Thursday, August 4, 2011

black and white wedding with red

images Red Black and White Wedding black and white wedding with red. Black, white red wedding cake
  • Black, white red wedding cake



  • Macaca
    08-07 07:38 PM
    Tougher Rules Change Game for Lobbyists (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/07/washington/07lobby.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK New York Times, August 7, 2007

    WASHINGTON, Aug. 6 � H. Stewart Van Scoyoc, founder of one of the biggest lobbying firms in Washington, spent an anxious morning with his lawyer last week assessing the far-reaching ethics and lobbying rules Congress had passed the day before.

    The first worry was what lobbyists are calling the new �temptation rules.� Not only do they bar lawmakers and aides from accepting any gifts, meals or trips from lobbyists, they also impose penalties up to $200,000 and five years in prison on any lobbyist who provides such freebies.

    And worse still for Mr. Van Scoyoc, under the new law he is required to certify each quarter that none of the 50 lobbyists in his firm bought so much as a burger or cigar for someone on a lawmaker�s staff.

    �You are basically asking people to certify, with big penalties, that nobody has lied on their expense accounts,� Mr. Van Scoyoc said, marveling at the complexity of policing such casual contact between lobbyists and Congressional aides. �These are people who are sharing apartments together, playing on the same softball teams, each other�young people with active social lives.�

    The new law has quickly sent a ripple of fear through K Street. It comes amid signs that federal prosecutors are taking a newly aggressive approach to corruption cases � including treating campaign contributions as potential bribes.

    By requiring them to certify the good behavior of their employees, the law puts lobbyists at new legal risk and could subject them to new pressure from prosecutors. And new centralized disclosures of lobbyists� campaign contributions, fund-raising activities and even their achievements � in the form of Congressional earmarks in spending bills � make it only easier for federal investigators to paint unflattering portraits of lobbyists� influence.

    �It will be easier to connect dots,� said Ted Van Der Meid, a Washington lawyer who was counsel to Representative J. Dennis Hastert when he was House speaker. �Even if there shouldn�t be a connection, you are going to have to explain to them how the way they connected the dots is not what you intended. You are going to have to basically prove your innocence.�

    Stanley Brand, a longtime Washington defense lawyer who usually represents Democrats, said the law was a sea change. �It should send shivers down lobbyists� spines,� Mr. Brand said. �It is a minefield now.�

    These are hardly the first restrictions, of course. Internal rules already barred lawmakers or senior staff members from accepting a gift or a meal worth more than $50 from a lobbyist. But the rules were rarely, if ever, enforced and did not govern lobbyists.

    President Bush has not said whether he would sign the bill, but it is already changing the culture of Capitol Hill in myriad ways, beginning with more Dutch treats and fewer steak dinners.

    Lobbying firms are racing to train employees in the new rules. One firm, fearful that prosecutors might try to use the expanded disclosures to link official actions to campaign contributions, has sent letters to its clients advising them how to respond if a lawmaker brings up fund-raising in a conversation about policy or procurements. �We would love to have this conversation, but it would have to be at another time� is the short answer.

    One lobbyist, who would speak only anonymously to avoid attracting the attention of prosecutors or rivals, said he had started sending himself date-stamped e-mail to create a record of every phone conversation he had with a lawmaker. Then he stopped making campaign contributions.

    Another lobbyist recently scaled back the menu at a breakfast briefing for lawmakers, offering bagels and cream cheese instead of ham and eggs. The rules permit lobbyists to provide refreshment of �only nominal value.� The House ethics committee guidelines suggest �light appetizers and drinks, or soda and cookies,� a standard that is known as �the toothpick test.�

    The firm also advised a client distributing flashlights on Capitol Hill � to promote government openness � to make sure not only that they cost less than $10 each but also that they looked cheap, to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

    And the �staff briefing� � in which a lobbyist enticed Congressional staff members to hear a talk about some dry legislative concern by offering pizza � has become extinct. No one will come without the free food.

    Lobbyists complain that Congress is unfairly punishing them for the misdeeds of its own members, not to mention ruining the social lives of innocent and underpaid staff members.

    �All those people who grew up in the system � who aren�t evil-doers, just good people � used to be able to entertain and have fun,� lamented Jim Ervin, a veteran military industry lobbyist.

    Jan Baran, a longtime Republican lawyer whose clients include lobbyists, said: �There is a great deal of resentment. It�s �the devil made me do it,� and the devil this time happens to be lobbyists. They get tarred with corruption, and the next day they get mail from all the same lawmakers who are blaming lobbyists saying, �I have a fund-raiser next week � don�t forget to contribute!� �

    Many lobbyists say the rules pose dilemmas. Blocking them from buying dinners or trips for lawmakers, lobbyists say, will only force them to spend more time and money at political fund-raisers to get the same access.

    For lawmakers, one of the most contentious elements of the package is the requirement that candidates disclose the names of federally registered lobbyists who solicit and �bundle� contributions. But lobbyists say the recognition may only encourage them to bundle. Ties to lawmakers are calling cards for clients.

