biggish data

The situation is sad, badly organized, and poorly executed. Maybe not total bull #######, but definitely burdensome, to say the least, for the people involved.

What is total bull ####### is the proposition that DHS had zero idea—none at all!—about the existence of the law prior to May 6. Shoot, the peons here at VJ knew about it long before then, so it must have been common knowledge, n'est-ce pas?

Oh ok I gotcha, Yes you are right in that. There was buzz going around about the law being passed. But no one at the DHS knew the intricacies of it until it was too late. That is why the USCIS never heard about it until WAY after the March 6th deadline (May 6th two months later). If you figure a month or so processing (bureaucracy) time for the DHS to finally inform the USCIS, they probably "officially" knew about it back at the end of March beginning of April when someone from the compliance department called attention to the deadline of this new law.

Thus why the USCIS hasn't had even a draft of the new I-129F form until very recently.

That is the current findings from what they could gather while I was there.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-05 12:32:00

I had to even actually provide a copy of the law for them to even come to know of it's existance. This law has been implemented so underhandedly, that not even the DHS knew about it until the memorandum was released on May 6th. Seriously!

Sorry, but that's total bull #######.

I hope I am understanding you to mean that this whole situation is and not that I am trying to give incorrect information?

Edited by zethris, 05 June 2006 - 12:24 PM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-05 12:21:00

Hi folks,

I just got back from the meeting. I will be brief and wont give out too many details. But they will investigate this issue and get back to me on Wednesday. They, along with the entire staff I spoke with also thought that this was rediculous with how they are going about it. They even, through their professional means logicaly deduced the negative outcomes of those immediatly effected. I guess to tally the potential case and income, but they had some interesting think tank ideas of the effects of this slam.

As a disclaimer, I have a no BS relationship with them. They gave me their honest opinions on this, not just to get me excited to start a lawsuit, like most shady lawfirms might do, but so we know we are not alone in thinking this whole implementation of the IMBRA law is preposterous. Even from outsiders looking in.

I had to even actually provide a copy of the law for them to even come to know of it's existance. This law has been implemented so underhandedly, that not even the DHS knew about it until the memorandum was released on May 6th. Seriously!

I wont divulge at this time the strategies of the approach. Nor will I ever, I think. I will leave that up to them if they want to take the case after careful investigation.

Again, this will not be to revoke IMBRA, but to call attention to the squished people (us) it's leaving in it's path as this bahemoth of a ninja law lands.

Edited by zethris, 05 June 2006 - 12:14 PM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-05 12:13:00

But that doesn't explain why they are backdating so much. They "claim" petitions were filed improperly after the "deadline" but going by everything I have encountered no one at the USCIS even knew about this change until the beginning of MAY!.

What they should have done was inform the USCIS of the change, made the cange to the I-129f forms LAST YEAR, and then set a cutoff date for the changed forms for those that are accepted after a ceartain date. Those that are already in process should be ok.

I am an angered beyond belief with this ordeal. I am going to be contacting who ever insignifigant congress person and representative about this, AND I am going to be ralying up and auditioning some lawfirms who might be willing to take this to a class action against the DHS and the Federal Government. I know of a few that are pretty good.

They have awoken a sleeping giant in me with this one. My fury has no bounds. NO ONE MESSES WITH MY LIFE OR MY FUTURE AND GETS AWAY WITH IT!

OH you are right where most of us were a few weeks ago when we first heard about this. I feel 100% the same you do. The worst part is the they haven't even notified us yet. The law went into effect 3 months ago and they haven't sent anything to petitioners who filed after that date and whose petitions are not being processed.

So make your phone calls and do what you can. I will join any class action against DHS! Then try to focus on that this is coming to an end shortly and the new forms should be out within the next few weeks. It's almost over.

I have a meeting today in New York with a lawfirm at 11am. Just so you all know, this class action will not be to get rid of IMBRA, it's needed. It is to make known, and make them accountable for the loss this is causing us, as well as the undue grief and stress for the negligence of how they implemented this "law".

It's not IMBRA, it's how they came to ratify it that is the problem.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-05 07:44:00

It is all well and good to post timelines- but it doesn't fix the IMBRA, and bigger picture, USCIS problems.

Please, call your congressmen. Ask to speak to the immigration specialist on staff. If you live reasonably close, go visit them. Express your rage at the entire application process not only being stopped, but REVERSED! (interviews canceled, approvals reversed)

This is insane.

It drives me crazy to read posters say- Just wait. Be patient. Be a quiet sheep. That is #######- our rights as citizens to pursue happiness and love where and how we chose to was trampled by the IMBRA law.

There is no earthly reason a fiancee visa should take more than a couple months from application to approved visa. There is no excuse. People must be held accountable for this not happening.

Today I made my 4th call to my Congressman's office and I will continue to call them until somebody fixes USCIS.

The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Don't be a sheep! Make some noise!

I posted this to a different thread but the message needs to be communicated far and wide.

