Send Flowers to Russia, Ukraine and Worldwide with Cyber-Florist.com Fiance.com: Beautiful Russian brides
Home  |  About  |  Forum  |  User Blogs  |  Login  |  Register

	Create New Topic   My Posts   My forum buddies   Invite friends   Private messages Russian brides > Main Forum > QUIK QUIZ Author Post DrKoop Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/18/2006 10:24:59 AM   I see you forum-ers' been exchanging ideas for some time now. I say, it's time to see if anyone made it forums awake: Question: Your fiancee's visa gets denied. You later learn that the consulate violated several laws and regulations. You should: (a) Ignore what you've learnt, and kiss the interviewer's rear into reversing his/her decision, (b) Impress them with your knowledge of the violations, and intimidate them into reversing the decision, (c) Approach your district's US attorney's office over legal violations, (d) Approach the Visa Office at the State Dept., since by regulation they have the authority to review all visa decisions, petitioned and non, (e) Approach the media over government corruption, (f) Wait for 6 months (only 3 years ago, it used to take 3 years) for the visa refusal to be reviewed by the immigration (CIS), which by law has the authority to review all PETITIONED visa denial cases, (g) Seek a visa injunction thru your district's federal court, (h) Appeal the visa denial to have the case re-opened at the consulate, (i) Hire an immigration attorney to do miracles for you because he's charging you big bucks. Of course, there might exist other possible answers, but you don't make up your own (j) answer on exams, do you? LadyJane Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/18/2006 12:17:43 PM   Oh, I don't know. I just don't know. I'm used to "all of the above" or "none of the above." danny3777 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/18/2006 1:51:16 PM   I'm still trying to figure out why, if the British consulate denied me, I would want to approach the US attorney's office or the state department or the district federal court or the CIS or hire an attorney, I don't think I would get very far :) DrKoop Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/18/2006 4:59:23 PM   That should tell you the question is intended for the American audience. Answer is more a dilemma than a choice, simply because I forgot to add a couple more choices. Anyway, I'll abort it at this, with following answers: (a) The only possible thing to do given these set of options. (b) Federal gov't hates defiance, even from it's own citizens, so it will never work. (c) US attorneys aren't lawmen. There's no law enforcement within the federal gov't, and therefore, no law. (d) Visa office has the authority but they won't intervene due to federal "space" issue; no one intervenes in another's. (e) media isn't what it used to be. they stay clear of gov't. how many SUV and large pick-up plants are closing down, but is its not in the media. (f) Interview to interview takes up to 14 months, if the CIS review re-approves the petition; but again, it's not reversal of the visa denial, merely re-approval of the petition, as it was before the visa denial. (g) Federal courts are no longer a seperation of power. They yield to executive branch whatever it seeks. Congress is now the only wall between you and the executive branch. (h) This will take longer than filing of new petition (an option I missed). (i) Most immigration attorneys are merely filers. They can file an appeal or a new petition, but they can't do any wonders. Now, you can thank God that your nation's forefathers seperated government powers, and most of you will never learn this because most of you will deal with city or county governments, neither of which are sovereign, like the federal gov't. Clifford Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/18/2006 6:34:25 PM   In the past I have had some interaction with federal paper pushers.Justice and Equality not being what it use to be(real).Try the insider path before hand.Every fed with a title has a mentor or good old boy.Find out who it is and approach on a personal level.I like some of Jefferson's and B. Franklins ideas on a citizen dealing with a corrupt gov't. danny3777 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/18/2006 6:52:13 PM   (That should tell you the question is intended for the American audience.) Ah, the question was addressed to forum-ers, you obviously neglected to mention only American forum-ers, my mistake :) DrKoop Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/19/2006 11:25:04 AM   Martin, I have heard that UK consulate officials are nothing of the sort of their US counterparts. How do you compare the two? JamesBlonde Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/19/2006 11:36:01 AM   "Aware of the tendency of power to degenerate into abuse, the worthies of our country have secured its independence by the establishment of a Constitution and form of government for our nation, calculated to prevent as well as to correct