    �That is not going to be viewed as the mark of Cain or anything,� Lawrence O�Brien III, a Democratic lobbyist and fund-raiser, said dryly. �It could be perceived as bragging rights.�

    Other lobbyists, though, worry that prosecutors� new tactics could make fund-raising more perilous. In plea agreements involving the lobbyist Jack Abramoff and former Representative Randall Cunningham, prosecutors have treated certain campaign contributions as bribes for official favors, something almost never done before.

    For lobbyists � who live at the nexus of contributions and favors � it is an alarming trend. �They might as well just pull up the paddy wagon outside the Capital Grille,� one lobbyist said, referring to a clubby steakhouse near the Capitol that is a well-known K Street hangout.

    Between the ban on buying dinners and the scrutiny of fund-raising, �It is a lose-lose situation,� said James Dyer, a lobbyist at Clark & Weinstock.

    A self-described �earmarks guy� who specializes in spending items, Mr. Dyer said the new rules were an invitation to scandal hunters. For the first time, the law will require disclosure of both the lawmakers who sponsor such items and the campaign contributions of the lobbyists who seek them.

    �It is a road map that says, �Hey, come look at me; I have got my name against an earmark,� � he said.

    Some loopholes exist. At the annual Aerospace Industries Association trade show in Paris last month, for example, military contractors treated a gaggle of senators to luxurious receptions at galleries, parks and hotels � all permitted under an exception for �widely attended events.�

    But John W. Douglass, the group�s president, said the new rules were putting a damper on such events. �Who wants to go to a hot, crowded cocktail party,� Mr. Douglass said, �and have to worry every time the guy brings the hors d�oeuvres tray up, �Should I do this or not?� �

    Still, some lobbyists and lawyers wondered privately how long the new carefulness would last.

    At the Capital Grille the evening after final passage of the new lobbying bill, private wine lockers by the door still bore the names of several prominent lobbyists. Two mounted stag heads were the only sentries policing the dimly lit bar. Shaking a Belvedere Vodka martini for a lone defense contractor, a bartender leaned in to offer his thoughts.

    �What happens at the Capital Grille,� the bartender said, �stays at the Capital Grille.�

    Fundraisers Tap Those Who Can't Say No (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/06/AR2007080601403.html) 'Bundlers' Look to Associates, Employees for Campaign Cash By Matthew Mosk Washington Post Staff Writer, August 7, 2007
    Draining the 'Swamp' Is Not So Easy (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/06/AR2007080601298.html) Skeptics Question Bite of Ethics Rules By Elizabeth Williamson Washington Post Staff Writer, August 7, 2007





    wallpaper Black, white red wedding cake black and white wedding with red. Black red and white wedding
  • Black red and white wedding



  • Refugee_New
    01-07 09:28 AM
    Hey Refugee_New, why the hell you gave me red ("what other site - refugee!").
    Go ahead & post it on the some news websites THAT ARE NOT RELATED WITH EB ISSUES. THIS FORM IS ONLY FOR EMPLOYMENT BASED IMMIGRATION RELATED ISSUES PERIOD & END OF DISCUSSION.
    As I already said it is very sad to hear innocent kids got killed. Opening a thread here & giving your baseless comments will not going to help the ppl suffering over there so why not you go over there and help them out by fighting with Israeli forces instead of whining here.

    GCBatman, i didn't give you red. Let me know how to give red or green. I never tried this before.





    black and white wedding with red. of lack and white wedding
  • of lack and white wedding



  • qasleuth
    03-31 09:58 PM
    I was quoting you to make a point, did not mean to put words in your mouth. Apologies.

    I totally agree about the transperancy part and the affect measuring people has on productivity. My receipt date is 07/30/07 and notice date is 09/06/2007, there were cases filed after mine on which RFEs were issued. Does it mean they have preadjudicated/looked at my case ? I can only wish as it is pretty hard to believe that it was looked at.

    Didn't say anything about "systematic" at all - I think we all know better than to use "systematic" and "USCIS" in the same sentence!:D However, they definitely seem to be making some progress on adjudications even if none the country caps limit green cards issual. Aamazing how you can change behaviour when you set a goal and start to measure people on it - looking at the bits and pieces of info being released by USCIS, you can see something is changing and I would suspect a lot has to do with the new leadership in government, that has a mandate for greater transparency (unlike their predecessors). Given the lack of visibility to Case Officers of cases with old PD's (they track by RDs and not PDs), I cannot but believe this will be good for getting some structure into the system.





    2011 Black red and white wedding black and white wedding with red. Red Black And White Wedding
  • Red Black And White Wedding



  • Canadianindian
    09-30 04:42 PM
    I like Obama's opinion and his enthusiam. I would support him financially and in fact campaign and vote for him.

    However, I am not sure if he understand the plight of Legal immigrants who have suffered for years with no relief in sight. We are law abiding people, but have to suffer tremendously. I am not sure if Obama is aware of our plight.

    I am afraid if Obama wins the election, our chances of getting the GC will diminish as the CIR will not get his support to benefit the EB immigrants.



    more...


    black and white wedding with red. Abstract Floral Red, Black
  • Abstract Floral Red, Black



  • GCapplicant
    07-13 04:46 PM
    I am just losing confidence.Just wondering how they have moved only the second category -when there is someone highly retrogressed.
    To fail the bills so no one will work for that anymore or just because EB2 is superior than EB3 or am I confusing myself.So once if EB2I becomes C and then EB3row C will EB3 I atleast move.