As much as we ALL hate to wait for our loved ones to come, I actually think that the law is a good one. I know that if I was affected by it I would be upset but in the end you will get to be together and I believe that the reason for the wait is ligical and it will help protect many people in the future. I don't think that doing a background check on the USC is a bad idea at all- they do checks on the foreign fiance so why not us as well? Unfortunately it just came along at a bad time for some people here on VJ who are probably going to have to wait a little longer to be with their fiances. They obviously have a reason for making this law and putting it into affect- many women (and maybe men as well) have come to the US for the wrong reasons or have gotten hurt or abused once they get here. Now I am not saying that ANOYONE on this forum is bringing their fiance for the wrong reason I am just making a general comment as to why this law is good in the end. I think it's a good idea to track people who are affected so that others will have some idea as to how it is going to affect them in the future. Waiting is not fun for anyone but ensuring the safety of future immigrants into America is not a bad cause for the wait, I think. I'm sorry this is happening to some people I hope things don't slow down too much.

Sarah

But that doesn't explain why they are backdating so much. They "claim" petitions were filed improperly after the "deadline" but going by everything I have encountered no one at the USCIS even knew about this change until the beginning of MAY!.

What they should have done was inform the USCIS of the change, made the cange to the I-129f forms LAST YEAR, and then set a cutoff date for the changed forms for those that are accepted after a ceartain date. Those that are already in process should be ok.

I am an angered beyond belief with this ordeal. I am going to be contacting who ever insignifigant congress person and representative about this, AND I am going to be ralying up and auditioning some lawfirms who might be willing to take this to a class action against the DHS and the Federal Government. I know of a few that are pretty good.

They have awoken a sleeping giant in me with this one. My fury has no bounds. NO ONE MESSES WITH MY LIFE OR MY FUTURE AND GETS AWAY WITH IT!

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-04 23:44:00

Look everyone welcome to the USA Birzaro world of immigration. IN the magical land of Bizaro USA, those who play by the rules and file properly and obey the rules are penalized and mistreated. But if you break the law and do things illegally you are rewarded (refering to certain group of 11 million people who just protested for their "rights" and will be given citizenship because it is the "humane" thing to do)

Just remember we are americans ( and americans to be) and our governement will use and abuse us, because thats what americans let our government do. God bless america.

I think it's just a matter of numbers -- 11 million people can demand virtually whatever they want, even if they're here illegally. That's 11 million people who probably have family members and friends and supporters and sympathizers who are USCs who will vote and influence elections. I don't know how many people apply for the K-1 every year, but it's probably a much smaller group than 11 million people -- and so, we matter less to most politicians. This is complete #######. Also, they probably figure that if we're going through all this trouble in the first place, we'll take whatever new laws and restrictions they throw out and continue to wait and follow everything to the letter.

It's funny because this new law probably is really a "good thing" because it aims to protect foreign women from abuse and I bet most people would be in support of it, but the way they're going about enforcing it is SO ridiculous and heartbreaking and it does seem like they're punishing people.

They should NOT have done such a sudden cut off. Especially without so much as a real warning. If they had done it, we would have been talking about this for months. I have never heard anything about this until today, and what worries me, I haven't heard anything about this from the DHS yet because my Recipt date is March 22nd 2006 and that means I guess I fall into this #######. So, I have to wait EVEN LONGER?!! I am so livid right now, I can barely type.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-04 22:22:00

FilipinaHeart.com Responds to my IMBRA Question

It is unfair to say any and every social gathering website, that does not specialize in mariages as their primary business, is an IMB. I will answer no, but the rest of you can anser yes. I feel no is more truthfull. Either way, it really doesn't matter. Nor will it effect anything in any way. It's just a matter of record keeping.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-29 19:50:00

FilipinaHeart.com Responds to my IMBRA Question

Well the news media is talking about this law as a mail order bride/groom law. (which is very derrogatory to many of us) if you remember in the past, many people considered online dating the same as a mail order bride/groom. Whispers of that still exist today even though it's a very common occurance. Now that the older, more conservative people, who are too scared of change to know when something new is actually good and immediatly act as if it's evil, have learned more about it, less and less treat it with prejudice. Especially those who admit they "met online" are met with much less disdain or scruitiny than before when online dating was new.

For a while, for a couple to say they "met online" it was like coming out of the closet for a homosexual. Now both are more accepted, it's a bit easier to come out with it and talk about it. Meeting online, of course, is being accepted much faster in society. But we aren't going to get into that. What the point is, prejudice in general about meeting online is going down so it's fake equivelenc to mail order bride/groom in peoples minds is going down. However, the media will exploit it and "remind" people of it to get their attention.

So what has happened here is the shadows of the past coming back to haunt us with IMBRA and how it's being reported online. People are "reminded" that it used to be considered taboo. So they worry IMBRA might effect them if they had met online.

Well IMBRA effects us all regardless of where you met. But, the media is tryign to make it sound as if anything remotely sounding like a "mail order bride/groom" service aka Mariage Broker (and especially International Mariage Brokers) will change our lives forever and all is lost. So grasping at straws, and splitting hairs is what it's time to do for most people right now concerned about their future.

Edited by zethris, 24 June 2006 - 01:56 PM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-24 13:55:00

FilipinaHeart.com Responds to my IMBRA Question

hi, i'm also in the same situation, i met my finace on asianeuro.com, also same company that owns filipinaheart.com.... i'm wondering if someone could shed a light to our situation.. i have a few questions..

1) we met "online" at asianeuro.com on december 4, 2005 - so we are not affected by IMBRA law because it took effect on march 6?

