Forum	Title	Content	Member	Sex	Country	Date/Time
Removing Conditions on Residency General Discussion	August 2009 I-751 filers	And we're done! Vermont Service Center VJName.............Date of I-751.....NOA1 Date...............Biometrics..........Approved OTTOUNDKARIN.......08/03/09..........08/10/09................09/09/09............__/__/__ GABY$TALBERT.......08/03/09..........08/05/09................09/10/09............12/14/09 VAN2006............08/05/09..........08/11/09................09/18/09............12/07/09 MELO...............08/06/09..........08/10/09................09/04/09............12/12/09 USA-JAMAICA........08/07/09..........08/10/09................09/17/09............12/17/09 EDDIEYGABRIELA.....08/08/09..........08/11/09................09/18/09............12/19/09 DANIELLEJ006.......08/08/09..........08/21/09................09/29/09............12/07/09 CAYBEE.............08/08/09..........08/11/09................09/09/09............12/16/09 RCARS3.............08/10/09..........08/14/09................09/15/09............12/10/09 BEN&Y..............08/11/09..........08/14/09................09/18/09............12/17/09 RECARDO............08/12/09..........08/19/09................09/21/09............12/14/09 AMBIENTGIRL........08/12/09..........08/14/09................09/16/09............12/10/09 CHELSEAANDJOHN.....08/15/09..........08/18/09................09/29/09............__/__/__ WWYEF..............08/15/09..........08/19/09................09/16/09............12/02/09 AYAWDIE............08/16/09..........08/17/09................09/16/09............12/21/09 USRRB..............08/17/09..........08/19/09................09/21/09............12/15/09 PATRICKNOLIVIA.....08/17/09..........09/25/09................09/29/09............__/__/__ Early Bio 09/25/09 BRARIO28...........08/18/09..........08/21/09................09/29/09............12/10/09 TRACYTN............08/19/09..........08/24/09................09/22/09............11/19/09 No int. BOSTONPARIS........08/19/09..........08/25/09................10/03/09............12/23/09 TONYECK............08/20/09..........08/24/09................09/25/09............11/30/09 ALLSWELL...........08/21/09..........09/10/09................09/29/09............11/30/09 CALADAN............08/21/09..........08/25/09................10/05/09............01/04/10 JESTAN01...........08/21/09..........08/31/09................09/23/09............12/11/09 PS40...............08/21/09..........08/24/09................09/24/09............12/24/09 (Biometrics re-take 10/23 - FBI was unable to process fingerprint) WELLDONE...........08/24/09..........09/02/09................09/22/09............12/01/09 SK28...............08/24/09..........09/01/09................09/26/09............11/24/09 GL29...............08/24/09..........08/26/09................09/29/09............__/__/__ JG_AM..............08/25/09..........08/27/09................09/24/09............11/24/09 GOGAL2020..........08/26/09..........08/31/09................09/23/09............12/07/09 THEBIGMAN..........08/03/09..........08/07/09................09/12/09............__/__/__ California Service Center GARYC..............08/03/09..........08/10/09................09/03/09............09/23/09 MRANDMRSBIRD.......08/05/09..........08/10/09................09/04/09............11/25/09 DUDEINNEED.........08/05/09..........08/12/09................09/15/09............10/07/09 IVYKRIS............08/07/09..........08/18/09................09/11/09............12/07/09 (Card ordered email received 12/07/09) ANJAANDHENRY.......08/10/09..........08/28/09................09/11/09............__/__/__ IYA................08/10/09..........08/12/09................09/18/09............10/01/09 CHERYLANDMIKE......08/10/09..........08/11/09................09/04/09............09/18/09 SIRLANCELOT........08/13/09..........08/17/09................09/16/09............12/15/09 SPRINTSCORER.......08/13/09..........08/24/09................08/31/09............09/25/09 Early bio KOBEYA20...........08/13/09..........08/24/09................09/17/08............10/02/09 SKEETER211.........08/14/09..........08/24/09................09/16/09............10/20/09 ZQT3344............08/18/09..........08/21/09................10/05/09............12/11/09 Early Bio 09/21/09 PERSEVERANCE.......08/18/09..........08/19/09................09/29/09............10/13/09 SILAS..............08/19/09..........08/21/09................09/25/09............10/14/09 CHOX99.............08/24/09..........08/25/09................10/05/09............10/13/09 BBZHEL.............08/24/09..........08/26/09................09/26/09............10/02/09 ISIS...............08/26/09..........08/31/09................10/06/09............10/29/09 CARDAMOM...........08/27/09..........09/01/09................09/25/09............10/01/09 SpiralShape........08/31/09..........09/08/09................10/06/09............__/__/__ (Biometrics re-take 11/02/09 - FBI was unable to process fingerprint) IMPORTANT! *Make sure that your VJ Text Editor setting is set to Rich Text Editor. *Go to the MOST RECENTLY POSTED VERSION of this list (go to the last post and scroll UP) and "Reply" to it, deleting the "quote" tags in your reply. * Please DO NOT change the font, font size, add colors, stuff like that. * Please PREVIEW before posting to make sure it is properly formatted. Date of I-751 = The Date you sent your application NOA Date = The Receipt Date on your original NOA letter Biometrics = The Date of your biometrics appointment Approved = The Date your case was approved *Please Capitalize your VJ Name when adding it to the list* **When you're on this list, please come back to update your information accordingly** [/quote] By the way there's been no movement at all on the online system.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2010-01-08 14:35:00
Removing Conditions on Residency General Discussion	August 2009 I-751 filers	Friggin' long wait for biometrics.... Ah well, at least we know when it is! Updated list VJName.............I-751.............NOA1 Receipt............Biometrics..........Approved VSC OTTOUNDKARIN.......08/03/09..........08/10/09................09/09/09............__/__/__ GABY$TALBERT.......08/03/09..........08/05/09................09/10/09............__/__/__ VAN2006............08/05/09..........08/11/09................09/18/09............__/__/__ MELO...............08/06/09..........08/10/09................09/04/09............__/__/__ EDDIEYGABRIELA.....08/08/09..........08/11/09................09/18/09............__/__/__ DANIELLEJ006.......08/08/09..........08/21/09................09/29/09............__/__/__ CAYBEE.............08/08/09..........08/11/09................09/09/09............__/__/__ RCARS3.............08/10/09..........08/14/09................09/15/09............__/__/__ BEN&Y..............08/11/09..........08/14/09................__/__/__............__/__/__ AMBIENTGIRL........08/12/09..........08/14/09................09/16/09............__/__/__ CHELSEAANDJOHN.....08/15/09..........08/18/09................__/__/__............__/__/__ PILOTINSKY.........08/17/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__ PATRICKNOLIVIA.....08/17/09..........__/__/__................09/29/09............__/__/__ BRARIO28...........08/18/09..........08/21/09................09/29/09............__/__/__ TRACYTN............08/19/09..........08/24/09................__/__/__............__/__/__ BOSTONPARIS........08/19/09..........08/25/09................__/__/__............