    Its just a spillover,why cant they give it equally.Why no one is ready to question for us?





    black and white wedding with red. Scarlet Red Wedding Invitation
  • Scarlet Red Wedding Invitation



  • Macaca
    02-13 09:42 AM
    Lobbying and Legislation: Enacting Better Laws (http://www.policylink.org/AdvocatingForChange/Lobbying/Legislators.html) (courtesy krishna.ahd)

    After you lay the foundation for your legislative efforts and assess the political landscape, your goal is to convince legislators to accept your position. Some activities, such as proposing legislation or amendments, meeting with legislators and their staff, and testifying at hearings, occur inside the halls of the legislature; other actions, such as letter writing, public demonstrations, and working with the media, are initiated outside the legislature to build public pressure and urge legislators to come over to your side. Always coordinate your actions inside and outside of the legislature to make sure you are consistent and achieve maximum effect.

    Write letters, send faxes and e-mails, and phone legislators. Letters are definitely worth the time. Legislators know that each letter they receive represents several additional constituents who feel the same way but have not taken the time to write. That�s why, in addition to writing your own letter, you should get your partners and allies to write letters as well.

    Be clear and concise. Keep your letter to one page, at most two, and address only one issue per letter, if possible. Clearly identify the bill you are writing about and the position you are urging (vote yes or no). Make two or three of your strongest arguments for or against the proposed legislation. Remember: Legislators receive many letters on many different issues; your letter should be easy to read and understand if you want any chance of grabbing their attention.
    Identify yourself and your constituency. Say something about who you are and whom you represent; you want the legislator to understand that you are someone she or he should listen to. Give an example of a personal story�preferably from the legislator�s district�that shows how the bill affects real people and that the problem is not just an isolated incident. Legislators hear about what�s good and bad policy all the time; real-life experiences grab their attention.
    Avoid using form letters whenever possible. Avoid them altogether if you cannot deliver extraordinary volume. Personal individually signed letters are far more effective. When you are soliciting letters from partners and allies, provide a sample with a request that they use it as a guide to writing a letter in their own words.
    While letters tend to be most effective, you can also fax, phone, and e-mail your legislators. Usually, you use e-mails, faxes and phone calls right before a bill is coming up for a vote to remind legislators of the importance of their vote to you. If you are planning to organize a fax, phone, or e-mail chain, in which your partners and allies ask their constituents and supporters to take action, be sure to provide the contact information for the appropriate representative because the most effective contacts are those that come from legislators� own constituents. For more on e-mail advocacy see the Internet Advocacy section.

    Meet with legislators. Face-to-face contact with legislators is key to humanizing the problem, demonstrating a commitment to solving it, and developing relationships for the long haul.

    Organize a small, diverse group of participants, perhaps three to five people. Make sure at least some of them reside in the legislator�s district.
    Select your best spokespersons and message. Choose someone who will appeal to the legislators you are trying to persuade.
    Decide ahead of time how you will conduct the meeting. Who will introduce the participants? Lead the meeting? Close the meeting? What materials will you take to leave with the legislator at the end of the meeting?
    Get to know legislators� staff. Legislators often rely heavily on the advice of key staff members. It is important to establish a good relationship with these staff members, make sure they have adequate information about your legislation, and try to learn from them any concerns you may need to address to keep your legislation moving forward. The staff will be your main point of contact if a legislator is unavailable or inaccessible.
    For more tips on meeting with legislators, such as scheduling, preparing for, conducting, and following up after the meeting, see Tips on Meeting with Your Elected Officials (http://archive.aclu.org/action/lobby.html), and �Six Practical Tips on How to Lobby Your Legislator or Elected Official (http://www.democracyctr.org/resources/lobbying.html)� in Lobbying�the Basics.

    Testify at hearings. This is not one of those times when you can wing it! Always be prepared before you give testimony on pending legislation.

    Get a rough vote count of how legislators are likely to vote before you attend the hearing and try to find out about outstanding issues and concerns. Having this information will help you choose the best witnesses, know what points you need to emphasize in your testimony, and consider amendments you may need to offer or agree to.
    Choose witnesses who will be credible and effective. Put together a combination of people directly affected by the legislation, experts, and individuals and organizations that represent legislators� constituents.
    Write out your testimony in advance so that it is clear, concise, and persuasive. Include personal stories whenever possible to show how the issue affects real people. Prepare a summary of your testimony for distribution at the hearing to legislators, the media, and other attendees. Anticipate questions legislators might ask and plan how to respond.
    Pack the legislative chambers with supporters and call the media. Wear buttons, T-shirts, or other identifying items to show legislators and the media the strength and presence of your support in the hearing room.
    Have legislators who support your cause ask your opponents tough questions and make supportive statements on your behalf. You could offer to draft a list of questions or key points that you would like them to cover. Discuss in advance amendments that may be offered and the bottom line for any compromises.

    Staging public protests or other public events. Consider organizing an event that energizes and mobilizes large numbers of supporters and captures legislators��and media�attention.

