BG. recently his current employer find something wrong about his prior company and they asked him to provide more evidance for prior company.now he don't have any contact of his prior employer and he does not have any more evidnace for showing their company.
Because of this reason they are asking him to come back home country from last two week.He told his company that he tryed to connect his prior employer but he can not make out and he don't have anything more to show the company.
Please suggest what he can do in this situation.
If anyone come across in this situation then please reply to my question.
Appericiate your help in advacne
dresses mobile wallpapers nature free
RDB
11-25 05:40 PM
I know the rules of car buying and hence mentioned the word hypothetical - however, as I said earlier, I agree with your basic principle that we are liable for whatever we signed up for and if you look at my first post on this thread that is exactly what I suggested to punjabi77 i.e. Is renting an option?
If we strictly go by the purpose of this thread - yes, we are in agreement that punjabi77 should look at alternative ways of paying off his mortgage or just simply sell his asset with a ~20k loss.
Peace :)
Some Rules:
Rule 101 for car buying: Value depreciates moment you walk out of show room. How much it will be, no one can guarantee you and no one but you are liable for depreciation.
Rule 101 for Home buying: Value of the debt you sign will remain unchanged
while the value of asset may erode.
Rule 102: House is a secure debt: meaning if you don't pay the house will be repossessed by bank. So you have to pay to play.
Do you know there is no earthquake insurance in California so if you loose your fully paid house in earth quake you are left with ZIP !!!
Mother of all Rule: Don't get into the any game without knowing the rules.
Now some clarification: The money Punjabi77 own to the bank is actually already paid to the builder or seller (previous owner) by the bank. Bank gave away that money just by a stroke of signature of Punjabi77 and in return for future interest payments. So the asset value on the book is what Punjabi
owes not a penny less and not a penny more. If they reduce the asset value to make Punjabi77 feel better it will be taking loss for him ? Why should they do it ? Should they take it back from builder and where do we stop ?
We can demonize lenders, Wall St and everyone all we want, but this thread is not about them. This is about punjabi77. But I don't know why it is so hard for us to just accept that we screwed up, got enticed made a mistake and start to fix it. Stop the blame game for once. I can attribute all my problems to someone or the other but how does it help me ? The sooner I accept them and start to work on then better it is for me.
If we strictly go by the purpose of this thread - yes, we are in agreement that punjabi77 should look at alternative ways of paying off his mortgage or just simply sell his asset with a ~20k loss.
Peace :)
Some Rules:
Rule 101 for car buying: Value depreciates moment you walk out of show room. How much it will be, no one can guarantee you and no one but you are liable for depreciation.
Rule 101 for Home buying: Value of the debt you sign will remain unchanged
while the value of asset may erode.
Rule 102: House is a secure debt: meaning if you don't pay the house will be repossessed by bank. So you have to pay to play.
Do you know there is no earthquake insurance in California so if you loose your fully paid house in earth quake you are left with ZIP !!!
Mother of all Rule: Don't get into the any game without knowing the rules.
Now some clarification: The money Punjabi77 own to the bank is actually already paid to the builder or seller (previous owner) by the bank. Bank gave away that money just by a stroke of signature of Punjabi77 and in return for future interest payments. So the asset value on the book is what Punjabi
owes not a penny less and not a penny more. If they reduce the asset value to make Punjabi77 feel better it will be taking loss for him ? Why should they do it ? Should they take it back from builder and where do we stop ?
We can demonize lenders, Wall St and everyone all we want, but this thread is not about them. This is about punjabi77. But I don't know why it is so hard for us to just accept that we screwed up, got enticed made a mistake and start to fix it. Stop the blame game for once. I can attribute all my problems to someone or the other but how does it help me ? The sooner I accept them and start to work on then better it is for me.
more...
makeup .mobi Mobile friendly download
nkavjs
09-14 10:29 AM
AOS filed July 2nd @ NSC (10:25 AM, J.Barrett)
I-140 approved from TSC in Feb 07 (LUD: 08/05)
Absolutely nothing yet...
----------------
I-140 approved by TSC
LUD on I-140 of 8-5-07
I-485 filed with NSC on 2nd july
J Barrett - 10.25am
No news yet.
When called IO, they say no application in system yet.
I-140 approved from TSC in Feb 07 (LUD: 08/05)
Absolutely nothing yet...
----------------
I-140 approved by TSC
LUD on I-140 of 8-5-07
I-485 filed with NSC on 2nd july
J Barrett - 10.25am
No news yet.
When called IO, they say no application in system yet.
girlfriend Free mobile wallpapers - for
.jpg "free download mobile")
ssa
08-21 12:56 PM
Yes, the same law can be interpreted like this:
EB1-ROW unused visa will go to EB2-ROW
EB2-ROW unused visa will go to EB3-ROW
Same for each country.
But its not happening. What actually is happening that they are giving unused visa from EB1-ROW to EB2-ROW to EB2-I/C. WHY?
So EB3-ROW is retrogressed bcoz it doesn't get any spillover and hence it affect EB3-I.
So where is the correct interpretation? Does any body know?
