Carl Shusterman

SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE

Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On Thursday, the House
Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing regarding
comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match" letter regulations
are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of thousands of jobs are at
stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining Immigration Voice's
September 18th demonstration for immigration reform for highly-skilled
workers? Read about these issues and much more in today's edition of the
most popular e-mail newsletter on the Internet, SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION
UPDATE.

Here is a "sneak preview" of the Table of Contents:
1. Retrogression Redux: USCIS Deluged with I-485s in July/August

2. Employers: How to Avoid Penalties for SSA "No-Match" Letters

3. September 18th Demonstration in D.C. by High-Skilled Workers

4. Schedule of Upcoming Immigration Law Seminars

5. Success Story: Overcoming the FBI Name Check Backlog

6. Immigration Trivia Quiz: Immigrant Authors and Novelists

7. Ask Mr. Shusterman: Advising Physicians and Programmers

8. Official Immigration Government Processing Times

9. Chat Transcripts, Audios, Videos and WebCasts

10. Winner of our August 2007 Immigration Trivia Quiz

************************************************** ***********************

Carl Shusterman served as a Trial Attorney for the U.S. Immigration Service
(1976-82) before entering private practice. He heads a five-attorney firm
specializing exclusively in immigration law. He maintains an extensive
website entitled "Immigration: A Practical Guide to Immigrating to the U.S."
containing over 1,000 articles on all phases of immigration law. He is the
author of SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE, a free, monthly e-mail newsletter
on immigration laws and procedures. You can subscribe online at
http://shusterman.com/subscribe.html

The E-vil Empire

Now we're going to diferentiate between "highly skilled" and "unskilled"
...IF THEY ARE ILLEGAL ...THEY ARE ILLEGAL !!!



"Carl Shusterman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:vz_Ci.1276$s06.1233@trnddc04...
> SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE
>
> Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On Thursday, the House
> Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing regarding
> comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match" letter regulations
> are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of thousands of jobs are
> at stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining Immigration
> Voice's September 18th demonstration for immigration reform for
> highly-skilled workers? Read about these issues and much more in today's
> edition of the most popular e-mail newsletter on the Internet,
> SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE.
>
> Here is a "sneak preview" of the Table of Contents:
> 1. Retrogression Redux: USCIS Deluged with I-485s in July/August
>
> 2. Employers: How to Avoid Penalties for SSA "No-Match" Letters
>
> 3. September 18th Demonstration in D.C. by High-Skilled Workers
>
> 4. Schedule of Upcoming Immigration Law Seminars
>
> 5. Success Story: Overcoming the FBI Name Check Backlog
>
> 6. Immigration Trivia Quiz: Immigrant Authors and Novelists
>
> 7. Ask Mr. Shusterman: Advising Physicians and Programmers
>
> 8. Official Immigration Government Processing Times
>
> 9. Chat Transcripts, Audios, Videos and WebCasts
>
> 10. Winner of our August 2007 Immigration Trivia Quiz
>
> ************************************************** ***********************
>
> Carl Shusterman served as a Trial Attorney for the U.S. Immigration
> Service (1976-82) before entering private practice. He heads a
> five-attorney firm specializing exclusively in immigration law. He
> maintains an extensive website entitled "Immigration: A Practical Guide to
> Immigrating to the U.S." containing over 1,000 articles on all phases of
> immigration law. He is the author of SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE, a
> free, monthly e-mail newsletter on immigration laws and procedures. You
> can subscribe online at http://shusterman.com/subscribe.html
>
>

J. J. Farrell

On Sep 5, 1:45 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Is there a possibility that a "highly skilled illegal" would possibly be
> afforded priority treatment over a "unskilled illegal" ?

Not legally, and the message you replied to didn't discuss any such
possibility.

> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected] oglegroups.com...
> > On Sep 4, 9:33 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Now we're going to diferentiate between "highly skilled" and "unskilled"
>
> > USA immigration law has differentiated between "highly skilled" and
> > "unskilled" for many a long decade.
>
> >> ...IF THEY ARE ILLEGAL ...THEY ARE ILLEGAL !!!
>
> > Indeed, but what does this have to do with your initial statement?
>
> >> "Carl Shusterman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>news:vz_Ci.1276$s06.1233@trnddc04...
>
> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE
>
> >> > Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On Thursday, the
> >> > House
> >> > Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing regarding
> >> > comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match" letter
> >> > regulations
> >> > are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of thousands of jobs
> >> > are
> >> > at stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining Immigration
> >> > Voice's September 18th demonstration for immigration reform for
> >> > highly-skilled workers? Read about these issues and much more in
> >> > today's
> >> > edition of the most popular e-mail newsletter on the Internet,
> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE.
> >> ...

The E-vil Empire

I didn't say it did ..."not legally" ...???

My point is ...we don't need even the appearance of a distinction based on
"skill" ...ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL and they ALL should be GONE !!!


"J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] oups.com...
> On Sep 5, 1:45 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Is there a possibility that a "highly skilled illegal" would possibly be
>> afforded priority treatment over a "unskilled illegal" ?
>
> Not legally, and the message you replied to didn't discuss any such
> possibility.
>
>> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> messagenews:[email protected] oglegroups.com...
>> > On Sep 4, 9:33 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> Now we're going to diferentiate between "highly skilled" and
>> >> "unskilled"
>>
>> > USA immigration law has differentiated between "highly skilled" and
>> > "unskilled" for many a long decade.
>>
>> >> ...IF THEY ARE ILLEGAL ...THEY ARE ILLEGAL !!!
>>
>> > Indeed, but what does this have to do with your initial statement?
>>
>> >> "Carl Shusterman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >>news:vz_Ci.1276$s06.1233@trnddc04...
>>
>> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE
>>
>> >> > Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On Thursday, the
>> >> > House
>> >> > Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing regarding
>> >> > comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match" letter
>> >> > regulations
>> >> > are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of thousands of
>> >> > jobs
>> >> > are
>> >> > at stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining
>> >> > Immigration
>> >> > Voice's September 18th demonstration for immigration reform for
>> >> > highly-skilled workers? Read about these issues and much more in
>> >> > today's
>> >> > edition of the most popular e-mail newsletter on the Internet,
>> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE.
>> >> ...
>
>

J. J. Farrell

On Sep 5, 9:49 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I didn't say it did ..."not legally" ...???

Then why did you make your initial reply? What was the connection
between the message you replied to and your reply?

> My point is ...we don't need even the appearance of a distinction based on
> "skill" ...ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL and they ALL should be GONE !!!

Indeed. What's puzzling me is that you are the only person here who's
talking about a distinction between illegal immigrants based on their
skills. Why are you shouting in this thread against something which no-
one in this thread is proposing, or even discussing?

> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected] ooglegroups.com...
>
> > On Sep 5, 1:45 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Is there a possibility that a "highly skilled illegal" would possibly be
> >> afforded priority treatment over a "unskilled illegal" ?
>
> > Not legally, and the message you replied to didn't discuss any such
> > possibility.
>
> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> messagenews:[email protected] oglegroups.com...
> >> > On Sep 4, 9:33 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> Now we're going to diferentiate between "highly skilled" and
> >> >> "unskilled"
>
> >> > USA immigration law has differentiated between "highly skilled" and
> >> > "unskilled" for many a long decade.
>
> >> >> ...IF THEY ARE ILLEGAL ...THEY ARE ILLEGAL !!!
>
> >> > Indeed, but what does this have to do with your initial statement?
>
> >> >> "Carl Shusterman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >>news:vz_Ci.1276$s06.1233@trnddc04...
>
> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE
>
> >> >> > Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On Thursday, the
> >> >> > House
> >> >> > Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing regarding
> >> >> > comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match" letter
> >> >> > regulations
> >> >> > are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of thousands of
> >> >> > jobs
> >> >> > are
> >> >> > at stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining
> >> >> > Immigration
> >> >> > Voice's September 18th demonstration for immigration reform for
> >> >> > highly-skilled workers? Read about these issues and much more in
> >> >> > today's
> >> >> > edition of the most popular e-mail newsletter on the Internet,
> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE.
> >> >> ...- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The E-vil Empire

Perhaps you should READ the first post in the thread ...npte the last
sentence.

"Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On Thursday, the House
Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing regarding
comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match" letter regulations
are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of thousands of jobs are at
stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining Immigration Voice's
September 18th demonstration for immigration reform for highly-skilled
workers? "


"J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] ups.com...
> On Sep 5, 9:49 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I didn't say it did ..."not legally" ...???
>
> Then why did you make your initial reply? What was the connection
> between the message you replied to and your reply?
>
>> My point is ...we don't need even the appearance of a distinction based
>> on
>> "skill" ...ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL and they ALL should be GONE !!!
>
> Indeed. What's puzzling me is that you are the only person here who's
> talking about a distinction between illegal immigrants based on their
> skills. Why are you shouting in this thread against something which no-
> one in this thread is proposing, or even discussing?
>
>> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> messagenews:[email protected] ooglegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Sep 5, 1:45 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> Is there a possibility that a "highly skilled illegal" would possibly
>> >> be
>> >> afforded priority treatment over a "unskilled illegal" ?
>>
>> > Not legally, and the message you replied to didn't discuss any such
>> > possibility.
>>
>> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> >> messagenews:[email protected] oglegroups.com...
>> >> > On Sep 4, 9:33 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> Now we're going to diferentiate between "highly skilled" and
>> >> >> "unskilled"
>>
>> >> > USA immigration law has differentiated between "highly skilled" and
>> >> > "unskilled" for many a long decade.
>>
>> >> >> ...IF THEY ARE ILLEGAL ...THEY ARE ILLEGAL !!!
>>
>> >> > Indeed, but what does this have to do with your initial statement?
>>
>> >> >> "Carl Shusterman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >> >>news:vz_Ci.1276$s06.1233@trnddc04...
>>
>> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE
>>
>> >> >> > Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On Thursday,
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > House
>> >> >> > Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing
>> >> >> > regarding
>> >> >> > comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match" letter
>> >> >> > regulations
>> >> >> > are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of thousands of
>> >> >> > jobs
>> >> >> > are
>> >> >> > at stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining
>> >> >> > Immigration
>> >> >> > Voice's September 18th demonstration for immigration reform for
>> >> >> > highly-skilled workers? Read about these issues and much more in
>> >> >> > today's
>> >> >> > edition of the most popular e-mail newsletter on the Internet,
>> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE.
>> >> >> ...- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>

ladyofthelake

Where is there any mention of illegal workers? Did it not cross your mind it could be a demostration for immigration reform for legal highly-skilled workers??

ian-mstm

Oh... it crossed his mind, I'm sure. But in an effort to win points for his side of the argument, he chose to ignore that interpretation and focus on his own agenda.

Ian

The E-vil Empire

<Did it not cross your
mind it could be a demostration for immigration reform for legal highly-
skilled workers??>

Is THAT what it says ?????????????????