    Public protests can sometimes turn up the heat on lawmakers to vote your way or at least think twice about siding with the opposition.
    Holding a Lobby Day is an opportunity to mobilize large numbers of people to meet with multiple legislators in one day to show your legislative power and gain media attention. The day usually begins with training in lobbying skills and a teach-in on your issues, followed perhaps by a rally and news interviews, a couple of hours of meetings with legislators, and an end-of-day debriefing session for supporters.

    Ignite Public Scrutiny. Elected officials care about their public image. They want to be portrayed favorably in the news. Develop a media strategy around your legislation that includes news conferences, letters to the editor, writing opinion editorials, or other media strategies that will put your issue in the public eye, maintain public scrutiny throughout the legislative process, provide a vehicle for keeping pressure on elected officials, turn up the heat on those who are against you, and applaud those who stick with you. For more tips on developing a media strategy see the Media Advocacy section.
    Be persistent. Lobbying campaigns rarely come to a definitive end.

    If your proposed legislation is defeated, there is frequently another opportunity to reintroduce it. Don�t be discouraged. Often it takes several tries to pass a measure, especially one that seeks to bring about an important change.
    If you win, do not get complacent. Monitor implementation and make sure your legislation is fully funded. Look out for opposition attempts to undo or diminish your victory by trying to repeal your legislation, filing litigation to overturn it, or seeking regulations to significantly weaken its implementation.



    more...


    black and white wedding with red. I love lack and white wedding
  • I love lack and white wedding



  • xyzgc
    01-03 06:20 PM
    Smash terror hideouts says Abdul Kalam.
    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Smash_terror_hideouts_Kalam_/articleshow/3931768.cms





    2010 of lack and white wedding black and white wedding with red. Red Black and White Wedding
  • Red Black and White Wedding



  • mxh72c
    07-14 08:55 AM
    CIR is coming BACK in 2009! The only change that will happen in immigration is CIR due to the pandering politics. IV and all its members focus should be ensuring CIR is not passed on the backs of EB green cards. The group most likely to be screwed over will be EB3. All our energies and money should be on CIR and that we have a seat on the table when these compromises are made.



    more...


    black and white wedding with red. Black and White Wedding
  • Black and White Wedding



  • ilwaiting
    04-09 11:46 AM
    Yes you are correct. Employee has nothing to do with the Abuse. More over most of the employers have nothing to do with the abuse as well. Lawmakers must get their facts straight before imposing such foolish laws.


    Pete, I am myself a manager at a leading company and do not fit into the typical "consultant" profile.

    That does not mean I want more shackles on myself because I feel someone is abusing the system. If someone (employers) are abusing the system, go after them - why do you want to go after the employee who, in a lot of cases, has nothing to do with the abuse?

    In fact, if this bill passed in its current form, it will probably not affect me but I will still oppose the bill - why, because it goes against my fundamental belief of freedom of movement. If the senators want to reform the system, may I ask

    1. Why prevent H1Bs from joining legitimate consulting companies such as Deloitte, IBM, BCG etc

    2. Why should H1B's pay Social security and medicare when they are "temporary" and do not get a dime back?

    Think of the bigger picture and then about your own objectives - I am sure you are a well educated person and you will understand the consequences of arbitrary decision making based on vested interests.





    hair Red Black And White Wedding black and white wedding with red. Simply Perfect Wedding
  • Simply Perfect Wedding



  • vivid_bharti
    06-23 04:04 PM
    Buying a house in India and living here on rent sounds like getting married and keeping your wife in India :) unless your wife is with you what is the point in getting married, I think people should think beyond the 'Investment' perspective of house.....in agreement.....there is definately pleasure in living in your own house....



    more...


    black and white wedding with red. Red/Black amp; White Wedding Cake
  • Red/Black amp; White Wedding Cake



  • file485
    07-07 09:41 PM
    Hi Manu..

    it must be living hell for you with this mess, we all pray for you to get some route out of this hell.

    When did INS ask for your husband's pay stubs for 2000-2001? although he was filed as a derivative when did they ask you for this..?

    pls post..

    waiting for your response.





    hot Abstract Floral Red, Black black and white wedding with red. Aqua-and-Red-wedding. Black-
  • Aqua-and-Red-wedding. Black-



  • StuckInTheMuck
    08-05 02:48 PM
    Two guys are moving about in a supermarket when their carts collide.

    One says to the other, "I'm sorry - I was looking for my wife."
    "What a coincidence, so am I, and I'm getting a little desperate."

    "Well, maybe I can help you. What does your wife look like?"

    "She's tall, with long hair, long legs, firm boobs and a tight ass.

    What's your wife look like?"

    "Never mind, let's look for yours!"



    more...


    house red/lack/white wedding black and white wedding with red. Red, Black, and White Wedding
  • Red, Black, and White Wedding



  • Macaca
    12-30 06:57 PM
    A Bridge to a Love for Democracy (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/us/30iht-letter30.html) By RICHARD BERNSTEIN | New York Times

    I write this, my last �Letter from America,� looking out my window at my snowy Brooklyn neighborhood. It�s midmorning Wednesday, three days after our Christmas weekend blizzard, and my street has yet to receive the benefit of a snowplow.