__/__/__ TONYECK............08/20/09..........08/24/09................09/25/09............__/__/__ CALADAN............08/21/09..........08/25/09................10/05/09............__/__/__ JESTAN01...........08/21/09..........08/31/09................09/23/09............__/__/__ JG_AM..............08/25/09..........08/27/09................09/24/09............__/__/__ GOGAL2020..........08/26/09..........08/31/09................__/__/__............__/__/__ CSC GARYC..............08/03/09..........08/10/09................09/03/09............__/__/__ MRANDMRSBIRD.......08/05/09..........08/10/09................09/04/09............__/__/__ DUDEINNEED.........08/05/09..........08/12/09................09/15/09............__/__/__ USA-JAMAICA........08/07/09..........08/10/09................09/17/09............__/__/__ ANJAANDHENRY.......08/10/09..........08/28/09................__/__/__............__/__/__ IYA................08/10/09..........08/12/09................09/18/09............__/__/__ CHERYLANDMIKE......08/10/09..........08/11/09................09/04/09............__/__/__ SPRINTSCORER.......08/13/09..........08/24/09................08/31/09............__/__/__ early bio KOBEYA20...........08/13/09..........08/24/09................09/17/08............__/__/__ SKEETER211.........08/14/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__ ZQT3344............08/18/09..........08/21/09................__/__/__............__/__/__ PERSEVERANCE.......08/18/09..........08/19/09................09/29/09............__/__/__ CHOX99.............08/24/09..........08/25/09................__/__/__............__/__/__ BBZHEL.............08/24/09..........08/26/09................__/__/__............__/__/__ CARDAMOM...........08/27/09..........09/01/09................__/__/__............__/__/__ IMPORTANT!*Make sure that your VJ Text Editor setting is set to Rich Text Editor. *Go to the MOST RECENTLY POSTED VERSION of this list (go to the last post and scroll UP) and "Reply" to it, deleting the "quote" tags in your reply. * Please DO NOT change the font, font size, add colors, stuff like that. * Please PREVIEW before posting to make sure it is properly formatted. Date of I-751 = The Date you sent your application NOA Date = The Receipt Date on your original NOA letter Biometrics = The Date of your biometrics appointment Approved = The Date your case was approved *Please Capitalize your VJ Name when adding it to the list* **When you're on this list, please come back to update your information accordingly**	Caladan	Male	Canada	2009-09-12 15:57:00
Removing Conditions on Residency General Discussion	August 2009 I-751 filers	Off we go....... VJName...............I-751.........NOA1 Receipt............Biometrics...........Approved........Center....... Walk-In Biometric OTTOUNDKARIN.......08/03/09..........08/10/09................09/09/09............__/__/__.........VSC GARYC..............08/03/09..........08/10/09................09/03/09............__/__/__.........CSC GABY$TALBERT.......08/03/09..........08/05/09................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC MRANDMRSBIRD.......08/05/09..........08/10/09................09/04/09............__/__/__.........CSC DUDEINNEED.........08/05/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__.........CSC VAN2006............08/05/09..........08/11/09................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC MELO...............08/06/09..........08/10/09................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC USA-JAMAICA........08/07/09..........08/10/09................__/__/__............__/__/__.........CSC EDDIEYGABRIELA.....08/08/09..........08/11/09................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC DANIELLEJ006.......08/08/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC ANJAANDHENRY.......08/10/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__.........CSC RCARS3.............08/10/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC IYA................08/10/09..........08/12/09................__/__/__............__/__/__.........CSC MIKEANDCHERYL......08/10/09..........08/11/09................__/__/__............__/__/__.........CSC BEN&Y..............08/11/09..........08/14/09................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC AMBIENTGIRL........08/12/09..........08/14/09................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC SPRINTSCORER.......08/13/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__.........CSC CHELSEAANDJOHN.....08/15/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC PILOTINSKY.........08/17/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC PATRICKNOLIVIA.....08/17/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__......... ZQT3344............08/18/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__.........CSC PERSEVERANCE.......08/18/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__.........CSC TRACYTN............08/19/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC BOSTONPARIS........08/19/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC TONYECK............08/20/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC CALADAN............08/21/09..........__/__/__................__/__/__............__/__/__.........VSC IMPORTANT!*Make sure that your VJ Text Editor setting is set to Rich Text Editor. *Go to the MOST RECENTLY POSTED VERSION of this list (go to the last post and scroll UP) and "Reply" to it, deleting the "quote" tags in your reply. * Please DO NOT change the font, font size, add colors, stuff like that. * Please PREVIEW before posting to make sure it is properly formatted. Date of I-751 = The Date you sent your application NOA Date = The Receipt Date on your original NOA letter Biometrics = The Date of your biometrics appointment Approved = The Date your case was approved *Please Capitalize your VJ Name when adding it to the list* **When you're on this list, please come back to update your information accordingly** Edited by Caladan, 21 August 2009 - 03:51 PM.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2009-08-21 15:51:00
Philippines	Denied today, worst day of my life	I thought that 'drug abuse' could only be a finding for inadmissibility if the incident was in the previous three years?	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-09-04 18:56:00
K-1 Fiance(e) Visa Case Filing and Progress Reports	Reality Check	While marriage might be recognized as a fundamental human right, immigration isn't. While appeals to emotion aren't necessarily fallacies, they're usually a rhetorical tactic employed only when the facts aren't on your side. And frankly, appeals to emotion don't cut in favor of the stereotypical K-1 applicant, since most people who don't know the process assume that Canadian-American couples like us don't have to go through it, and it's all about guys importing their third Russian bride, and really, no one thinks that person is terribly worthy of sympathy. Nice post. Another thing to keep in mind is that USCIS is efficient from one standpoint. There is ONE form for adjusting status, even though there are many paths to a green card. There is ONE form to request work authorization, ONE AP form, ONE affadavit of support, the I129F is also used for spouses... it makes it easier to train personnel, it's easier to find the form (can you imagine the confusion here if there was a different type of form for every type of entry & adjustment route)... but what it means is that there aren't any shortcuts. This leads to a lot of redundancies, but I expect it cuts down on the number of errors.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-16 10:09:00