2) but asianeuro.com charges a fee for membership if someone wants to contact one member (chat, email), so is it considered a marriage broker?

3) my fiance and i has been corresponding for about 6 months now and we will meet "face to face" in july and he will file k1 petition in august, so that would mean we are affected by IMBRA law now? and that should we say YES or NO if we meet through a marriage broker? and i'm wondering if asianeuro.com is considered a marriage broker site..

please , i'm a little confused.. thanks a lot - aix

It's not when you met that matters. It's when you file your petiton that matters. If you have not yet filed, then you definately fall under IMBRA. Also, the site you met through does charge a fee, and does specifically "market" persay Asian-American relationships/marriage, so it would qualify as a marriage broker, so you would answer yes.

No, none of these websites qualify under a mariage broker definition. That is incorrect information. A mariage broker is a mariage broker.

(4) INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER.?

(A) IN GENERAL.?The term ??international marriage
broker?? means a corporation, partnership, business, individual,
or other legal entity, whether or not organized
under any law of the United States, that charges fees
for providing dating, matrimonial, matchmaking services,
or social referrals between United States citizens or
nationals or aliens lawfully admitted to the United States
as permanent residents and foreign national clients by
providing personal contact information or otherwise facilitating
communication between individuals.

(cool.gif EXCEPTIONS.?Such term does not include?
(i) a traditional matchmaking organization of a
cultural or religious nature that operates on a nonprofit
basis and otherwise operates in compliance with the
laws of the countries in which it operates, including
the laws of the United States; or

(ii) an entity that provides dating services if its
principal business is not to provide international dating
services between United States citizens or United
States residents and foreign nationals and it charges
comparable rates and offers comparable services to
all individuals it serves regardless of the individual?s
gender or country of citizenship.

Part A means: no website such as the above examples (yahoo, eharmony, match, etc) can be classified as an IMB because they don't physicaly arrange "dating, matrimonial, matchmaking services,
or social referrals between United States citizens or
nationals or aliens lawfully admitted to the United States
as permanent residents and foreign national clients by
providing personal contact information or otherwise facilitating
communication between individuals."

#1 You find who you want to talk to yourself. If you want to try to say a search engine is defined as a referral I would disagree because no one is physically refering you to someone, you are searching on your own.

#2 Personal contact information is defined as a real name, physical address, and/or phone number. Nothing else. IMB's offer this. Social gathering websites like the above do not by default offer this, it is generaly given in private forms of communication by the actuall user, and NOT by the website's officers.

ref: http://www.visajourn...showtopic=18770

Because these social gathering websites DO NOT physically arange an in person meeting or mariage, they do not broker mariages to be classified as a mariage broker. Furthermore, even though it may charge a fee to operate, it is no different than your paying a fee to use premium features of ANY other website. While the end result of websites such as asianeuro may be to start a friendship with someone that may lead to a relationship or mariage, it is simply a side effect that happens when a form of communication is opened that previously didn't exist.

Otherwise, is World of Warcraft, a Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game for the PC that boasts over 5 million people a Mariage broker? Going by what a couple people here want to say about social gathering websites, that must mean it is due to the fact that multiple mariages have resulted from the friendships developed online through that game.

Sorry but I disagree. AsianEuro.com, like most other sites, is exempt because the law clearly states, " EXCEPTIONS.?Such term does not include?(ii) an entity that provides dating services if its principal business is NOT to provide international dating services between United States citizens or United States residents and foreign nationals and it charges comparable rates and offers comparable services to all individuals it serves regardless of the individual?s gender or country of citizenship."

AsianEuro and similar sites provide a place for people from ANY country, NOT principally between United States citizens and foreign nationals, to find PENPALS, LANGUAGE PRACTICE, FRIENDS, or MARRIAGE to others from ANY country. You can join AsianEuro if you are from Great Britain and find someone from Iceland.

The site clearly states...

"WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS SITE?

The purpose of this site is to assist people to find an Asian partner for friendship, language practice, romance or possible marriage.

I'M NOT ASIAN CAN I STILL JOIN?

Yes everyone is welcome to join, in fact many Asian ladies are specifically seeking a non-Asian partner. Some are also seeking an Asian partner or partner of an overseas Asian background. "

They are NOT principally geared for Americans!

I fully agree to this, and it is even another arguement against the idea that social gathering websites like asianeuro.com are IMB's.

Edited by zethris, 23 June 2006 - 05:45 AM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-23 05:44:00

Bad news from Senator regarding NOA 2's from Vermont

I find it amazing how screwed up this process has become.. Embassy recalls placed last, recent submissions being put in the front, with the exception of a few.. Certainly not the way to do business.

In fact, if the Government were a business, they would be bankrupt in short order. You would think that after 230 years, our Government would have learned the concept of efficiency. Nope. Not yet. Perhaps someday they will!

My only consolation is that I only need to go through this one time.

when it becomes less of an incentive to create a job for yourself like it is currently in govt. then will things speed up. Otherwise, they will always be creating something to instill more demand for themselves.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-29 19:18:00

Bad news from Senator regarding NOA 2's from Vermont

I just received a call from Senator Specter's (PA) office. I was told that petitions that have already been approved (NOA's) and sent to the embassy and had to be recalled are being processed last... I guess everyone already knows this already, but its good to find out something. Even though it means those who submitted in March are being screwed over while they process more recently received petitions. Appartently they are sending the RFE's to all peitions that have NOT been previously sent overseas first, before moving on to people that actually were approved. (Where is there any logic in that!???)