    Cars, as the prize-winning novelist Saul Bellow once put it, are impounded by the drifts. The city is still partly paralyzed, pleasantly, in a way. There�s nothing like a heavy snowfall to give one a bit of a respite, to turn the ordinary, like walking to the corner store, into a little adventure. And there�s the countrylike stillness of this city block filled with snow, absent the usual traffic.

    It seems a good moment, in other words, to pause and reflect. My thoughts turn to a very unsnowy moment in 1972 in a village called Lowu, which was the last village in the Crown Colony of Hong Kong just before the border with China. I was a graduate student in Chinese history and a stringer for The Washington Post going to the territory of Chairman Mao for the first time in my life.

    There was a short trestle bridge at Lowu. I�ve often wondered if it�s still there. The Union Jack flew at one side, the red flag of the People�s Republic of China at the other. The border town on the other side was a little fishing and farming village called Shenzhen, now a modern city of skyscrapers and shopping malls, an emblem of China�s amazing economic development.

    I was favorably disposed toward China as I strode across the bridge, ready to experience the radical egalitarianism of the Maoist revolution, which was generally viewed with favor among American graduate students specializing in China. I was a member of a group, moreover, that partook of a certain leftist orthodoxy. We had learned the �Internationale� so we could sing it for our revolutionary hosts. We were supposed to return to America and report the truth about China, which was, essentially, that it was the future and it worked.

    But it took only about 24 hours on that first journey to China for me utterly to change my mind and, indeed, to become a lifelong anti-Communist and devotee of liberal democracy, to find great wisdom in Winston Churchill�s dictum about its being the worst of all systems except for all the others.

    The noxious cult of personality around Mao was the first thing that effected my political transformation. But deeper than that was the pervasive odor of orthodoxy, the uniformity of it all, the mandatory pious declarations, which, if they were believed, were ridiculous, and, if they were forced, illustrated the terror of it all.

    Many of my American fellow travelers felt very differently about this. In my intense discomfort, I found myself in a sort of Menshevik minority, criticized by the majority for what I remember one person calling my �Darkness at Noon� mentality.

    Still, that discomfort, and the unwillingness of most of the others to experience it, has informed my work as a journalist ever since. I have to admit it: When I went to China as a correspondent for Time magazine seven years after that first trip, my impulse was not so much to look with fresh and impartial eyes on a country that had just opened up to a degree of foreign inspection as it was to expose what I felt many Americans were missing in those rhapsodic days. Namely, that the country under Mao and after belonged to the 20th-century totalitarian mainstream � that it was a poverty-stricken police state and not a viable alternative to Western ways.

    There was a degree of bias in this view, and it led me into some mistakes. On China, in particular, I was perhaps focused too single-mindedly on its totalitarian elements so that I underplayed other elements, notably the speed of change in China, and perhaps even the unsuitableness of many Western democratic ways for a country so essentially backward.

    And perhaps, too, I extrapolated a bit too much from the China experience when it came to other places and other times. When I covered academic life in the United States, for example, I tended to see vicious Maoist Red Guards in the phenomenon of what came to be called political correctness, and, while I don�t think this was entirely wrong, it was an exaggeration.

    And yet, it seems appropriate in this final column to say, as well, that my nearly 40 years in the journalism game haven�t shaken me from the essential belief that formed during that first, memorable visit to China.

    Ever since, despite all our infuriating faults, our wastefulness, our occasional self-satisfied sluggishness, our proneness to demagogy and other forms of anti-intellectualism, our crumbling infrastructure, the Fox News channel, the cult of Sarah Palin, the narcissistic self-indulgence of our urban elites, the detention center in Guant�namo Bay and our crisis-creating greed and shortsightedness � despite all that � I continue to believe that, not to put too fine a point on it, we�re better than they are.

    This doesn�t mean that I think we�re perfect, or that our impulse toward a kind of benevolent imperialism has always had benevolent results. But I have stuck for 40 years to a belief that, yes, our ways are superior � and by our ways I mean such things often taken for granted as a free press, strong civil institutions, an independent judiciary and, perhaps above all, the belief that the powers of the state need to be restrained, and that the institutions of government exist to serve the individual, not the other way around.

    The essential difference with China, even the much-changed China of today, and most of the other non-Western political cultures, is the absence of this sense of restraint, and the primacy of the collective over the individual.

    That�s the idea that I was actually groping toward when I crossed the bridge at Lowu. It�s the idea that I want to end with here on this snowy day in New York in my final sentence on this page. Goodbye.





    tattoo Scarlet Red Wedding Invitation black and white wedding with red. red black and white wedding
  • red black and white wedding



  • nojoke
    12-27 06:24 AM
    Ofcourse its Pakistan's responsibility since we created them. But the question is, where do you go from here?
    There is about twenty to twenty five years worth of infrastructure and intellectual capital built in the unofficial 'non-state' militant/jihadi circles.
    So, its going to take time for this infrastructure to go away.

    The challenge for Pakistan is to dismantle this infrastructure. A hostile or unfriendly India doesn't help. Ironically, it makes reliance upon this infrastructure attractive.