K-1 Fiance(e) Visa Case Filing and Progress Reports	Waiting for a NOA2 from CSC for your I-129F?	Probably worth pointing out that USCIS doesn't prioritize petition approvals by a numbered list on Visajourney, and while you can have some idea based on when you filed, worrying whether you're #412 vs. #390 doesn't matter much. Remember there's thousands of people who file who DON'T use this site, so you have no idea if #378 and #379 are right next to each other in a pile or separated by fifty other petitions or ended up on the desks of different officers.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-09-02 12:46:00
Middle East and North Africa	Update on the denial	I think the only thing that could be construed as insensitive were the comments that implied 'gah, why did you even bother applying?' But even so, hardship waivers are nigh impossible to get, and I don't think anyone meant to ridicule. jabree, I hope you two manage to meet in person. I agree with the previous posters who have noted that it's very hard to have a relationship that has a chance without meeting in person. My fiancé and I chatted for thirteen months before we met in person, and while I knew all the 'details' about him, being able to hear his voice in person, see his face, read his body language, see how he got on with my friends & family.... well, knowing all the nonverbal communication meant more than all the phone calls in the world. I don't know why you can't fly. Some here seem to think that it's because of a fear of flying, and that sucks. I'm pretty much a basket case every time I fly, but I do it. Maybe a friend or relative could go with you to help calm your fears?	Caladan	Male	Canada	2006-09-21 18:30:00
Middle East and North Africa	Weight	If you do squats or lunges, you'll work up your gluteal muscles and you'll get a rounder butt. But a lot depends on genetics, too.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2006-10-01 15:22:00
Middle East and North Africa	Closed North AFrican Country problem...	It is very very very very very very rare to succeed in getting a waiver for not having met within the past two years. There's essentially two reasons listed in the I-129F: overriding religious/cultural prohibition that doesn't allow couples to meet before marriage. (unlikely since you've looked into meeting) And extreme hardship: severe medical, danger to the U.S. citizen, that sort of reason. Someone who isn't as tired as I am will come along with the URL, but there's only one case I can think of where someone was approved: the petitioner was on kidney dialysis or something like that. It's theoretically possible, from what you sketched of your situation on the other thread, but very very very very very very very very very very very very very unlikely. (And that's just to get to the NOA2, let proving a viable relationship without having met.) Could the two of you meet in a third country? You probably can't get to Libya, but maybe there's a neutral site where you two could meet (Egypt? Tunisia?) The U.S. barely has diplomatic relations with Libya. In any case, in a number of the denied waivers the adjudicators have cited failure to prove that meeting in a third country isn't possible, so that should be an option you should explore (aside from the advisability of meeting in person the guy you plan to marry.)	Caladan	Male	Canada	2006-10-08 21:40:00
Middle East and North Africa	dogs	I expect quite a lot of the questions about Islam is just due to inexposure. I'm probably more exposed to Islam than the average American, but through university courses and discussion. I can count my actual Muslim friends on one hand. So I figure if I wonder about certain customs, it's got to be even worse for someone who only hears about Islam on the news. You'll see similar queries about Mormons or Buddhists or other minority religions in the U.S. That said, the dog thing has always struck me as a cultural thing more than a religious thing. One of my friends is a first-generation American whose parents are from Iran. He's not religious, and they are but not devoutly so, and he's remarked that he still finds it weird that Americans keep dogs in houses as pets; they're just dirty animals. I suspect it may be more a regional preference than a religious one, or that the two reinforce each other. My fiancé (Canadian, Protestant) doesn't like dogs as pets because he grew up on a farm and thinks of them as dirty working animals.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2006-10-12 08:59:00
Middle East and North Africa	Marriage Protection & Recourse in Law and Faith	If fraud wasn't an issue, then why'd you bring it up? Yes, non-Muslims were invited, but I didn't expect all of you to understand the discussion. I was right. Why should you? Some of the MENA girls don't either. Keep laughing! Let's be clear; I'm not slamming Islam and I'm more than capable of understanding the discussion. I may be mocking you (and VP, maybe, tho' she has a good sense of humor about it), but that's hardly the same thing. You've studied Islamic law and believe you have a duty to 'stand out firmly for justice', but from this angle, it doesn't look so much like a debate about religious law as a catfight due to a personality conflict. So, some questions: 1) A contract requires enforcement. That's basic contracts. But there are many attempted contracts that fail, and so I'm wondering what you do if your marriage contract isn't enforceable in the society where you live. Because I imagine there are some marriage contracts that wouldn't be enforceable in the U.S. 2) 'Protections' are required, but we haven't said what they are here, so it's hard to know what's being contracted. 3) If there is no higher central authority in Islam, then how is interpretation decided? If it's just 'schools of interpretation', then how can you be speaking as the one true voice of Islam as you're representing yourself here? Maybe VP isn't up-to-snuff on religious law, but you seem to be against any imam or religious website or anything that disagrees with you as obviously wrong, but I'm not seeing where that authority derives. I admit... I don't understand the discussion... here's what loses me... we're discussing religious law, however, I'm being quoted "basic" US contract law. As far as I understand it... taking into account I could be wrong... God did not Himself reveal US contract law to any prophet. I thought that was a bunch of laws that men got together and voted on The Quran, which He did reveal, does not require registration of any marriage with any entity. It is not required in the Quran that anyone other than the parties making the contract and the witnesses even recognize it. It is, however, stressed that we are to take personal responsibility for our actions and that, even if we are not judged on Earth for them, we will all stand before the Creator on JD and answer for them. I, at one time, took a great interest in the US legal system... I lost interest when I began to actually learn about the process though because it seems to be a corrupt system in which the point of civil law is how rich people can weasle their way out of responsibilities... who can find the best loophole... If a person makes a contract with another person, they are honor bound by the contract regardless of religion or social status. Just because a judge from a corrupt system tells you otherwise does