optom3

Might I suggest an ape,you don't seem to have had much luck with the chimpanzees or bunnies.Better still a trip to the zoo,where with your ,all encompasing knowledge of the law,you can while away a few hours while constructing your own case.
Better watch out for those snakes in the grass though!!!!

Malvin

Well, if he was trying to be funny then I don't get English sense of humor, guilty as charged.
No, all questions were distinctly different. You can prove me wrong if you wish but you will fail.
There were people who answered my questions and their answers were very helpful. I believe I expressed my sincere thanks to every one of them. "We", as you put it, never left any comments other than yelling about contacting a LAWYER!
Nothing, I want nothing from you personally and your personal friends. I ask questions that are important to me in a public newsgroup hoping to get the answers. I was never rude, I was never vulgar, and I never insulted anybody, which I cannot say about the certain group of individuals you call the "we". If you don't want to answer, simply don't.
This is also an insult in my book, and completely uncalled for at that.

You are taking my words out of context. You should know that that's a no-no if you consider yourself a civilized person.

No, you can't, I got that, but other people can, I know that. So I'm not asking you personally, I asking them, whoever they might be.

If you are the owner of this web site and you don't want me to post through it, just say so. I will respectfully find another portal to the misc.immigration.usa newsgroup. My target is the newsgroup not the "we" group.

Thank you.

ian-mstm

I do consider myself a civilized persion... but except for the "thank you very much", I quoted your comment in its entirety. How can that be "out of context"? You specifically wrote (in its entirety): "I do know everything there's to know about "practice of law", thank you very much." Either you meant it or you didn't.


Fair enough! While the newsgroup is open to anyone who might care to participate, you'll find that of the several million immigrants currently in the US, only a handful actually post in this forum. Keep in mind that most of us who have responded to you *are* immigrants and have jumped through the various USCIS hoops... me included.


I have nothing to do with administration of this site, so from where I sit, you're free to do as you wish.


While I'm thinking about it... let me just get this off my chest...
Do you mean to, more properly, say, "most attorneys 'with whom I've come into contact' are crooks..."? The word "most" implies a majority, and that, sir, *is* insulting and not at all indicative of the lawyers with whom I've come in contact. Perhaps, in your frustration, you exaggerated a bit.

Look, you seem like a nice fellow who's an upstanding guy... I hope you get the answers you're after. Good luck to you.

Ian

Malvin

If that what is truly going on with this newsgroup nowadays then it's a crying shame. I haven't been here for more than 6 years at least. From what I remember back in the 90's it was a great group with lots of people participating, helping each other, and 4 or 5 attorneys commenting the posts at any given day and time. They were pretty generous and friendly too. Oh well.

Malvin

I don't know how long you've been living in America, but lawyers, in general, are commonly regarded there as liars and thieves. On the streets, in the movies, in popular culture you will never find a person who would say anything good about a lawyer. That is unless that person is a lawyer him/herself. Again, I'm not saying that all of them are monsters but that's the opinion American people have about them in general.

Besides, I'm not frustrated at all. My current situation doesn't bother me a whole lot and I don't think about lawyers all that much either. If I will have to deal with them again, I will proceed with caution, but the old wounds have healed long time ago.

Thank you. I intent to

Tai Fu

have you considered going to Canada on skilled worker visa? they seem easier
compared to getting waviers through. The CIC (Canada's equivilent of INS)
site is very helpful and they seem to give second chances although they ban
anyone for any offense other than minor traffic offense, even DUI. I have
been asking myself this because if I am going to fight this out I could be
paying 10-20K to a lawyer for something that may not succeed. However I can
immigrate to Canada for roughly 20K in the future, including resettlement
funds without using lawyers... assuming I can get my criminal records taken
care of with them, and assuming things dont change where they become
impossible to immigrate to.