I know people have been receiving differnt things from congressmen and senator's, so hopefully this may not be 100% correct either. Either way, my wedding is trashed, and yet more money down the drain.. Thank's USCIS and thank you Congress for screwing us over and over!

I can confirm this, as I too got a call today that was the same. So aparently a memo of some sort must be getting passed around. Also the department of state pretty much re-itterated the same thing when I called in.
Seems anything I was able to do has kind of been pointless I guess. But maybe I helped a little bit to speed up the process a month. It's just lewd that those of us closer to the deadline are getting processed first!

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-29 18:45:00

After IMBRA RFE anyone got approved?

I am so pissed right now, it's not even funny.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-03 18:21:00

USCIS Substnly Changes Congress's Wordng of IMBRA

he is just that blasted troll again. he keeps re-registering. Scumbag.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-03 18:18:00

I'm cdngirl06's fiancee, and I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

The expectation is that the RFEs to recalled petitions will not be issued for 2-3 weeks, as they sort out a bunch of computer issues dealing with recalled petitions. They basically can't generate the RFEs, nor can they process them, the way the system is set up.

Not sure where you been, but RFE's are being sent right now. Just not to the cases one would think is and should be at the head of the line (NOA2). Also, some have recieved theirs and also sent it back.

I know for a fact that it's not 2-3 weeks BEFORE they START sending RFE's. they are doing it right now. But don't be surprised if it takes at least 2-3 weeks to get to your case due to how many there are.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-22 07:28:00

Since we have to send the RFE back with whatever they ask in the RFE, that wouldnt´work ´cus how would you be sending back something they haven´t sent you yet?

I have to wonder, though, if this particular RFE isn't just a canned RFE. Because of the uniqueness and urgency of the situation, I would not be suprised if it's not a typical RFE at all and just a special temporary form with the background check questionaire on it.

It would be still good to see a PDF file of one to see if it could be workable.

It that would work they would allow us to download a pdf file.
It would be much easier to them.
But according to what the officer from Vermont told me today, they actually need to touch each petition at a time.
And they keep that recorded. So we need to wait until they touch ours.
I wish I could so something also.

Keep calling them. I will.

Thats presuming they know that, that is the easier way. Which obviously because of what we are going through right now, they don't.

There is no reason what so ever that they MUST see our petition first before sending the RFE. Frankly, if it takes 3 months to go through 3000 peitions at the Philippines embasy, imagine how long it will take for the 10,000 to go through them all manualy. No, they are following beureaucratic procedure that is all. If the form is not pre-filled out, then as they recieve them they can find the case and attach it to it.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-19 21:14:00

Since we have to send the RFE back with whatever they ask in the RFE, that wouldnt´work ´cus how would you be sending back something they haven´t sent you yet?

I have to wonder, though, if this particular RFE isn't just a canned RFE. Because of the uniqueness and urgency of the situation, I would not be suprised if it's not a typical RFE at all and just a special temporary form with the background check questionaire on it.

It would be still good to see a PDF file of one to see if it could be workable.

Edited by zethris, 19 June 2006 - 08:44 PM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-19 20:43:00

An idea I had, what if one of us who has had the RFE sent already, gets the RFE in the mail and makes an Adobe PDF copy of it so we could print it out and send it in ourselves? After all, it would still result to the same case# because we would be writing it in, and match the our cases as they recieve them. Logicaly, that sounds right.

Maybe it will remove some of the wait time for them to get to our case to send us the RFE because they would still have to process the mail the same way, right? We already know we are effected by the dates of our NOA1's. But we don't have to be beureaucratic patsies like they have to be and wait for "official" notification before we can "officialy" say our case has been recalled. It's kind of like helping them reduce a step or two by doing it for them, and by side efect will save them and us some time I think.

What do you all think? Would you May/Juner's be willing to do that when it comes in this week before you fill the form out?

Edited by zethris, 19 June 2006 - 08:38 PM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-19 20:35:00

NVC's number is 603-334-0700 and operators are available until midnight eastern time. All you need is your receipt number and they ask for the beneficiary's name and birthdate. I was only on hold for about 3 minutes.

Good Luck!

thanks for the number

My problem is, my fiance calls the embassy and they claim it's there still. But they answer too fast to have actually gone to check if it's there physically. So I will call the NVC on Monday to find out if they have it.

NOA1 -- Mar 20th
NOA2--April 13th

no touches, no word on where my application is, nothing.

Our NOA2 is dated April 12th. Yesterday I spoke with someone at the VSC and he said that there'd been action on our case at all - no RFE made on it, nothing - could only confirm that they had our application and that he didn't know what was going to happen to applications that had been approved.

Then, last night I checked on the USCIS website and (for the first time since 4/12) it had been updated and it said that a RFE went out on June 12th. So...VSC says one thing and USCIS says another...you know who I'm hoping is the right one!

REALLY????
So you are the first approved case with a FRE on your way!
Just plz tell me one thing.

When I check my status online it says "this case has been approved..."