"ladyofthelake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] m...
>
>> Perhaps you should READ the first post in the thread ...npte the last
>> sentence.
>>
>> "Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On Thursday, the
>> House
>> Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing regarding
>> comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match" letter
>> regulations
>> are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of thousands of jobs
>> are at
>> stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining Immigration
>> Voice's
>> September 18th demonstration for immigration reform for highly-skilled
>> workers? "
>>
>>
>> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected] ups.com...
>> > On Sep 5, 9:49 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >> I didn't say it did ..."not legally" ...???
>> >
>> > Then why did you make your initial reply? What was the connection
>> > between the message you replied to and your reply?
>> >
>> >> My point is ...we don't need even the appearance of a distinction
>> >> based
>> >> on
>> >> "skill" ...ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL and they ALL should be GONE !!!
>> >
>> > Indeed. What's puzzling me is that you are the only person here
>> > who's
>> > talking about a distinction between illegal immigrants based on
>> > their
>> > skills. Why are you shouting in this thread against something which
>> > no-
>> > one in this thread is proposing, or even discussing?
>> >
>> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> >> messagenews:[email protected] ooglegroups.c-
>> >> om...
>> >>
>> >> > On Sep 5, 1:45 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> Is there a possibility that a "highly skilled illegal" would
>> >> >> possibly
>> >> >> be
>> >> >> afforded priority treatment over a "unskilled illegal" ?
>> >>
>> >> > Not legally, and the message you replied to didn't discuss any
>> >> > such
>> >> > possibility.
>> >>
>> >> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> >> >> messagenews:[email protected] oglegroups.co-
>> >> >> m...
>> >> >> > On Sep 4, 9:33 pm, "The E-vil Empire"
>> >> >> > <[email protected]>
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >> Now we're going to diferentiate between "highly skilled" and
>> >> >> >> "unskilled"
>> >>
>> >> >> > USA immigration law has differentiated between "highly
>> >> >> > skilled" and
>> >> >> > "unskilled" for many a long decade.
>> >>
>> >> >> >> ...IF THEY ARE ILLEGAL ...THEY ARE ILLEGAL !!!
>> >>
>> >> >> > Indeed, but what does this have to do with your initial
>> >> >> > statement?
>> >>
>> >> >> >> "Carl Shusterman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> news:vz_Ci.1276$s06.1233@trnddc04...
>> >>
>> >> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE
>> >>
>> >> >> >> > Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On
>> >> >> >> > Thursday,
>> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> > House
>> >> >> >> > Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing
>> >> >> >> > regarding
>> >> >> >> > comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match"
>> >> >> >> > letter
>> >> >> >> > regulations
>> >> >> >> > are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of
>> >> >> >> > thousands of
>> >> >> >> > jobs
>> >> >> >> > are
>> >> >> >> > at stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining
>> >> >> >> > Immigration
>> >> >> >> > Voice's September 18th demonstration for immigration reform
>> >> >> >> > for
>> >> >> >> > highly-skilled workers? Read about these issues and much
>> >> >> >> > more in
>> >> >> >> > today's
>> >> >> >> > edition of the most popular e-mail newsletter on the
>> >> >> >> > Internet,
>> >> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE.
>> >> >> >> ...- Hide quoted text -
>> >>
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>> >
>> >
>
> Where is there any mention of illegal workers? Did it not cross your
> mind it could be a demostration for immigration reform for legal highly-
> skilled workers??
>
> --

The E-vil Empire

Yeah bright eyes ...ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL regardless of skill level.


"ian-mstm" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] m...
>
>> Where is there any mention of illegal workers? Did it not cross your
>> mind it could be a demostration for immigration reform for legal highly-
>> skilled workers??
>
> Oh... it crossed his mind, I'm sure. But in an effort to win points for
> his side of the argument, he chose to ignore that interpretation and
> focus on his own agenda.
>
> Ian
>
> --

ian-mstm

You are the only one talking about illegal aliens. It's not even mentioned in the original post... but you seem fixated on arguing about it anyway. Well, whatever pumps your 'nads.

Ian

J. J. Farrell

On Sep 6, 4:03 am, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Perhaps you should READ the first post in the thread ...npte the last
> sentence.
>
> "Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On Thursday, the House
> Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing regarding
> comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match" letter regulations
> are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of thousands of jobs are at
> stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining Immigration Voice's
> September 18th demonstration for immigration reform for highly-skilled
> workers? "

I'm a little at a loss to know how to reply to this, other than to say
perhaps you should READ the first post in the thread ... note the last
sentence.

Nowhere does that message mention distinguishing between skilled and
unskilled illegal immigrants. Nowhere does the newsletter referred to
in that message mention distinguishing between skilled and unskilled
illegal immigrants. The one and only person in this thread talking
about distinguishing between skilled and unskilled illegal immigrants
is you. It seems a little silly to rant in public against something
you've dreamed up yourself.

> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected] oglegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Sep 5, 9:49 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> I didn't say it did ..."not legally" ...???
>
> > Then why did you make your initial reply? What was the connection
> > between the message you replied to and your reply?
>
> >> My point is ...we don't need even the appearance of a distinction based
> >> on
> >> "skill" ...ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL and they ALL should be GONE !!!
>
> > Indeed. What's puzzling me is that you are the only person here who's
> > talking about a distinction between illegal immigrants based on their
> > skills. Why are you shouting in this thread against something which no-
> > one in this thread is proposing, or even discussing?
>
> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> messagenews:[email protected] ooglegroups.com...
>
> >> > On Sep 5, 1:45 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> Is there a possibility that a "highly skilled illegal" would possibly
> >> >> be
> >> >> afforded priority treatment over a "unskilled illegal" ?
>
> >> > Not legally, and the message you replied to didn't discuss any such
> >> > possibility.
>
> >> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> >> messagenews:[email protected] oglegroups.com...
> >> >> > On Sep 4, 9:33 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> Now we're going to diferentiate between "highly skilled" and
> >> >> >> "unskilled"
>
> >> >> > USA immigration law has differentiated between "highly skilled" and
> >> >> > "unskilled" for many a long decade.
>
> >> >> >> ...IF THEY ARE ILLEGAL ...THEY ARE ILLEGAL !!!
>
> >> >> > Indeed, but what does this have to do with your initial statement?
>
> >> >> >> "Carl Shusterman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >> >>news:vz_Ci.1276$s06.1233@trnddc04...
>
> >> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE
>
> >> >> >> > Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On Thursday,
> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> > House
> >> >> >> > Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing
> >> >> >> > regarding
> >> >> >> > comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match" letter
> >> >> >> > regulations
> >> >> >> > are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of thousands of
> >> >> >> > jobs
> >> >> >> > are
> >> >> >> > at stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining
> >> >> >> > Immigration
> >> >> >> > Voice's September 18th demonstration for immigration reform for
> >> >> >> > highly-skilled workers? Read about these issues and much more in
> >> >> >> > today's
> >> >> >> > edition of the most popular e-mail newsletter on the Internet,
> >> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE.
> >> >> >> ...- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The E-vil Empire

Have you heard of ANY demonstrations for either LEGAL skilled or unskilled
immigrants ????????????

NO ...you haven't ...because those following the legal process DON'T
DEMONSTRATE and call possible unwanted attention to themselves, they simply
do what they can LEGALLY.

Perhaps you should learn to read between the lines a bit.