not change how you will be judged for your actions on JD. I didn't see any slams against Islam here... maybe I just don't have my offended glasses on properly today... let me readjust Not basic U.S. contract law, just basic meaning of contract. If people have contracted to do something -- marriage, pay $20, whatever -- and one of them doesn't follow through, then the other person has certain recourse against them. The idea is that it can be enforced; it's supposed to be something stronger than a mere promise. What sort of recourse? Depends on the contract. If it's a legal contract, then the recourse can take the form of legal sanctions. If it's a religious contract, then the recourse is whatever the religion holds (excommunication, or just God pwning your butt on Judgment Day, whatever.) The question, I guess, is whether God's judgment counts for enforcing a marriage contract or if you need to have the civil paperwork filed. So it seems that you, VP, have a religious contract but not a civil contract with your fiancé, and there's some debate among Islamic scholars as to whether a religious contract requires a civil contract or not in order to be a legit contract. Fair enough. I don't know if there is a consensus of religious scholars on this point, but I'm going to guess 'no', as half of the point of being a scholar is to have no consensus. As far as the consulate is concerned, you've been completely open with them, so we're hardly talking fraud! They could *deny*, perhaps, a fiancé visa on the grounds that you two are married enough for the consulate's purposes, which would suck, but it isn't fraud unless, you know, there's lying & deceit.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2006-10-16 09:50:00
Middle East and North Africa	Marriage Protection & Recourse in Law and Faith	If fraud wasn't an issue, then why'd you bring it up? Yes, non-Muslims were invited, but I didn't expect all of you to understand the discussion. I was right. Why should you? Some of the MENA girls don't either. Keep laughing! Let's be clear; I'm not slamming Islam and I'm more than capable of understanding the discussion. I may be mocking you (and VP, maybe, tho' she has a good sense of humor about it), but that's hardly the same thing. You've studied Islamic law and believe you have a duty to 'stand out firmly for justice', but from this angle, it doesn't look so much like a debate about religious law as a catfight due to a personality conflict. So, some questions: 1) A contract requires enforcement. That's basic contracts. But there are many attempted contracts that fail, and so I'm wondering what you do if your marriage contract isn't enforceable in the society where you live. Because I imagine there are some marriage contracts that wouldn't be enforceable in the U.S. 2) 'Protections' are required, but we haven't said what they are here, so it's hard to know what's being contracted. 3) If there is no higher central authority in Islam, then how is interpretation decided? If it's just 'schools of interpretation', then how can you be speaking as the one true voice of Islam as you're representing yourself here? Maybe VP isn't up-to-snuff on religious law, but you seem to be against any imam or religious website or anything that disagrees with you as obviously wrong, but I'm not seeing where that authority derives. Edited by Caladan, 16 October 2006 - 06:21 AM.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2006-10-16 06:21:00
Middle East and North Africa	Marriage Protection & Recourse in Law and Faith	Under VP's version, you don't need the contract to be married in Islam, and if you don't register the marriage, you can still count as married. Is protection and enforcement not tied to local culture at all? Actually I do believe you have to have a marriage contract... I just don't agree that any govt... much less a non-muslim one... has to recognize it in order for it to be valid. Personal responsibility has to come in to play at some point. So it would just need to be a contract between two people and God? But it's not a sacrament? Would a contract more than that even make sense in the U.S., what with all the no-fault divorce laws? This has been interesting to me apart from the sniping, as it's a very different view of marriage than is in my own tradition (which is pretty much about telling civil authorities to stuff it.), where any legal contractual authority is pretty much relativised to culture. (i.e., there's no spousal support rule in Catholicism, but if the culture has rules, they'll probably be picked up by the local diocese.) We have pre-Cana stuff but it's just basically pre-marital counselling.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2006-10-15 20:10:00
Middle East and North Africa	Marriage Protection & Recourse in Law and Faith	Hehe. To me it's reading a bit like the More Muslim Than Thou Olympics. Judged sort of like figure skating or gymnastics: 'Bob, she's got the veil, which is a conventional style often appreciated by the judges, but she's pushing new frontiers with her insistance on a paper marriage, something new and daring! It could work in her favor, but it's got a very high degree of difficulty. I hope she sticks the landing!' 'Here's our classically trained rising star, who has incorporated shouts of 'fornicator! fornicator!' into her routine, in an attempt to garner artistic accolades.'	Caladan	Male	Canada	2006-10-15 19:51:00
Middle East and North Africa	Marriage Protection & Recourse in Law and Faith	So, basically, under szsz's version of Islam, to be married requires a formal contract signed with two witnesses, and in order to ensure that the contract is properly enforced, szsz's Islam requires that the marriage be registered with the local civil authorities when there's not a religious court that has the power of enforcement? And if you're missing either of those you're not married as far as Islam is concerned. Under VP's version, you don't need the contract to be married in Islam, and if you don't register the marriage, you can still count as married. Is protection and enforcement not tied to local culture at all? (The reason I said horribly biased is that if you extend, as you did, the poll to non-Muslims, it means very different things. I, for example, will want the legal protections afforded by U.S. civil law, but it has fskall to do with the religious marriage. But if I check yes, it seems as though I'm implicitly saying, Oh, yes, legal protections are part of my marriage traditions, and they're really not. In other words it was this: "The debate has been about what Islam requires, but it is no less than what is required in all Abrahamic faiths, and, I imagine, what most would wish for themselves so all are welcome to respond. It is an ecumenical discussion." that sparked my thoughts, and at least one rather big Abrahamic faith doesn't have this concept of protections at all.) As far as visa fraud is concerned, the only question as far as *fraud* goes is whether the marriage is misrepresented legally. If two people decide they're 'married in their heart' it doesn't matter a whit to the civil authorities unless it means their criteria for a legal marriage. So I'm not seeing how VP could be committing visa fraud if she's a) not legally recognized as married B) not recognized religiously as married (according to szsz) and c) files on a fiancé visa. Edited by Caladan, 15 October 2006 - 06:49 PM.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2006-10-15 18:46:00