Funny how USA is so tough on immigrants that even someone who stole 20
dollars 20 years ago were banned even if they have an American wife or
husband. Yet they can't keep 10 million illegal aliens out of the
country....
--
TAI FU
"Malvin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] m...
>
>> Or they should remove the newsgroup with a perm. sticky "see an
>> immigration
>> lawyer, here is a list" and at the bottom "if you are an immigration
>> lawyer
>> and want to advertise please call 1-800-xxx-xxxx"
>>
>> I asked if I should try for USA or Canada because I felt waviers might
>> be
>> hard to get and Canada is better about giving second chances (comeon,
>> which
>> is easier to prove, rehabilitation or extreme hardship?), but I still
>> have
>> to quality for skilled worker. I wont need lawyers for Canada because
>> their
>> website gives good information on how to do this, but USCIS site is a
>> mess,
>> other info is laced with a bunch of "call me, I am a overpaid lawer, I
>> can
>> do this for 10,000 dollars!"
>>
>> I agree with you, someone who lived through the law knows more about
>> that
>> particular case than the lawer or judges.
>>
>> --
>> TAI FU
>> "Malvin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected] m...
>> >
>> >> Oh, for goodness sake, no one here can tell you for sure whether or
>> >> not you will incur a ban.
>> >>
>> >> Go and see an IMMIGRATION LAWYER
>> >
>> > You didn't read my post carefully. I'm not talking about the
>> > ban
>> > anymore. Why would you even bother making suggestions like "see
>> > a
>> > lawyer"? Isn't that obvious even to the dumbest person in the
>> > world?
>> > Let's all see a lawyer then and close this newsgroup. That's
>> > it, I got
>> > it. Close this group and put a permanent banner in its place saying,
>> > "Go
>> > and see an IMMIGRATION LAWYER".
>> >
>> > One lawyer is one voice, one opinion. With the kind of prices that
>> > they
>> > are charging, I don�?f?�?,�?¢�?f�?¢,�?,�?¬�?f�?¢"�?,�?¢t think many people
>> > could afford a second or
>> > a third opinion. Immigration lawyers (with good references) already
>> > screwed my immigration twice. I�?f?�?,�?¢�?f�?¢,�?,�?¬�?f�?¢"�?,�?¢m not
>> > planning on making the same
>> > mistake the third time. On the other hand, forums like this may
>> > provide
>> > different point of views and that can be extremely helpful.
>> >
>> > I apologize if my posts are disturbing you personally. Please
>> > believe me
>> > it was not my intention. This is a US immigration newsgroup. I'm not
>> > a
>> > newcomer here so I know the rules. If you would like to talk about
>> > something different or if you don't have any desire to help people
>> > then
>> > perhaps you should try a different forum. No offence.
>> >
>> > --
>
> If that what is truly going on with this newsgroup nowadays then it's a
> crying shame. I haven't been here for more than 6 years at least. From
> what I remember back in the 90's it was a great group with lots of
> people participating, helping each other, and 4 or 5 attorneys
> commenting the posts at any given day and time. They were pretty
> generous and friendly too. Oh well.
>
> --

Ray

Me Insulting!!! ..I am well known for my kindness to
moronic fools and animals ...

Malvin

There you go again. Nice attitude, you should be proud of yourself.

Or was it the famous British sense of humor again? Uh, hold on, let me read it again...nope, still don't get it. It's probably just me though. Everybody else can just go ahead and laugh yourself to death at my expense. Have fun kids.

Malvin

No, not really interested. I'm not running away from my country. I'm pretty comfortable here. USA is my second home so I wouldn't mind living there but if it doesn't work out, that's fine too. I'll go there when my ban (if I have it) is over or I will retire there. Canada is a nice country but it's just too small, it's too cold over there, and you can't make any money by simply working for someone.

Even in America, I only want to live in New York where I lived for over 10 years. Not interested at all in Texas, or Tennessee, or Colorado, or Florida (well, maybe when I retire), or even California (where, as we know, the only cultural advantage is that you can make a right turn on a red light ).

It's all politics, my friend; it has nothing to do with humanitarism. Hypocrisy is the way of the modern society.

Malvin

Anybody cares to comment on this exception? Can there be a different interpretation, other than obviuos one?

(a) Classes of Aliens Ineligible for Visas or Admission.-Except as otherwise provided in this Act, aliens who are inadmissible under the following paragraphs are ineligible to receive visas and ineligible to be admitted to the United States:

(B) 13/ ALIENS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT.-

(i) In general.-Any alien (other than an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence) who-

II) has been unlawfully present in the United States for one year or more, and who again seeks admission within 10 years of the date of such alien's departure or removal from the United States,is inadmissible.

(iii) Exceptions.-

II) Asylees.-No period of time in which an alien has a bona fide application for asylum pending under section 208 shall be taken into account in determining the period of unlawful presence in the United States under clause (i) unless the alien during such period was employed without authorization in the United States.


Thanks.

CarlM

You tell us...

Malvin

I wasn't talking to you. Go advise the unwise (translation: bullshit the suckers).

I don't know, are you so full of it that because you hate me personally (for some mysterious reason) you would pass on an opportunity to flex your intellectual muscle? Isn’t that why you are here? Well, suite yourself.

If you want to tell me that only the all-mighty immigration attorneys know how to interpret the law, then what are you doing here “advising” people? Who needs you anyway? Or are you just chit chatting?

PS Do you hear hatred in my voice? Believe me, it’s only because you want to.

farmerwife

My comment is - "it looks to me like" the category of the

(iii) exceptions -
II) Asylees - "might possibly" apply to you, IF you fit the conditions, and the USCIS also thinks so, may be. Just my opinion. I am not sure though. But then again, under B, you are not actually present in the US right now, so may be this just applies to current asylees, not an "abandoned in the past asylee" ?

The class of immigrant visa applicants who are now married to USCs who abondoned an asylum application in the past who post here and can help you from their own experience is probably tiny/nonexistent. And a lay person's interpretation probably only means as much as your own.

Ray

He was nearly a lawyer himself you know .....

TimFountain

It's a good job he/she is leaving, I've been told by someone who was nearly the town mayor at one time that there's a vacancy for an argumentative village idiot in his home town.