Your said the same until yesterday and now it doesn´t anymore?
It says a RFE has been sent but no longer aproved, is that correct?

That would be a good sign I think.

Please answer me when you have a chance!

There should be a lot more starting next week.

Edited by zethris, 17 June 2006 - 09:19 AM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-17 09:21:00

Venting - the Curse of IMBRA

Such a pleasure to have my post hijacked by old time flamer's day at the rest home! While some valuable thoughts were passed, some people whom I can't imagine getting as far as they have exposed their egos without even addressing my core question, which is - doncha think this is cruel and unusual?
Yes, wisdom about the capriciousness of timing is truth.
Saying 'Beeyatch be cool. That's how it is, bro!' with stronger language is juvenile.
And yes, much more juvenile than my whinging.

-A level of civility also means a level of maturity.

To answer the question: This is cruel and unusual because we are being punished for following the law.

You have every right to vent. If they want to enforce the f'ing law, do it, but what's this recall BS. Let them enforce the law when they have their damn forms up-to-date first.

here here!

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-23 06:08:00

Everyone has recieved their RFE's?? I haven't what gives?

I can't seem to find that post that had the number and path through the phone tree to get to the VSC. I just barely (like 2 seconds ago) recieved an e-mail from the Manila Embasy (a full month and a half after I even asked) that they had sent it to the VSC via the NVC, but I haven't heard anything from the VSC or the NVC. I need to try to at least confirm the physicall location of where my case is. Maybe raise an awareness that i am one of few who seems to have fallen through the cracks here.

So it's actually the very first thing I even officialy heard about my being recalled at least.

Here's what you were looking for. However, they aren't very hepful down there in terms of giving specific info. You could try though.

1-800-375-5283
press 1 pause 2 pause 6 pause 1
Enter Receipt #
press 3 pause 2 pause 1

Thanks for the info. I have been without internet for about 3 weeks, so I was kind of out of touch with things and I remember seeing a post before with that information. I just couldn't find it.

Is that the EAC number? or the embasy recipt number?

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-14 13:42:00

Everyone has recieved their RFE's?? I haven't what gives?

I just hope we are allowed to expedite our cases in Manila because of the extended wait. They are taking 4 to 6 months for an interview lately I have heard. Im gonna have my Congressman write a letter asking for the expedition of the Petition once all of this reprocessing B.S. is through.

I don't know if it matters, but the listed appointments that manila updates once a month have already passed my MNL case number. So I suspect I should have been setup for Aug 23rd or so had IMBRA not taken effect.

Yeah, I did the same thing. My # would have been for Aug 22nd. I plan to go to the interview with my Fiance when we are finally rescheduled. If the process by # we should be 1st when they give new appointments. Maybe we will rub elbows in Manila if you go too. lol.

Maybe so. The plan is to go there because she's not flown in a plane before and would like to be with me on the flight here. But I might not if the pocketbook says noooooo!

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-14 13:02:00

Everyone has recieved their RFE's?? I haven't what gives?

I just hope we are allowed to expedite our cases in Manila because of the extended wait. They are taking 4 to 6 months for an interview lately I have heard. Im gonna have my Congressman write a letter asking for the expedition of the Petition once all of this reprocessing B.S. is through.

I don't know if it matters, but the listed appointments that manila updates once a month have already passed my MNL case number. So I suspect I should have been setup for Aug 23rd or so had IMBRA not taken effect.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-14 12:55:00

Everyone has recieved their RFE's?? I haven't what gives?

I can't seem to find that post that had the number and path through the phone tree to get to the VSC. I just recieved an e-mail from the Manila Embasy (a full month and a half after I even asked) that they had sent it to the VSC via the NVC, but I haven't heard anything from the VSC or the NVC. I need to try to at least confirm the physicall location of where my case is. Maybe raise an awareness that i am one of few who seems to have fallen through the cracks here.

Yeah, I sent them an email and they claim I must deal with Manila. Then Manila emails me and says I must deal with the NVC. Then then the USCIS says that the NVC has nothing to do with my case now and they will not enter it into there computer system that they ever touched my Petition. I have comfirmed that with the NVC on the phone, they claim they don't retain any info at all.

They really don't, the NVC is kind of like a clearing house or checkpoint before our applications go abroad. Other than the record that it was sent, and where, they don't have anything else to record. It's an unfortunate buffer because most embasies think that you have to contact the NVC because that is who they deal with. They don't deal with the service centers. And the NVC is lacking valuable information that both we, and the embasy could use.

Edited by zethris, 14 July 2006 - 12:47 PM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-14 12:46:00

Everyone has recieved their RFE's?? I haven't what gives?

I can't seem to find that post that had the number and path through the phone tree to get to the VSC. I just barely (like 2 seconds ago) recieved an e-mail from the Manila Embasy (a full month and a half after I even asked) that they had sent it to the VSC via the NVC, but I haven't heard anything from the VSC or the NVC. I need to try to at least confirm the physicall location of where my case is. Maybe raise an awareness that i am one of few who seems to have fallen through the cracks here.

So it's actually the very first thing I even officialy heard about my being recalled at least.

Edited by zethris, 14 July 2006 - 12:35 PM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-14 12:32:00

Everyone has recieved their RFE's?? I haven't what gives?