Middle East and North Africa	Marriage Protection & Recourse in Law and Faith	Don't know how Islam works, but there's nothing in Catholicism as far as I know about that would invalidate a Catholic sacrament because a civil contract wasn't available or enforceable. (You could be a married Catholic in the absence of a functioning or tolerant government that recognized the marriage.) So let's not group all the Abrahamic faiths under one mantle here, as there just isn't a requirement of civil protection in a Catholic marriage. I haven't voted in the poll as its horribly biased. Like asking in a poll 'when did you stop beating your wife?' Practically, there's a number of civil benefits under American law that occur with a legal marriage that are a pain in the behind to contract individually: default power of attorney, inheritance rights and the like go to spouses automatically, but if you're not legally married, all of those contracts can be contested in court more easily. And that's before we get to all the immigration stuff.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2006-10-15 10:13:00
Middle East and North Africa	Another Countdown Thread!!!!!!	mybackpages' advice seems on target here and in the other thread. Think of it like this. The officer is going to look at the evidence and try to tell a story that best explains the evidence. If the evidence includes a few so-called red flags, that's going to change the story. It seems that in Private's case, from what we've learned, the main flags are no common language, a very short courtship, and the groom's cousin acting as her wali. So the officer tells him or herself a story. Which better explains the evidence, from the officer's point of view? The flags seem to have appeared to the officer a good reason to recommend denial. What you need to do is re-explain those flags so they fit in with a story that says 'We are a legit couple that intends to marry.'	Caladan	Male	Canada	2006-10-18 09:40:00
Canada	Wheres all the privileges to be canadian	Let me walk you through my logic on this and maybe we can stop with the condescending entitlement argument, mkay? Because the purpose of the K-1 is first, to provide a path into the country, and second, to provide a path, if the conditions, viz. marriage to the petitioner are fulfilled, for adjustment of status. And it is NOT essentially an immigrant visa. It's essentially a non-immigrant one. If you don't marry within the 90 days, you either have to leave, just like a tourist visa, or on the assumption you've married late, file an I-130 because you are out-of-status on a non-immigrant visa. It's the marriage that does all the work in getting permanent residency. The K-1 just gets you here (useful if you're from a country where you can't get a tourist visa) and gives you 90 days to play with. It's like a tourist visa for a purpose, and doing it means you eliminate one form and maybe get the medical taken care of. So, given those two conditions, what does making a person from a VWP country (or here on a student visa, etc.) file a K-1 accomplish? Reduction in fraud? On the contrary, the countries are on the VWP list because they are already low fraud, and if someone wanted to come here and stay, they'd just hop on an airplane and stay. No need to swindle an American into a green card. At least not ahead of time. Protection against disease? We assume the people are fine to visit for a 90-day VWP stay; if they file for AOS they need a medical at which point diseases would be caught. Net protection against disease by making a VWP person go through the K-1 = 0. Protection against terrorists? Again, VWP. If we're not worried about terrorism enough to kill the VWP, it surely doesn't do anything to add a fiance interview of three minutes into the process. So we can conclude it has nothing to do with keeping undesirables out of the country, when the applicant is from a VWP country. If they just wanted to get in, they'd already be here. And if we are that worried, we should make everyone apply for a tourist visa. So all that's left is providing a path for adjustment of status. That's useful, like a headache is useful, but it's really easy to replace with an I-130, as people manage it all the time if they're here for other reasons (work, school, spontaneous weddings) and get married. Construing this as wanting privileges based on country of origin is really rather insulting. It has nothing to do with race or language or whether I like Canadians and everything to do with the fact that the country has already decided that this country is a low fraud risk and lets them in for all sorts of purposes, even to get married. There is an awful lot of redundancy in this process. And if you eliminate redundancy, everyone's processing times go up. How much faster would the immigrant visas in Montreal go if they didn't also have to process K-1s? How much faster would it be at the service centers if they didn't have to approve VWP K-1s.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-21 16:05:00
Canada	Wheres all the privileges to be canadian	Does it smack of entitlement when you use the VWP? You only get that based on your country of origin just by having a passport. If not, why not? The process wasn't too bad, but it was pretty wasteful considering they learned nothing at the interview that wasn't on the forms. And it's not like it's illegal to adjust status having come in off of another visa, or that coming in off of another visa type means you're exempt from the AOS paperwork. And since that's the case, it doesn't seem all that strange to have a policy of eliminating the K-1 for VWP countries.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-21 15:01:00
Canada	Wheres all the privileges to be canadian	QUOTE (rebeccajo @ Oct 21 2007, 11:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> QUOTE (Caladan @ Oct 21 2007, 11:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It's not just numbers that made her visa faster, rebeccajo. She didn't have to get a medical or an interview, either. Plus, the K-1 is a non-immigrant visa; the 'immigrating' portion happens later, and Canadian or British citizen would still have to go through that. Or here's another way you could do it. It's possible to apply for work visas at the border. If an interview is so important, have an approved I-129F, and allow the border patrol to conduct the interviews and grant the visa much in the same way the (non-immigrant, dual intent) L-1 or the TN visas are. I don't know who the 'she' is you are referring to - I am obviously unfamiliar with this story. So the K1 is a non-immigrant visa. Does that mean if you are Canadian that visa should be administered in a different manner than it is for citizens of another nation? Full story: friends of mine, one American, one UK, met in grad school. He proposed last April. They filed the paperwork so she could come this fall to the UK where he has a postdoc. Start to finish for her 'visa journey': three weeks. No interview, no medical, just a few pieces of paper plus her birth certificate. No requirement that they marry in 90 days. I think her visa is multiple entry and good for two years. As to your question about the visa being administered in another manner -- why not? C.'s never had to apply for a tourist visa, either. Neither, I suspect, did your husband. It's not unprecedented for countries to have different relationships with some countries rather than others. The UK, Canada, and Australia & NZ have a closer relationship than that of the U.S. and those countries. Is that unfair? Not really -- they have a long and shared history. And given that AOS is what gives someone the right to work and stay, not the K-1, I wouldn't see much wrong with a system that said, essentially, you can adjust status based on marriage off of the VWP without having to demonstrate a lack of immigrant intent. Cuts down on the paperwork, still doesn't give anyone the right to stay without AOS and means a faster process for everyone else who actually needs the K-1 to get their partner here.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-21 10:30:00