    If pakistan is innocent, how about handing over dawood ibrahim? or a few other terrorist to India. If not to India, why not hand them over to international court? If they don't want to do this, then it is logical for us to conclude that the pak government is involved



    more...


    pictures I love lack and white wedding black and white wedding with red. Red Black and White Wedding
  • Red Black and White Wedding



  • xyzgc
    12-27 01:29 AM
    great posts by alisa, gcisadawg and abcdgc. I don't agree with alisa but the posts are decent.





    dresses Aqua-and-Red-wedding. Black- black and white wedding with red. Page 2 - Project Wedding
  • Page 2 - Project Wedding



  • Macaca
    12-23 11:04 AM
    'D' in Democrats means Do-Nothing (http://www.mercurynews.com//ci_7792528?IADID=Search-www.mercurynews.com-www.mercurynews.com) BUSH, REPUBLICANS GET THEIR WAY ON MOST ISSUES DESPITE VOTERS' MANDATE TO CHANGE DIRECTION Mercury News Editorial, 12/23/2007

    When the Democrats won control of Congress a year ago, they promised bold new leadership. Things would change, they said. They had a mandate.

    But they didn't have the votes to stand up to veto threats by Bush and filibusters by Senate Republicans. They didn't have the bold new leadership, either. A year later, Congress is lamer than the lame-duck president.

    On the Democrats' No. 1 issue, the war in Iraq, it's been a year of defeat and surrender. They were going to "bring the troops home." Instead, President Bush sent more troops to Iraq. The "surge," coupled with a new counter-insurgency strategy, has led to a sharp decline in military and civilian deaths. All attempts to link war funding to a withdrawal timetable fizzled. Giving up completely, Congress passed $70 billion in no-strings war funding before the Christmas recess.

    Democratic leaders blame their impotence on Bush's obstinacy. Bush didn't compromise. He didn't have to.

    Democrats talked about limiting the excesses of the Patriot Act, banning cruel CIA interrogation tactics and closing the Guant�namo Bay internment camp. Didn't happen.

    Instead, Congress authorized warrantless surveillance for six months by passing the Protect America Act before the August recess. Democrats were forced to push discussion on making the surveillance rules permanent into January. Bush will likely win this one, too.

    After months of wrangling, Congress approved an omnibus budget bill that gave Bush the spending levels he wanted.

    Promising fiscal discipline, the Democrats vowed to pay for any tax cuts with tax increases elsewhere or spending cuts. That "pay as you go pledge" was put aside to pass a popular bill protecting 23 million middle- and upper-middle-class taxpayers from paying $2,000 extra under the alternative minimum tax. Since the tax was originally designed to prevent the super-rich from using tax shelters, conservative Democrats tried to close tax shelters used by super-rich hedge-fund managers to cover the $50 million revenue loss. They lost.

    Congress made baby steps toward fiscal discipline by trimming "earmarks" for pet projects by 25 percent from 2006, estimates Taxpayers for Common Sense. But legislators OK'd more than $15 billion for more than 11,000 pork-barrel projects.

    President Bush didn't win them all: Social Security reform went nowhere, reauthorization of No Child Left Behind was postponed to 2008 and he couldn't rally enough Republicans to pass a complex and controversial immigration bill.

    But this wasn't supposed to be his year. The triumphant Democrats made big promises a year ago, but delivered modest results. Democrats increased the minimum wage, enacted the Sept. 11 commission's recommendations into law and expanded student loans.

    Most notable was the energy bill, which included the first increase in fuel efficiency standards for cars and light trucks in 32 years.

    However, Democrats dropped plans to repeal tax breaks for oil companies and require more use of alternative energy. Bush insisted. Congress caved.

    On other issues, Congress acted and Bush vetoed. Congress expanded health insurance for children and approved federal funding for stem cell research, but couldn't overcome Bush's "no" vote.

    Stymied repeatedly, Congress saw its approval ratings fall to record lows. When you're less popular than George W. Bush, you're pretty darned unpopular.

    "I don't approve of Congress, because we haven't . . . been effective in ending the war in Iraq," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco told reporters in response to the polls. "And if you asked me in a phone call, as ardent a Democrat as I am, I would disapprove of Congress as well."

    2008 will be a year of partisan politics. No doubt Republicans will run against the do-nothing Congress. That could backfire. Democrats will tell voters that if they want Democratic policies - and most people tell pollsters they do - they need to put a Democrat in the White House in 2008.

    For the next 11 months we can expect more of the same from the lame duck and lamer Congress.



    more...


    makeup Black and White Wedding black and white wedding with red. red/lack/white wedding
  • red/lack/white wedding



  • nojoke
    04-06 04:50 AM
    Fide_champ,

    I am also looking for buying house in new jersey and as you mentioned all good places with good schools have hardly any effect from recession and housing down turn. But any way if you have to buy a house for long term then no point in waiting. The only thing bad times do to good places is value doesn't increase like it does in good times. Any suggestions on areas in New Jersey with good school and affordable (I mean something in 350-450k)? I know some very good areas where worst looking house starts at 700k which is out of scope.