I've got squat. The 9 of us charted plus zethris makes 10 little indians. What ever happened to your class action lawsuit, chief?

It could very well come to fruition afterall if this is what is happening. So it might have been good that I got the ball rolling a couple months ago. The aproach we decided to take was to lobby and politic some leverage to hopefully speed things up. All along though more evidence and information has been accrued, and if they lost some of our cases, well that might be the straw.

We'll see.

I've got squat. The 9 of us charted plus zethris makes 10 little indians. What ever happened to your class action lawsuit, chief?

The only problem is if we go to the courts....This wait will be nothing compaired to getting something done there. I can also see the Gov. freezing all K1 and K3 Visas until the figuire out if our Constitutional rights have been violated. This will take years. I just want my Woman here that's all now. I guess some might feel thats a selfish statement but it's how I feel. Just my 2 cents

I've got squat. The 9 of us charted plus zethris makes 10 little indians. What ever happened to your class action lawsuit, chief?

The only problem is if we go to the courts....This wait will be nothing compaired to getting something done there. I can also see the Gov. freezing all K1 and K3 Visas until the figuire out if our Constitutional rights have been violated. This will take years. I just want my Woman here that's all now. I guess some might feel thats a selfish statement but it's how I feel. Just my 2 cents

Thats part of the reason why we aren't pressing anything right now too. It's a very fine string that is keeping them from putting the whole thing on pause just so they can re-evaluate if this is a lawful law. I would rather take the aikido aproach for now and let their momentum be used against them at the right time, or have it cancel itself out naturally (as in, the RFE's and such go out and it's business as usuall sooner than later)

However, if it escalates any more, if it's not me, someone is going to cry foul loud enough to cause the whole thing to freeze. So because I know I could have a while back, I chose to give it some more time.

Edited by zethris, 14 July 2006 - 12:08 PM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-14 12:06:00

Everyone has recieved their RFE's?? I haven't what gives?

Have you gotten the update saying you had your case back or reopened? Some people who have been waiting forever got their cases reopened today.

We have a feeling that things *are* starting to move - and it was about time already. But there are a few cases that have been recalled and have heard nothing so far.

nope, I haven't heard anything yet. I had to call the department of state to tell me it had been recalled. However, he said it too fast to really have checked. So I suppose he just batched it in because of my NOA1 date.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-13 19:32:00

Everyone has recieved their RFE's?? I haven't what gives?

What the heck is going on here?

I haven't heard anything what so ever on where my RFE is. Are people with NOA2's in April now getting their RFE's?

I read a few posts, and it's kind of making me worry.

BTW, my case at the USCIS hasn't even been touched since 04/16/2006.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-13 14:13:00

What I sent back with IMBRA RFE

This is an over kill since you are not subject to the 2 year limitation. Your action has just added additional 5 minutes or so processing time to your application at the expense of all us. Why is it so hard to follow direction.

These questions:

[I have NOT had any Federal, State, or local arrest or conviction for solely, principally, or incidentally engaging in prostitution; a direct or indirect attempt to procure prostitutes or persons for the purpose of prostitution; or receiving, in whole or in part, of the proceeds of prostitution.]

[I have NOT had any temporary or permanent civil protection order or restraining order issued against me.]

are required in IMBRA and not asked on the REF. Considering that the REF was rushed...

I was trying to avoid :
In certain circumstances, USCIS may need to issue a second RFE to some petitioners

It could save me and maybe some others a month. Sorry I own you five minutes.

I think it was actually well written, and I will throw away the one I was making and use yours instead. I am not going to take any chances either. My loved one is too important. Even if that means it will add a little more time to the processing while someone is looking at it for an extra minute or two (wow, talk about splitting hairs) it could save weeks or months by preventing a second RFE. More evidence is good evidence when it comes to the USCIS. My petition weighed over 4lbs with all the information I included with it and I think thats part of how I got mine through to NOA2 so fast and would have had an Aug 23rd interview date had IMBRA not come around. Either that, or they were tired of lugging around a 4lb petition and they just wanted to get rid of it. Hmmm... maybe THATS the secret! Aha! :lol:

Edited by zethris, 24 June 2006 - 09:16 AM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-24 09:15:00

Did the RFE need to be notarized?

I have no idea where a notary public is anywhere near by me to get it notarized.

So I was just wondering if one was needed this time, or if I still have time to find one
when I need to fill out the I-134 affidavit.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-17 10:30:00

My VSC experience today...

We'll see what happens. I am one who still gets choaked up when I hear the "Proud to be an American" song. But dogonit if this isn't just the hugest test of faith ever.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-21 21:42:00

My VSC experience today...

zethris, before you rage at the machine, help us understand. Your I-129f was approved in less than a month? And you have the NOAs to prove it? Give the NVC a few minutes to catch up with you. Or you'll bust a main artery over nothing.

It's been a two year long process (well almost) already. The actuall submission didn't occur until later due to learning about this visa process, preparation, ensuring I had a good job to work at for incom requirements, preparation, and also more preparation. My concern is this delay is going to cause some of the evidence to be expired. Fact of the matter is, there are no overseer's overseeing these overseer's so they will allow for documents to expire We already have to renew CENOMAR, clearances, etc. I now may have to come up with another $2500 or so to go visit again next year when I have more time off available, and quite possibly have to re-apply if it doesn't go through by Sept or at the very latest Oct. Then, because there is yet another law on the books to be passed like this one slated this December, I could be lost in a never ending circus of being juggled by the clowns of the DHS and USCIS

I am getting caught in a cycle here, even though the VSC was as fast as everyone has said they were, it is irrelevent to the situation.