Canada	Wheres all the privileges to be canadian	It's not just numbers that made her visa faster, rebeccajo. She didn't have to get a medical or an interview, either. Plus, the K-1 is a non-immigrant visa; the 'immigrating' portion happens later, and Canadian or British citizen would still have to go through that. Or here's another way you could do it. It's possible to apply for work visas at the border. If an interview is so important, have an approved I-129F, and allow the border patrol to conduct the interviews and grant the visa much in the same way the (non-immigrant, dual intent) L-1 or the TN visas are.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-21 10:16:00
Canada	Wheres all the privileges to be canadian	QUOTE (rebeccajo @ Oct 21 2007, 11:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> QUOTE (trailmix @ Oct 21 2007, 02:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> QUOTE (thermophile @ Oct 20 2007, 11:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> actually I don't think that its unreasonable to think that Canadian/American couples should have an easier time. A reasonably large chunk of us can just cross the border and look for work under NAFTA, no long application process or interview involved. And (this is me opening a huge can of worms) we are much more likely to just meet during non-visa-mediated encounters. I'd suggest that there is a much lower proportion of Can/Am marriage based immigration fraud because of this closeness. (actually I don't think that marriage based immigration fraud is as prevalent as is depicted in the media, regardless of the country) The process is ridiculously long, but I'd be happy if they'd just stop making us go to Montreal or Vancouver for a pointless 3 minute interview. If they'd waive the interviews for the typical Can/Am couple they'd solve the backlog and acknowledge the close relationship between the two countries. agreed Oh really? And then I suppose other 'friendly nations' should waive the interview requirment as well? Where do you draw the line? There's a good argument for drawing it at Canada. Very open border, six months visitation permitted. (Just like we draw lines at Canada for, say, requiring passport travel until very recently.) But I'd be fine with a system rather like the UK for any VWP country. Send in the paperwork, no interview requirement, you're good to go. It took my friend three weeks, start to finish, to get an 'unmarried partner visa' to the UK,.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-21 10:06:00
Canada	Wheres all the privileges to be canadian	QUOTE (DeadPoolX @ Oct 20 2007, 07:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> QUOTE (liz_legend @ Oct 20 2007, 06:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> QUOTE (Rob & Jin @ Oct 20 2007, 07:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So suck it up and join the club. Plus its damn cheap to visit Canada during the wait, try saving the money to fly to china on a regular basis, then post again. Now there really isn't any need for that kind of attitude.. No, there isn't; however, I can understand the frustration presented in it. The OP gave the impression that "since Canadians are such-and-such way, they shouldn't have to jump through the same hoops as everyone else." That's bound to rub some people the wrong way. After all, Canada is a foreign country (as many Canadians are so fond of reminding Americans), so it only makes sense that Canadians are subject to the same processes that every other foreign national is as well. Sort of. On the other hand, the first time C. used a passport to enter the U.S. was *after* his I-129F had been approved. There's a lot he can do as a Canadian that recognizes the close relationship between Canada and the U.S. Work visas, longer maximum stay per year, that sort of thing. It's not a problem for older Canadians to own homes in the U.S. and travel there. Canada's already not in the same category as China. Has there ever been a Canadian-American couple on VJ denied for proof of relationship? (Definitely not true of Guangzhou, and certainly no one is told to get another Canadian if their girl or guy gets denied.) Anyone else think it's weird that Ron is so dangerous he can't get a fiance visa but a waiver for a weekend visit isn't a big deal? I think that's patently nuts. There needs to be some oversight, but I'd be fine with an arrangement that entailed that Canadian-American couples either didn't need the fiance visa (but would necessarily have a green card interview), or received one without an interview. The interview for us was a complete joke, to the extent I have to wonder if they're silently sniggering at all the couples that bother with it rather than just driving down one day and 'spontaneously' getting married.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-21 10:04:00
Canada	Health Insurance	QUOTE (lynamon @ Oct 27 2007, 12:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thanks for the warning but there is something called "open enrollment" once a year and they cannot refuse preexisting conditions. This is true if health insurance is provided through your employer, but if you're trying to self-insure, they can and do take your condition into account. You know what's bizarrely wrong? That health INSURANCE, not health CARE is such a large part of our budget. It's a sunk cost even if you're not sick!	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-26 23:52:00
Canada	Health Insurance	QUOTE (Misty1979 @ Oct 25 2007, 10:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Funny you should bring this topic up...I was just browsing health insurance a couple hours ago, and was going to ask the same question. I did a little survey and was quoted about $117 for a decent plan. Not sure why they would quote any of you $300+, unless you were insuring a whole family. Then again, the price may have changed after I actually spoke to an agent and confirmed the price, but I wouldn't think it would cost that much.... It depends on the kind of coverage you get. Adding C. to my plan would have cost us about $8000 a year, so we insured him independently for around $115 a month, but it's a catastrophic coverage plan. Basically, no doctor's visits, but if he gets hit by a car we're only out for the first $5000. This works for us because he's healthy, on no regular prescriptions, and doesn't need regular checkups that we can't afford out of pocket.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-26 09:25:00