"J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] oups.com...
> On Sep 6, 4:03 am, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Perhaps you should READ the first post in the thread ...npte the last
>> sentence.
>>
>> "Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On Thursday, the
>> House
>> Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing regarding
>> comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match" letter
>> regulations
>> are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of thousands of jobs are
>> at
>> stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining Immigration
>> Voice's
>> September 18th demonstration for immigration reform for highly-skilled
>> workers? "
>
> I'm a little at a loss to know how to reply to this, other than to say
> perhaps you should READ the first post in the thread ... note the last
> sentence.
>
> Nowhere does that message mention distinguishing between skilled and
> unskilled illegal immigrants. Nowhere does the newsletter referred to
> in that message mention distinguishing between skilled and unskilled
> illegal immigrants. The one and only person in this thread talking
> about distinguishing between skilled and unskilled illegal immigrants
> is you. It seems a little silly to rant in public against something
> you've dreamed up yourself.
>
>> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> messagenews:[email protected] oglegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Sep 5, 9:49 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> I didn't say it did ..."not legally" ...???
>>
>> > Then why did you make your initial reply? What was the connection
>> > between the message you replied to and your reply?
>>
>> >> My point is ...we don't need even the appearance of a distinction
>> >> based
>> >> on
>> >> "skill" ...ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL and they ALL should be GONE !!!
>>
>> > Indeed. What's puzzling me is that you are the only person here who's
>> > talking about a distinction between illegal immigrants based on their
>> > skills. Why are you shouting in this thread against something which no-
>> > one in this thread is proposing, or even discussing?
>>
>> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> >> messagenews:[email protected] ooglegroups.com...
>>
>> >> > On Sep 5, 1:45 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> Is there a possibility that a "highly skilled illegal" would
>> >> >> possibly
>> >> >> be
>> >> >> afforded priority treatment over a "unskilled illegal" ?
>>
>> >> > Not legally, and the message you replied to didn't discuss any such
>> >> > possibility.
>>
>> >> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> >> >> messagenews:[email protected] oglegroups.com...
>> >> >> > On Sep 4, 9:33 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]>
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >> Now we're going to diferentiate between "highly skilled" and
>> >> >> >> "unskilled"
>>
>> >> >> > USA immigration law has differentiated between "highly skilled"
>> >> >> > and
>> >> >> > "unskilled" for many a long decade.
>>
>> >> >> >> ...IF THEY ARE ILLEGAL ...THEY ARE ILLEGAL !!!
>>
>> >> >> > Indeed, but what does this have to do with your initial
>> >> >> > statement?
>>
>> >> >> >> "Carl Shusterman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >> >> >>news:vz_Ci.1276$s06.1233@trnddc04...
>>
>> >> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE
>>
>> >> >> >> > Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On
>> >> >> >> > Thursday,
>> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> > House
>> >> >> >> > Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing
>> >> >> >> > regarding
>> >> >> >> > comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match" letter
>> >> >> >> > regulations
>> >> >> >> > are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of thousands
>> >> >> >> > of
>> >> >> >> > jobs
>> >> >> >> > are
>> >> >> >> > at stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining
>> >> >> >> > Immigration
>> >> >> >> > Voice's September 18th demonstration for immigration reform
>> >> >> >> > for
>> >> >> >> > highly-skilled workers? Read about these issues and much more
>> >> >> >> > in
>> >> >> >> > today's
>> >> >> >> > edition of the most popular e-mail newsletter on the Internet,
>> >> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE.
>> >> >> >> ...- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>

J. J. Farrell

On Sep 6, 9:42 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Have you heard of ANY demonstrations for either LEGAL skilled or unskilled
> immigrants ????????????

Obviously I have, as have you - the one mentioned in this thread for
starters. See http://immigrationvoice.org/ for details.

> NO ...you haven't

Yes I have. I can't imagine why you think you know what I have and
haven't heard of.

> ...because those following the legal process DON'T
> DEMONSTRATE and call possible unwanted attention to themselves, they simply
> do what they can LEGALLY.

That's clearly untrue.

> Perhaps you should learn to read between the lines a bit.

I'm more than capable of reading between the lines when there's
something there to be read. I'm also capable of doing research,
checking facts, and making sure I've got a clue what I'm talking about
before posting. That way I usually avoid making a fool of myself in
public.


> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected] ooglegroups.com...
> > On Sep 6, 4:03 am, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Perhaps you should READ the first post in the thread ...npte the last
> >> sentence.
>
> >> "Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On Thursday, the
> >> House Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing
> >> regarding comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match"
> >> letter regulations are being challenged in Federal Court.
> >> Hundreds of thousands of jobs are at stake. One of them
> >> may be yours! Planning on joining Immigration Voice's
> >> September 18th demonstration for immigration reform for highly-skilled
> >> workers? "
>
> > I'm a little at a loss to know how to reply to this, other than to say
> > perhaps you should READ the first post in the thread ... note the last
> > sentence.
>
> > Nowhere does that message mention distinguishing between skilled and
> > unskilled illegal immigrants. Nowhere does the newsletter referred to
> > in that message mention distinguishing between skilled and unskilled
> > illegal immigrants. The one and only person in this thread talking
> > about distinguishing between skilled and unskilled illegal immigrants
> > is you. It seems a little silly to rant in public against something
> > you've dreamed up yourself.
>
> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> messagenews:[email protected] oglegroups.com...
>
> >> > On Sep 5, 9:49 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> I didn't say it did ..."not legally" ...???
>
> >> > Then why did you make your initial reply? What was the connection
> >> > between the message you replied to and your reply?
>
> >> >> My point is ...we don't need even the appearance of a distinction
> >> >> based on
> >> >> "skill" ...ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL and they ALL should be GONE !!!
>
> >> > Indeed. What's puzzling me is that you are the only person here who's
> >> > talking about a distinction between illegal immigrants based on their
> >> > skills. Why are you shouting in this thread against something which no-
> >> > one in this thread is proposing, or even discussing?
>
> >> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> >> messagenews:[email protected] ooglegroups.com...
>
> >> >> > On Sep 5, 1:45 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> Is there a possibility that a "highly skilled illegal" would
> >> >> >> possibly be
> >> >> >> afforded priority treatment over a "unskilled illegal" ?
>
> >> >> > Not legally, and the message you replied to didn't discuss any such
> >> >> > possibility.
>
> >> >> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> >> >> messagenews:[email protected] oglegroups.com...
> >> >> >> > On Sep 4, 9:33 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]>
> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> Now we're going to diferentiate between "highly skilled" and
> >> >> >> >> "unskilled"
>
> >> >> >> > USA immigration law has differentiated between "highly skilled"
> >> >> >> > and "unskilled" for many a long decade.
>
> >> >> >> >> ...IF THEY ARE ILLEGAL ...THEY ARE ILLEGAL !!!
>
> >> >> >> > Indeed, but what does this have to do with your initial
> >> >> >> > statement?
>
> >> >> >> >> "Carl Shusterman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >> >> >>news:vz_Ci.1276$s06.1233@trnddc04...
>
> >> >> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE
>
> >> >> >> >> > Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On
> >> >> >> >> > Thursday,
> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> > House
> >> >> >> >> > Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing
> >> >> >> >> > regarding
> >> >> >> >> > comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match" letter
> >> >> >> >> > regulations
> >> >> >> >> > are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of thousands
> >> >> >> >> > of
> >> >> >> >> > jobs
> >> >> >> >> > are
> >> >> >> >> > at stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining
> >> >> >> >> > Immigration
> >> >> >> >> > Voice's September 18th demonstration for immigration reform
> >> >> >> >> > for
> >> >> >> >> > highly-skilled workers? Read about these issues and much more
> >> >> >> >> > in
> >> >> >> >> > today's
> >> >> >> >> > edition of the most popular e-mail newsletter on the Internet,
> >> >> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE.
> >> >> >> >> ...

The E-vil Empire

Perhaps its a uk thing ...I wonder if it has anything to do with immigration
refusals.

Heh ...