I love ya Jersey Girl, you are a great poster by the way, in some ways (except maybe my lower tollerances for this kind of thing) we are kindred spirits in humor. :yes:

Edited by zethris, 21 July 2006 - 05:58 PM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-21 17:56:00

My VSC experience today...

A lot of nothing. Again.

See, even though the embasy has e-mailed me saying that my case was "sent" back to the USA NVC finally mid July (about 7 days ago), the VSC only has record of the case and not if it's been recieved.

What kills me is that most of you have at least had a formal notice sent to you by the service center, and/or your cases were updated while others have even recieved their RFE's, especially those who thought they wouldn't recieve it. So yes, I think I have grounds to be concerned.

I called today, and they put in a report, told me to call in 30 days. I am actually about to start raging here. After 3 months of this hell of purgatory I am really startng to lose my patience again.

I wish I had a job at the VSC where I can talk a lot of nothing to someone on the phone. Wouldn't that be nice?

This is almost worse than being robbed. You feel violated and helpless because you can't do anything about it. I almost question as to why I even want to try starting my life here in America when things have come to this here.

Edited by zethris, 20 July 2006 - 10:23 PM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-20 22:22:00

Protest on Capital Hill?

Online petitions mean nothing. Less than that even. It's a novelty that no one takes seriously.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-20 18:53:00

Protest on Capital Hill?

Create a well worded website, advertise it here, create some stories and have it dugg at digg.com and netscape.com, drive as much traffic to it so that those who don't know where else to turn and haven't found visajourney can find this website or the other one.

Then we can organize this protest.

I am in Philly area so it's a quick drive for me.

whats more, lets have an ongoing protest. Lets try to organize one in shifts so there is always an ammount of people there protesting in large numbers for the months extra it is taken for us to get our petitions through? I get 2 weeks vacation per year that I haven't used yet, and if this goes into October or November before I can ever expect to see my fiance here, I could do it for a full 2 weeks myself, and have vacation time back again the next year.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-07-20 18:46:00

[quote name='zed2283' post='269460' date='Jun 23 2006, 10:22 AM'][quote name='meauxna' post='267670' date='Jun 22 2006, 02:21 PM']
[quote name='zed2283' post='267600' date='Jun 22 2006, 10:46 AM']
Anything I've ever read basically says that there is no evidence to suggest that these types of occurances (divorces also) are any more prevelant in marriages with foreign spouses than in any other marriage in this country. And I find that to be a reasonable statement.[/quote]
zed,
Can you consider this? It's nothing to do with marriage, divorce or protecting foreign women(men). It's all about immigration and the American collective 'we' taking on someone we're eventually going to have to pay for.
What if?

Take all the bleeding heart ####### out of it if it doesn't jibe for you---look at it from a cooly practical point of view.
[/quote]

That's a good point, Meauxna, although I disagree that that's what it's about.

[quote name='Imbra2005' post='268116' date='Jun 22 2006, 04:56 PM'][quote name='zed2283' post='267600' date='Jun 22 2006, 01:46 PM']

Imbra, if you could provide a link to what Congress cited, it would be appreciated. Anything I've ever read basically says that there is no evidence to suggest that these types of occurances (divorces also) are any more prevelant in marriages with foreign spouses than in any other marriage in this country. And I find that to be a reasonable statement.[/quote]

Sure. Here's the link to the page of Congressional Record with Sen. Brownback's statment, it continues over a page or two. http://frwebgate.acc...ame=2005_record

Also, the INS commissioned a study for a report to Congress (I think it was in 1997) that, among other things, concluded that "While no national figures exist on abuse of alien wives, there is every reason to believe that the incidence is higher in this population than for the nation as a whole. Authorities agree that abuse in these marriages can be expected based on the men's desire for a submissive wife and the women's desire for a better life. At some point, after the alien bride has had time to adjust to the new environment, to make new friends, and to become comfortable with the language, her new independence and his domination are bound to conflict. The problem, according to Mila Glodava (Glodava and Onizuka, 1994) and Uma Narayan (Narayan, 1995), is largely due to the men's unrealistic expectations. While many state a desire for a submissive wife, they find that such dependence becomes a burden. To provide some relief, the husband seeks ways (friends, activities) that will get the wife "out of the house" on occasion. The resulting independence then angers the husband who manifests the anger on the wife, who may have only been guilty of trying to please her husband." http://www.uscis.gov...ies/Mobappa.htm

Does that help? There was testimony before the House Foreign Relations Committee in 2004 as well. I can try and find that online somewhere to if you want.
[/quote]

Wow... now if I tried to say something with a disclaimer like "although I have no facts, I know this is true" I would take some pretty serious heat. And I say that from experience. "Authorites agree that abuse in these marriages can be expected "???