Canada	What is Moral Turpitude?	QUOTE (IR5FORMUMSIE @ Oct 27 2007, 11:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> QUOTE (Caladan @ Oct 27 2007, 10:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> QUOTE (IR5FORMUMSIE @ Oct 27 2007, 07:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> QUOTE (Caladan @ Oct 27 2007, 06:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> A rough guide is 'moral turpitude' = the sort of person you'd have a hard time explaining to your parents. All felonies, many drug crimes, and a handful of misdemeanors, with borderline cases being dependent entirely on the details. That would depend on your parents, wouldn't it? White collar criminals can be quite charming. Felonies are out, since the petty offence exception goes out the window and you'll need the waiver, most misdemeanours (except something like DUI/DWI) are included in the list in some fashion. The borderline cases are things like being forced to do something under duress or some kind of threat of violence or harm. I have the full list around here somewhere, but there's a lot of regulatory misdemeanory stuff like breach of the peace that is excluded (what you might think of as 'stupid ####### you did in college') completely, and often what's borderline (to my mind at least) about some of the misdemeanors is that it depends what statute your crime fell under, not what you were punished. So the judge could be lenient on you, say, in a possession case, by only fining you, but the crime you were convicted of could have carried a sentence of X years. Or tax evasion, which isn't a problem as long as it's not willful tax evasion. Caladan, you're absolutely right. We don't think that the high school hijinks and pranks can come back to haunt you (that doesn't mean you shouldn't do them, just don't get caught this halloween). I posted a while back about the whole mens rea (evil, guilty or depraved mind) bit (actus rea is OK, mens rea is not). It makes sense to absolutely nobody who's ever read the list (everybody has a slightly different one). Even the courts can't agree on what is and what is not a CMT. The potential charge in many cases carries much, much more weight than the actual sentence. If you get caught in the system (p*** off the right person) you could potentially get indicted for eating a grape in a supermarket and end up needing a waiver. If a disgruntled judge or JP thinks that you were "colouring" your testimony in a traffic case, you might just get hit with a charge of perjury and even if the charges are thrown out, you would need a waiver. It's stupid and unfair and pointless but that's what we have to deal with. Or the Jena 6, where the prosecutor called sneakers a 'deadly weapon', so the kid would theoretically be inadmissible for life for kicking someone in the ribs. I have an acquaintance who is a prosecutor and he said they've recently been receiving training on how their charges affect immigration, because usually the prosecutor only cares about convicting the right person with an appropriate sentence. Most of the time, people don't care about the specific statute as long as the punishment seems to fit, and judges usually have enough discretion to give a fine or probation. Employers won't care once the crime is explained (or the record is sealed), but immigration has to go by the statute.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-28 10:04:00
Canada	What is Moral Turpitude?	QUOTE (IR5FORMUMSIE @ Oct 27 2007, 07:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> QUOTE (Caladan @ Oct 27 2007, 06:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> A rough guide is 'moral turpitude' = the sort of person you'd have a hard time explaining to your parents. All felonies, many drug crimes, and a handful of misdemeanors, with borderline cases being dependent entirely on the details. That would depend on your parents, wouldn't it? White collar criminals can be quite charming. Felonies are out, since the petty offence exception goes out the window and you'll need the waiver, most misdemeanours (except something like DUI/DWI) are included in the list in some fashion. The borderline cases are things like being forced to do something under duress or some kind of threat of violence or harm. I have the full list around here somewhere, but there's a lot of regulatory misdemeanory stuff like breach of the peace that is excluded (what you might think of as 'stupid ####### you did in college') completely, and often what's borderline (to my mind at least) about some of the misdemeanors is that it depends what statute your crime fell under, not what you were punished. So the judge could be lenient on you, say, in a possession case, by only fining you, but the crime you were convicted of could have carried a sentence of X years. Or tax evasion, which isn't a problem as long as it's not willful tax evasion.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-27 21:08:00
Canada	What is Moral Turpitude?	A rough guide is 'moral turpitude' = the sort of person you'd have a hard time explaining to your parents. All felonies, many drug crimes, and a handful of misdemeanors, with borderline cases being dependent entirely on the details.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-27 17:31:00
Canada	We are under contract! We're buying a house!	Congrats, Karen!	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-28 22:05:00
Canada	Adjustment of Status	QUOTE (misa @ Oct 31 2007, 02:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Just to clarify a few statements here, there is nothing fraudulent about entering with intent to marry -- it's the intent to stay that's the issue. Absolutely right; it's just that intent to marry is often seen as a proxy for intent to stay. QUOTE (Reba @ Oct 31 2007, 03:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I think however that if you are denied your adjustment from a tourist/visitor status that there is no appeal process. You're denied, and you're deported. That is IF they deem that you arrived with intent to stay. I'm sure most of the time they know that was the intent, but really what's the point in denying an adjustment, if the marriage is bonafide and not for the soul purpose of obtaining a green card. Fraudulent marriages of Canadians to USC's are less than from other countries, so they are probably given a bit more lee-way at interview. However, I wouldn't recommend it to anyone myself even in passing. Depending on how long an adjusment application can take in some areas of the US, the person could be stuck here for more than a year, unable to work or to travel. I've known of more than one person whose been stuck for nearly 3 years because USCIS denied their application for AP. I couldn't handle that. No way. I think you'd be able to work, because you file for the EAD based on your marriage to the USC, not on having entered on a K-1. (This might differ for K-3s.)	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-31 16:39:00
Canada	Adjustment of Status	QUOTE (bowflex @ Oct 31 2007, 12:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> If she came to the United States to visit you and had no intent to marry, then it's possible to get married and then file for AOS. If her intent when coming over the border was to get married, than that's a different story. And 99% of the time, the intent is impossible to prove, so there are no problems. They really don't seem to be out to deport spouses, and it seems like the sort of thing that would be easier if you didn't know the law. You can adjust from F-1s, J-1s, tourist visas, all manner of things. The thing is that marriage counts as a reason to change your intent, the sort of thing that if it happens to you, might change your vacation plans or your study plans. That's why there's all the emphasis on intent to marry before you enter; if you have the intent to marry, it's a safe bet you have the intent to stay. Honestly, if C and I had the same timetable from entry to marriage -- about 61 days -- it likely wouldn't have flagged as suspicious. I can see why the lawyers advise the way they do. Why make someone wait 9 months for a five minute interview when they could come on vacation, hang out for a couple months, marry, and have the green card by then?	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-31 12:56:00