Don't take me wrong here. I don't favor EB3-ROW or any particular category. I am EB3-I with PD Nov 2002.
I remember reading statement from USCIS head (if I remember correct on Ron Gotcher's forum as well as in some immigration newsletter) that they consulted congress and other legal resources on how to interpret the unused visa overflow provisions and based upon the consultation decided to change overflow allocation from "vertical" to "horizontal".
So yes, they did change the way they used to handle the overflow but it does not seem like it was done on their own whims and fancies. It does not matter how we interpret the sections of the law among ourselves, if they got the current interpretation after consulting with congress etc. IMHO it will be very hard to make them change it back to the old way. As a government agency they can not do frequent flip-flops on policy matters - now efficiency is whole another story ;)
If I can find the links to the articles I mentioned above I'll post them on this thread.
EB1-ROW unused visa will go to EB2-ROW
EB2-ROW unused visa will go to EB3-ROW
Same for each country.
But its not happening. What actually is happening that they are giving unused visa from EB1-ROW to EB2-ROW to EB2-I/C. WHY?
So EB3-ROW is retrogressed bcoz it doesn't get any spillover and hence it affect EB3-I.
So where is the correct interpretation? Does any body know?
Don't take me wrong here. I don't favor EB3-ROW or any particular category. I am EB3-I with PD Nov 2002.
I remember reading statement from USCIS head (if I remember correct on Ron Gotcher's forum as well as in some immigration newsletter) that they consulted congress and other legal resources on how to interpret the unused visa overflow provisions and based upon the consultation decided to change overflow allocation from "vertical" to "horizontal".
So yes, they did change the way they used to handle the overflow but it does not seem like it was done on their own whims and fancies. It does not matter how we interpret the sections of the law among ourselves, if they got the current interpretation after consulting with congress etc. IMHO it will be very hard to make them change it back to the old way. As a government agency they can not do frequent flip-flops on policy matters - now efficiency is whole another story ;)
If I can find the links to the articles I mentioned above I'll post them on this thread.
hairstyles Free Nature Iphone Desktop
kevinkris
11-21 03:29 PM
But haven't got response from NSC or Ombudsman..
TSC people are thinking smart by sending "Contact Help Desk" letter
to everyone.. They don't even see what's in the letter and why 100's of people sending same letter. Sigh.. :mad:
Same here.
TSC people are thinking smart by sending "Contact Help Desk" letter
to everyone.. They don't even see what's in the letter and why 100's of people sending same letter. Sigh.. :mad:
Same here.
sledge_hammer
11-25 08:06 PM
I still would not put the blame on the lender. Nobody put a gun to your head and asked you to buy a home. You, out of your own volition, went to the lender after all the shopping you did for rates, then settled with one lender and signed the contract. Why is it the lender's fault for lending you money when you needed it? Why didnt you finanance the whole purchase yourself? You didn't have that kind of money, right? So what the lender did was charge you interest, as a fee for loaning you the money. So the builder/owner of the home got his money from the bank and left. Now the two parties involved are you and the lender. And it is your obligation to pay the loan whether the home appreciates or depriciates. Like Canadian_Dream already said, any investment has risk associated with it. You should have paid attention to it before signing the contract. Have you ever invested in a stocks or mutual funds? There is always a disclaimer that there is a certain amount of risk involved. The investment in real estate is just like that. It is not like putting away money in a savings account which is insured by FDIC.
If someone is dumb enough not to know these things he should not be investing in the first place!
Yup, that was my point - both are greedy :)....so no point blaming any 1 party. And agree with you that foreclosure is only an option if you 'really' can't pay your monthly dues and that too for a sustained period of time - if one has the money to pay the monthly mortgage, one should continue to pay it off even if the asset value as plummeted to rock bottom because that is what you have singed in for - the amount of loan you took out to buy that house. No excuse from that!
Foreclosing just because you can't make short term profit on it is simply in-excusable.
If someone is dumb enough not to know these things he should not be investing in the first place!
Yup, that was my point - both are greedy :)....so no point blaming any 1 party. And agree with you that foreclosure is only an option if you 'really' can't pay your monthly dues and that too for a sustained period of time - if one has the money to pay the monthly mortgage, one should continue to pay it off even if the asset value as plummeted to rock bottom because that is what you have singed in for - the amount of loan you took out to buy that house. No excuse from that!
Foreclosing just because you can't make short term profit on it is simply in-excusable.
rameshk
03-31 11:13 PM
Hi,
I have donated $100 for the advocacy day. But I still cannot access the donar forum. How to request this access?
Thanks,
Ramesh
Important information is available on this in the Donor Forum. VBKris77 have compiled the information from the previous analysis and the latest information released by Dept. of State and IV's recommendation.
But I am not allowed to post the information here...:D
I have donated $100 for the advocacy day. But I still cannot access the donar forum. How to request this access?
Thanks,
Ramesh
Important information is available on this in the Donor Forum. VBKris77 have compiled the information from the previous analysis and the latest information released by Dept. of State and IV's recommendation.
But I am not allowed to post the information here...:D
No comments:
Post a Comment