abuse." -- Thomas Jefferson, 1809. AJ Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/19/2006 12:02:59 PM   Sovereign immunity is a doctrine, so federal courts have never withstood Executive. Judiciary is too tiny to stand up to Executive. Congress is the heavy foot because it approves funding for Executive. Defense Dept. was working on a project called "Total Information Awareness", headed by John M. Poindexter, Reagan's national security adviser, convicted in 1990 of felony for his role in the Iran-Contra affair. The database was to contain every American's vital statistics, library, bank, video rental, criminal and civil, and even purchase records. The word of it leaked out, and they immediately renamed the project "Terrorism Information Systems", until Congress pulled it's funding. Similarly, Ashcroft's Justice Dept. was working on Patriot Act 2 before it leaked out. Use search engines to read what all was included in it. Clifford Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/19/2006 1:11:39 PM   "Leave no authority existing not responsible to the people."Thomas Jefferson 1812 danny3777 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/19/2006 6:32:43 PM   (Martin, I have heard that UK consulate officials are nothing of the sort of their US counterparts. How do you compare the two?) Dr Koop, I have no experience of US consulates thus I cannot comment but to tell you about the British, and my wife knows this so I can talk about it, I met with a previous girlfriend in Tashkent some 5 years ago and we went through the fiancee visa process. I made 'friends' with the British vice-consul 'Dave' and my then lady attended an interview and her visa was issued the same afternoon. Our subsequent relationship, no it wasn't a relationship but a battleground, lasted only a matter of weeks (a long and distant story) and with hindsight I wish the b@sta@rds had made the visa application more difficult :) Martin bmadmax40 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/20/2006 10:53:49 PM   One of the way to solve the puzzle can be going to Russia and getting married, filling i130 and again 129F. Of course, it will take time. However, one has to remember, that laws are laws. MOst fiance visa's are dinied due to luck of evidence or incorrectly filled paperwork. Does anybody think that an average Joe clerk at the INS cares if everything is filled out OK and there are no criminal or other records? Who in the government office would take the responsibility of profiling? So, if the petition is denied (without a reason) then it makes sence to reapply or just get married and reapply Sergey Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/21/2006 10:25:03 AM   you must be white. during mid 1980s in university, i knew an iranian whose WIFE visa was denied twice. in 2nd interview wife was pregnant and with an infant in 3rd interview. in both interviews both flew to istanbul. visa put the guy $10,000 in debt. this is when houses here sold for $30,000. visas are denied at personal tastes. for any reason. you don't get it because of your "domestic psyche", meaning you are used to believing if something is denied, it has to be for a legal reason. this is not how consulates work. DrKoop Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/21/2006 10:44:27 AM   The following is from May 2004 issue of a publication. Country, city and individual's names have been initialed to protect identity. Diplomatic immunity protects these officials abroad, while at home, no one cares. "..promiscuity among some Americans stationed in R increased to levels that threatened to jeopardize the mission’s reputation and subject U.S. government employees to blackmail. They stated that some diplomats were engaging in homosexual relations with R citizens and other foreign nationals. Such dalliances led some to ridicule the U.S. diplomatic presence in R as the “pink embassy” and the “B bathhouse.” A letter sent by a group of R NGOs and individuals to President Bush and Secretary Powell in January (2004) named high-level appointees responsible for having “transformed the U.S. diplomatic addresses in to havens of debauchery,” and further alleges that “(b)ased on reports and pornographic photos circulating around newspapers…” they “… use their privileged positions to corrupt young R's, paying them for sexual relations, by both cash and visas to the U.S.” The signatories of this letter include the Union of War Veterans, the National League of December 1989 Combatants, and three former R parliament members. An erstwhile gay lover of a former high-ranking official at the USAID mission in B has described such conduct in a sworn statement. He says that he lived with this official for four years in his government housing under the guise of serving as household help. There he claims to have witnessed U.S. government employees engaged in lewd acts and entering into other compromising positions. According to his deposition, these acts included multiple sexual encounters with young R men, some of whom