"J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] ups.com...
> On Sep 6, 9:42 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Have you heard of ANY demonstrations for either LEGAL skilled or
>> unskilled
>> immigrants ????????????
>
> Obviously I have, as have you - the one mentioned in this thread for
> starters. See http://immigrationvoice.org/ for details.
>
>> NO ...you haven't
>
> Yes I have. I can't imagine why you think you know what I have and
> haven't heard of.
>
>> ...because those following the legal process DON'T
>> DEMONSTRATE and call possible unwanted attention to themselves, they
>> simply
>> do what they can LEGALLY.
>
> That's clearly untrue.
>
>> Perhaps you should learn to read between the lines a bit.
>
> I'm more than capable of reading between the lines when there's
> something there to be read. I'm also capable of doing research,
> checking facts, and making sure I've got a clue what I'm talking about
> before posting. That way I usually avoid making a fool of myself in
> public.
>
>
>> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> messagenews:[email protected] ooglegroups.com...
>> > On Sep 6, 4:03 am, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> Perhaps you should READ the first post in the thread ...npte the last
>> >> sentence.
>>
>> >> "Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On Thursday, the
>> >> House Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing
>> >> regarding comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match"
>> >> letter regulations are being challenged in Federal Court.
>> >> Hundreds of thousands of jobs are at stake. One of them
>> >> may be yours! Planning on joining Immigration Voice's
>> >> September 18th demonstration for immigration reform for highly-skilled
>> >> workers? "
>>
>> > I'm a little at a loss to know how to reply to this, other than to say
>> > perhaps you should READ the first post in the thread ... note the last
>> > sentence.
>>
>> > Nowhere does that message mention distinguishing between skilled and
>> > unskilled illegal immigrants. Nowhere does the newsletter referred to
>> > in that message mention distinguishing between skilled and unskilled
>> > illegal immigrants. The one and only person in this thread talking
>> > about distinguishing between skilled and unskilled illegal immigrants
>> > is you. It seems a little silly to rant in public against something
>> > you've dreamed up yourself.
>>
>> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> >> messagenews:[email protected] oglegroups.com...
>>
>> >> > On Sep 5, 9:49 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> I didn't say it did ..."not legally" ...???
>>
>> >> > Then why did you make your initial reply? What was the connection
>> >> > between the message you replied to and your reply?
>>
>> >> >> My point is ...we don't need even the appearance of a distinction
>> >> >> based on
>> >> >> "skill" ...ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL and they ALL should be GONE !!!
>>
>> >> > Indeed. What's puzzling me is that you are the only person here
>> >> > who's
>> >> > talking about a distinction between illegal immigrants based on
>> >> > their
>> >> > skills. Why are you shouting in this thread against something which
>> >> > no-
>> >> > one in this thread is proposing, or even discussing?
>>
>> >> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> >> >> messagenews:[email protected] ooglegroups.com...
>>
>> >> >> > On Sep 5, 1:45 pm, "The E-vil Empire" <[email protected]>
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >> Is there a possibility that a "highly skilled illegal" would
>> >> >> >> possibly be
>> >> >> >> afforded priority treatment over a "unskilled illegal" ?
>>
>> >> >> > Not legally, and the message you replied to didn't discuss any
>> >> >> > such
>> >> >> > possibility.
>>
>> >> >> >> "J. J. Farrell" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> >> >> >> messagenews:[email protected] oglegroups.com...
>> >> >> >> > On Sep 4, 9:33 pm, "The E-vil Empire"
>> >> >> >> > <[email protected]>
>> >> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> Now we're going to diferentiate between "highly skilled" and
>> >> >> >> >> "unskilled"
>>
>> >> >> >> > USA immigration law has differentiated between "highly
>> >> >> >> > skilled"
>> >> >> >> > and "unskilled" for many a long decade.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> ...IF THEY ARE ILLEGAL ...THEY ARE ILLEGAL !!!
>>
>> >> >> >> > Indeed, but what does this have to do with your initial
>> >> >> >> > statement?
>>
>> >> >> >> >> "Carl Shusterman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >>news:vz_Ci.1276$s06.1233@trnddc04...
>>
>> >> >> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE
>>
>> >> >> >> >> > Congress returns from its August recess tomorrow. On
>> >> >> >> >> > Thursday,
>> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> > House
>> >> >> >> >> > Immigration Subcommittee will hold a legislative hearing
>> >> >> >> >> > regarding
>> >> >> >> >> > comprehensive immigration reform. DHS's new "no-match"
>> >> >> >> >> > letter
>> >> >> >> >> > regulations
>> >> >> >> >> > are being challenged in Federal Court. Hundreds of
>> >> >> >> >> > thousands
>> >> >> >> >> > of
>> >> >> >> >> > jobs
>> >> >> >> >> > are
>> >> >> >> >> > at stake. One of them may be yours! Planning on joining
>> >> >> >> >> > Immigration
>> >> >> >> >> > Voice's September 18th demonstration for immigration reform
>> >> >> >> >> > for
>> >> >> >> >> > highly-skilled workers? Read about these issues and much
>> >> >> >> >> > more
>> >> >> >> >> > in
>> >> >> >> >> > today's
>> >> >> >> >> > edition of the most popular e-mail newsletter on the
>> >> >> >> >> > Internet,
>> >> >> >> >> > SHUSTERMAN'S IMMIGRATION UPDATE.
>> >> >> >> >> ...
>