    USDream2Dust

    I hope this is not a joke. You have any idea what kind of downturn we will be facing? Why did Fed jump in to bail out Bear Stearns against all the criticism? What they did is considered illegal by many. But still they did it anyway. Because the Government is very afraid of this shaky economy. We were just few steps away from bank runs.
    My friend bought house in Atlanta and within 3 months the builder sold the same model houses for 100k less. We are going to see a 30% to 50% reduction depending on the area.
    People who wanted to convince themselves said it will not happen in california. As things started unfolding, they said it will not happen in Bay area. Then they said it will not happen in San Jose and Santa Clara. Now they are saying not in their block.
    If you still think a good school will protect your house price, go ahead and catch the falling knife. To give you some idea of what people here are thinking -------------
    “Sinclair: ‘But the prices kept going up. At one time, our house was worth over $600,000. In fact, a model just like this they were asking $699,000 — and now things have entirely collapsed.”

    “A similar house down the street is already in foreclosure and the bank is entertaining offers for under $200,000.”

    “The Sinclairs stopped paying their mortgage in October when the payment jumped from $3,000 a month to $4,000. Now they’re basically squatting in their own home, living there for free. Sinclair: ‘We had to start making some hard choices, which included going into foreclosure on our house and kind of starting again.’”

    “Sinclair: ‘We would do it if the equity was there, but in a case where we’re already so behind… Imagine that for five years, say, we’re gonna pay four grand a month and then we’re just gonna be back up at what we bought the house for. We feel like we’re throwing away money.’”

    --------------------------------
    They are just walking away from their house because they see that their house value is going down. This all will feedback and cause further decline in the prices. Don't think that the prices will be back in 5 years. For someone who bought a house in 1989, it took 8 years to 9 years to get back to their purchase price. This time it will be worse.

    Guys, people are talking about Depression and you guys want to buy house in a good school district. These FB(search google what it means), are waiting for some greater fool than themselves to unload their burden. This is why you will be called "greater fool"
    If you want to loose your 200K in 2 years, go ahead. It is your money. Don't tell that you weren't warned, like all these mortgage companies and banks who are now saying - "who would have thought it would get this worse".

    Land is plentiful in california and NJ. There are building restrictions artificially imposed to keep the prices high. But this is past. No realtors are saying "we are not making any more land" these days. I have been following the housing blogs and they are laughing at Indians who are buying here in Bay area. Do some research before spewing the realtor propaganda and don't compare situation in India with US. Sorry for the rant. I am doing this with good intention to save atleast some of you guys.





    girlfriend red black and white wedding black and white wedding with red. Gothic Red Wedding Dress,
  • Gothic Red Wedding Dress,



  • waitnwatch
    08-05 07:28 PM
    I had tried to frame the debate in my previous post which is quoted below. Never received as much as a yay or nay from anyone. On the other hand there are enough folks with a lot of bluster and rhetoric to keep the storm in the teacup going.

    It should be obvious that the USCIS doesn't make changes because we spit fire on this forum.

    That is exactly why we would be better of trying to use this forum for honing our arguments instead of punching imaginary bags and getting all riled up.

    This is probably my last post on this topic but I'll sure be visiting to enjoy all the shouting and screaming!

    OP is long gone. Your post is full of big brave words and no substance. If you want to have a discussion and demonstrate your "intellect", please make some rational arguments and back them up. There is no lawsuit discussion here, just a debate on the merits of BS+5 PD porting

    Here's the logic behind this debate as I see it (not that there is much logic in the way the immigration laws/rules are framed)

    A person with a Master's or a PhD has spent 2-3 or 5-6 years respectively to get their degrees but do not get a priority date reflecting that time spent on acquiring the qualifications.

    On the other hand a person with a bachelors who gets 5 years experience can port their priority date while moving from EB3 to EB2 thereby getting credit for time spent.

    Porting is law while the Bachelor+5 is due to some memo. This memo does not take into consideration the above inconsistency and therefore this debate.

    I hope this sounds logical to atleast some of you folks.





    hairstyles Red/Black amp; White Wedding Cake black and white wedding with red. red white black wedding
  • red white black wedding



  • alien2006
    08-11 12:55 PM
    dont know about lou's total viewership but every day his online polls have less than 15,000 respondents

    http://www.cnn.com/POLLSERVER/results/26653.exclude.html

    i m sure its basically everybody who is a member of numbersusa, fair and other nut job establishments

    The less we talk about his polls the better. Notice how every poll of his is swung to one end of the spectrum. His polls are the most ridiculous thing on the face of the planet.





    StuckInTheMuck
    08-05 02:13 PM
    Dick Cheney walks into the Oval Office and sees The President whooping and hollering.

    "What's the matter, Mr. President?" The Vice President inquired.

    "Nothing at all, Dickie. I just done finished a jigsaw puzzle in record time!" The President beamed.

    "How long did it take you?"