may have been minors. The high-ranking USAID official’s taxpayer-provided residence was said to be the site of wild sexually charged parties where participants allegedly used drugs and viewed pornography. He states that this official has made sexually explicit photographs of himself available on the Internet. He accuses other officials of paying for sexual favors as well as offering foreign nationals visas in exchange for money or sex. Asked for comment, the USAID press office said it was unaware of any such allegations. Calls to the Inspector General’s office were not returned. This goes beyond moral and cultural tensions over homosexuality. If true, these serious betrayals of diplomatic responsibility are incompatible with the professional climate required to represent this country abroad effectively. Contrary to a firm U.S. policy against illicit sexual liaisons and the corruption of minors, they would constitute illegal acts using taxpayers’ property and money with the potential to harm national security. In addition, our national reputation has suffered enough recent damage in Romania due to the case of Kurt T, a prominent historian the U.S. embassy in B placed on the Fulbright Commission. Yet T was a convicted sex offender. He videotaped himself engaging in sexual acts with children as young as seven, some of whom were allegedly orphans, and was sentenced to seven years in R prison for pedophilia and child abuse." JamesBlonde Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/23/2006 10:34:55 AM   You missed to initial one R doc. bmadmax40 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/23/2006 3:31:14 PM   Sergey, I have no doubt that something like that could have happened to the guy. Is it the reason not to believe in the System? It is pointless to hate something which is not under control just because of one "spoiled apple". I almost guarantee you that the guy wasn't a citizen and it took 3 or so years to bring spauses back then to the US. Obvious: 1.There is Immigration Law, which can be disputed if broken 2. Spouses of the US citizens HAVE THE RIGHT TO COME HERE BY LAW 3. The biggest crime in the US is to discriminate based on race or religion 4. there is more cases of discrimination of white people than others because there is more whtile people than other races. Iranians are caucasians and nobody ever would ask what religion a person practices unless that person is seeking asylem based on religious harasment. 5. While it is very time and money consuming to object INS decisions, but for those 10k the guy spent, one can win the "case" if there is a case. More than likely, there was a mistake in the paperwork (on either side). Also, many people believe that having kids from foreign spouses will expedite the petition. It may be only in the case if one applies to bring his/her kids to the US. Finally, regardless of gossips, the system works and better than OVIR in 1985. Sergey Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/27/2006 4:09:36 PM   Doc, I want to file a litigation, hoping it would compel them into issuing the visa? I have tried all else. I've begged them. I've had 2 senator and 1 rep. offices write them letters. The reason for visa denial was "no proof of relationship." DrKoop Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/28/2006 7:17:53 PM   You mean file a litigation hoping for visa as settlement. US government doesn't negotiate with it's citizens. Remember, it's their game, and they won't let you get ahead. My advise is to start off with a new petition, while getting the Congressional offices involved. Sergey Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/30/2006 4:45:38 PM   Doc, she suffers occassional domestic violence (common there), is depressed and didn't wish to come to the US to begin with (I talked her into it), and I don't think she'll wait out a year or even 6 months (if I file a new petition) in her circumstances. It's been 3 months since visa denial already. I was just hoping I would pesent them the proof of relationship (stated reason for visa denial), and things would work out. Is there anything else I can do? DrKoop Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 8/31/2006 10:52:07 AM   "No proof of relationship" is an impossible conclusion on the consulate's end, because "proof of relationship" is part of petition adjudication process by the CIS. This alone should tell you that visa denial was unlawful, but at federal level, it is inconsequential. "The approval of a petition under INA 204 is considered to establish prima facie entitlement to status. The validitity of relationship between petitioner and the alien beneficiary is presumed to exist. Unless the consul has specific, substantial evidence, the consular officer would have no reason to return petition to DHS." 9 FAM 42.41 N1 - Establishing Relationship between Petitioner & Alien Beneficiary. Your Reply: Your name:   New Registration Password:   Forgot password?   refresh Code:   Russian brides > Main Forum > QUIK QUIZ
	Pages: 1 2