Canada	Do most USC attend Consulate interviews with their fiances/spouses?	I didn't. I had to teach and Connecticut to Vancouver seemed a waste of a ticket for what was going to be a slam-dunk interview.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-31 09:07:00
Canada	OK , Im getting run around about my car =/	We were able to get a compliance letter for our 1999 Chevy Venture, with little hassle (just faxed in a form, cost around $80.) At the border they gave us the impression ('almost no one is well prepared ahead of time') that you can 'import' the car later. The standard procedure seems to be to give the new immigrant the forms at the border, and the CBP guys had to look up how to do it. When we got to the DMV, they didn't even care to see the import paperwork. They just ran a check on the VIN and had us go for an emissions test, but that didn't prevent registration of the car.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-11-02 08:11:00
Canada	Canadians Facing Delays in Renewal of Passports by Mail	C.'s parents almost missed our wedding because they filed in April (pre lots of passport offices) via mail and received the passports twelve hours before their flight in July, having had to withdraw their old application, and refile an expedited one.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-11-04 10:47:00
Canada	Got copy of medical back yesterday...	QUOTE (lynamon @ Oct 23 2007, 11:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> QUOTE (jasman0717 @ Oct 23 2007, 09:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> QUOTE (Emancipation @ Oct 23 2007, 05:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> QUOTE (jasman0717 @ Oct 23 2007, 08:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Don't take any changes, see a specialist immediately tee hee.. that one made me laugh.. "see a specialist immediately" In Canada.. tee hee.. *sigh.. I'll shut up now.. Puts on her serious hat.. MandE... i'll add my voice to the others who said. it's probably nothing.. and I think i would bring additional documentation from my Dr.. as well.. I think that's a good idea.. Is there anyway they could Re-do the x-ray (the US approved Dr. that is?) for your peace of mind? I am not from C-a-n-a-d-a so don't get the humor but still recommend that a specialist be seen quickly. Lung problems truly isn't very funny to me The humour comes from the fact that we have socialized health care ... you have to see your doctor who refers you to a specialist and then it takes a while to get an appointment ... so immediately isn't really immediate at all It works like that in the U.S., too. My GP referred me to a specialist for my knee, and so now I have an appointment for.... December 10th. (ohnoes private medicine!) I don't think X-rays regularly are good for your health; it's a low dose of radiation, but my GP was telling me that she had a patient doing it six times a year by going to clinic screenings. MandE, rumor has it that if you take a healthy person and run a battery of tests, you'll always find at least three things 'wrong' with them that turn out to be just quirks of their anatomy. Get it tested, good luck, and keep us posted.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-10-29 21:48:00
Canada	Possibility at U.S. work permit for Canuk hubby	If the corporation is international and they can arrange an intracompany transfer, he'd be eligible for an L-1. In the case of C.'s company, they started making noises about getting many of their employees L-1s in April and most of them filed for them at the border in May.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-11-17 01:00:00
Canada	Possibility at U.S. work permit for Canuk hubby	As far as I know, going the work-related path would preclude continuing going down the IR-1 path. But were your husband able to secure an H1-B, he could come here and work; it's a visa that permits dual intent. So he'd come here, work, you'd file the I-130 and all the rest of the AOS stuff, and once he had the EAD, just transition over to that. We considered doing something like this with C. He had the chance for an L-1. Problem was, by the time the chance showed up, he already had the K-1 in hand, and it's not permitted to switch from a K-1 to an L-1. We weren't sure whether that was before or after entry (I suspect after) but we didn't want to take a chance on screwing up the wedding. But had we done it, he would have come here on an L-1, we would have married and filed for AOS.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-11-16 23:40:00
Canada	Canadian winters are killing me...ok not really but	QUOTE (kimmbo @ Nov 16 2007, 12:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I have been in Canada for almost 6 years (from Vegas).. and each winter my skin has gotten worse and worse... the first year I lived here I didnt know what was happening to me when I literally was up all night scratching myself because I was so itchy!..I thought I had a skin disease, and later found out its common to get itchy in the winter... I read up on what to do about it and started taking warm, short showers...instead of long hot ones...... and I always put on lotion when I get out..and I drink water all day long (always have)... Now, 6 years later my arms and legs dont itch AS MUCH but now in the last 2 years my dryness has moved to my face..I always wear chapstick to bed, and put moisturizer (Vichy) on my face...but by the time I wake up I look like I have a milk moustache and my whole mouth area is white and dry...LOL any recommendations for facial moisturizers?? I have sensitive skin and an inherited tendency towards eczema and winter itch, so I feel your pain. Some suggestions: 1) Aveeno makes a very good lotion that contains menthol, which helps kill the itch. 2) In the winter I switch to an oil-based facial cleanser made by Burt's Bees. It's orange oil based and comes in a tube. It's not drying at all. 3) Burt's Bees also makes a good moisturizers (Vanishing Marshmallow) for your face. 4) Shea butter works pretty well, too. 5) Get a humidifier if you don't have one. It'll make the air less dry.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-11-16 13:41:00
Canada	Can Montreal override Vermont	Ron, a quick look around the I-601 forum seems to indicate that this is standard procedure, isn't it? There's a second interview, but if the only problem was the reason for the waiver, it should be just a formality.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-11-23 17:07:00
Canada	Vancouver - When do you get your Visa	QUOTE (Bernie and Gary @ Dec 2 2007, 09:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I managed to change my interview to December 13th, in order to accommodate the medical on the Wednesday (Dec 12th). My interview on the 13th is at 1:00 PM. When do you get the visa? I'd like to fly out of Vancouver that evening or the morning of the 14th. THanks again everyone! Back in February C. had a mid-morning appointment and received the visa in early mid-afternoon, and flew back to Edmonton that evening. He was even able to snag an earlier flight than he had planned due to the amount of flights between Vancouver and Edmonton daily.	Caladan	Male	Canada	2007-12-02 10:18:00