    "Well, the box said '3 to 5 Years' but I did it in a month!"





    senthil1
    05-16 05:29 PM
    Infact pro immigrants and Corporations are arguing that shortage of skills and they are not displacing US workers. If that is true why cannot they accept the conditions that they will not displace US workers. If you accept that you do not mind replacing some american workers also then all of your points are valid. Then you can lobby for unlimited H1b and Unlimited greencards. You will never get American people support for that. But we all are lobbying based on the shortage of skills. So we should be ready to reduce H1b when demand goes down or accept the conditions for non displacement of US workers. Right now demand is more so US will absorb even 200K H1bs. But you need to look what happened between 2000 to 2003. So many layoffs. Part of reason was economy but other part was due to H1b and outsourcing

    I will accept that 25 year old H1b from India can work 15 to 18 hours a day but same kind of productivity cannot get with 40 year old person with family of 2 kids whether Indian or american. Is it right to replace those person with 25 year old person. If that is the case then you will be replaced by youger H1b person in future.

    My view is clear. There should be H1b numbers based on demand and supply. If they cannot come with correct numbers then restriction of non displacement of US workers should be there.


    I am not Ronald Regan but I am compelled to say, " There you go again...."



    Why are you consistently discussing about H-1B caps. Green card delays are not because of H-1B quota, I am sure you know this. H-1B caps have nothing to do who applied for the H-1s, whether those were consulting companies in US or a company in Japan. You are just saying it consistently in all your posts because you don�t like more people coming here after you are on path to green cards. In all your posts, you have this mid set where the door closes right behind you and more people should not be allowed on H-1. I am sure you qualify to be the member of IEEE-USA. Please Google search for their membership form. Just because the name of the organization is �Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers� doesn�t mean that every thing on their agenda is kosher.



    This shows that you have no clue about the reality. You have looked at the IEEE website and formulated the opinion about the nice people at IEEE-USA, who are working overtime for you to get your green card. This is what you think, right? Well! My friend we live in a very strange world in which political organization (like IEEE) show stuff on their website just so that they don�t appear to be outright anti-immigrants.
    Also, I do think that anybody who do not want to pick up their ass to find a job and rather chose to whine about someone else taking away the job is lazy and for sure undeserving. They are interested to put restrictions on H-1B because they want to eliminate their competition. Every community/group, big or small, have their opponents and enemies just because of the sheer nature of the competition for resource with other groups/communities. H-1B community now forms substantially large group of people. It is natural that orgs like IEEE-USA will be a natural opponent of H-1B community because there is a competition. Now, most members of IEEE-USA are older and middle aged folks, who are not able to compete with good quality engineers from other parts of the world. The folks on H-1 are young, dynamic and fast learners. IEEE-USA folks cannot compete with this group and so they are working to eliminate competition from H-1B folks by other means. Sometimes they call H-1Bs as indentured servants, sometimes promoting outsourcing, sometimes taking away their jobs and sometime depressing wages. They throw out all sorts of rationale to hurt H-1B community. And some idiots on this and other forums have not clue of the bigger picture and are hell bent on screwing the so called �body shoppers� as if it is ok to work at the client site to do the same job at the same amount if you are employees of KPMG or Accenture or Bearing Point. But it is not ok to do the same thing if you are an employee of TCS, INFY or SIFY etc. If this is not discrimination, then tell me what is????? I sincerely do want to understand your view and please consider me to be totally ignorant person who is here to learn from you. I sincerely mean it.



    So you do think that anything associated with the word �IEEE� is gospel. Let me share with you my friend that IEEE and IEEE-USA are totally different organizations. Just like any other organization in the world, IEEE-USA is working to address the issues of their members only. IEEE-USA is working to fix the issues of their members who live in USA ONLY. It has no clue and no desire and no objective to look at any of your issues, no matter what they are. We all acknowledge that are problems with the H-1B program but the question is, Is Durbin-Grassley approach the real solution to the problem? Congress did not address anything associated with H-1B visa for last 6-7 years. If you write to lawmakers they only understand only thing about the word �H-1B� and that is increase in H-1B� that�s it. Now every system in the world needs tweaking from time to time and this has not happened with H-1B program for a very long time. Either way, throwing out people waiting for green cards for 6-7 years is not the solution, putting in restrictions to undermine the entire H-1B program (because they know they will not have enough votes to reduce the visa numbers or eliminate the program) is not the solution, �investigating� companies when they hire someone on H-1B as if hiring someone on H-1B is a crime is not the solution, singling out companies from one country because the guy driving IEEE-USA (Ron Hira) doesn�t want more people to come from India because he hates his heritage � is not the solution. Yes there are problems, but Durbin-Grassley bill is not the solution.



    Who needs enemies if we have friends like you? I mean why do you want hard working people to unnecessary go through more problems before getting their green cards, as if the existing problems for us are not enough. You simple want to make the system difficult to test human endurance? You know what, we can do this, how about all the stringent conditions of Durbin-Grassley bill will apply ONLY on you and we are all sure that the �HIGH-SKILLED� that you are, you will pass all the �tests� with flying colors. For rest all the others, please consider us lowly skilled and please set a bar lower to the extent that is humanly achievable, we are not �highly-skilled� super-humans like yourself.



    Yes, you have not yet clearly said that �I support banning all H-1Bs�, not in those words, not yet. But reading your posts, it is apparent that you are headed there, as soon as you get your green card. As I said earlier, form now on, just think that all the Durbin-Grassley conditions apply on you and live your life as per the standard set by Durbin-Grassley. For the rest of us, please have mercy on us.



    No comments:

    Post a Comment