[quote name='zethris' post='269229' date='Jun 23 2006, 07:24 AM'][quote name='Imbra2005' post='268116' date='Jun 22 2006, 04:56 PM']
[quote name='zed2283' post='267600' date='Jun 22 2006, 01:46 PM']

Imbra, if you could provide a link to what Congress cited, it would be appreciated. Anything I've ever read basically says that there is no evidence to suggest that these types of occurances (divorces also) are any more prevelant in marriages with foreign spouses than in any other marriage in this country. And I find that to be a reasonable statement.[/quote]

Sure. Here's the link to the page of Congressional Record with Sen. Brownback's statment, it continues over a page or two. http://frwebgate.acc...ame=2005_record

Also, the INS commissioned a study for a report to Congress (I think it was in 1997) that, among other things, concluded that "While no national figures exist on abuse of alien wives, there is every reason to believe that the incidence is higher in this population than for the nation as a whole. Authorities agree that abuse in these marriages can be expected based on the men's desire for a submissive wife and the women's desire for a better life. At some point, after the alien bride has had time to adjust to the new environment, to make new friends, and to become comfortable with the language, her new independence and his domination are bound to conflict. The problem, according to Mila Glodava (Glodava and Onizuka, 1994) and Uma Narayan (Narayan, 1995), is largely due to the men's unrealistic expectations. While many state a desire for a submissive wife, they find that such dependence becomes a burden. To provide some relief, the husband seeks ways (friends, activities) that will get the wife "out of the house" on occasion. The resulting independence then angers the husband who manifests the anger on the wife, who may have only been guilty of trying to please her husband." http://www.uscis.gov...ies/Mobappa.htm

Does that help? There was testimony before the House Foreign Relations Committee in 2004 as well. I can try and find that online somewhere to if you want.
[/quote]

Anyone really who disputes that is in denial. I would go so far as to say the vast majority percentage of older men marying younger women is for this reason. Even domestic mariage between an older man and a younger naieve woman. Once the Woman gets older and more experienced, the control factor (fantasy world) the older man was seeking goes away and the real abuse starts becasue he feels there is a growing power struggle.

Even worse when the American man solely desires a wife strictly from a foreign country because she is younger and/or because she is considered "poor and humble" (a.k.a non-western) and he believes them to be culturaly submissive in comparison to the brass rude American style, he feels there is a greater chance to live the fantasy of control. The girl is more a pet, than a person at this point. Thats when it gets sick. Thats why IMBRA, on many levels, is a good thing, it makes it much harder for the easy venues these people go to, to order a wife/spouse.

Oh and P.S. don't waste time commenting on the un-pc sounding nature of my comparison with older men and younger women. Lets face it, it's rare that there is a brokered mariage between a woman petitioner and a male beneficiary. Although, I would suspect that in many more cases, even if the woman was older the relationship would work out much better. Or at least, the odds of success are much higher in comparison. Heck, I have a thing for older women (they know what they want), I just happened to find someone who I love dearly that happens to be more my age.

[quote name='jangler' post='268551' date='Jun 22 2006, 08:28 PM'][quote name='nessaandcharles' post='267079' date='Jun 22 2006, 10:06 AM']

I agree IMBRA sucks, because it's delaying everybody's process. But I also agree it has one benefit: why do us foreigneirs have to show the police certificates and prove this and that while the USC don't need to? I think it's more than fair. If you need proof we are not lying about our past and we're not murderers, rapists, etc, why should the rule apply only 1 sided?

[/quote]

I believe the reason the government demands foreigners to have to show police certificates is to keep criminals out of the USA. Let's not pretend that they had the USC's welfare in mind. Do you really think they did that to keep us safe from abuse? Now the USC has to prove he/she is innocent of any crimes to solely protect the foreign spouse. They never really cared about "us" or that we may end up with a wife/husband who was at one time a prostitute or who once dealt drugs. The reasons for the criminal checks are different for both sides. Just my opinion.
[/quote]

Again well said, and I agree. It is very one sided with how these laws are being made and it goes to show how xenophobic America has become.

I M B R A

Imbicilic Magistrate Bought, Re-election Always
[/quote]

Again wow... and people accuse ME of sweeping generalizations. I would absolutely dispute this and in no way am I in denial about anything. The citings in the Congressional document were horrible, but I saw no dates, no numbers, or anything else. Unfortunately, you could make a list 100 times as long involving domestic spouses.
[/quote]

Of course you can make such a list, sham relationships happen domesticly too. But your "list" would have more cases because there are magnitudes more than there are imigrant mariages. So your example is kind of lukewarm at best im afraid.

The citings of the Congressional Document, as well as many other spousal abuse cases show that a higher concentration of spousal abuse occurs with imigrant spouses, especially those arranged by a mariage broker.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-23 16:07:00

Imbra, if you could provide a link to what Congress cited, it would be appreciated. Anything I've ever read basically says that there is no evidence to suggest that these types of occurances (divorces also) are any more prevelant in marriages with foreign spouses than in any other marriage in this country. And I find that to be a reasonable statement.

Sure. Here's the link to the page of Congressional Record with Sen. Brownback's statment, it continues over a page or two. http://frwebgate.acc...ame=2005_record

Also, the INS commissioned a study for a report to Congress (I think it was in 1997) that, among other things, concluded that "While no national figures exist on abuse of alien wives, there is every reason to believe that the incidence is higher in this population than for the nation as a whole. Authorities agree that abuse in these marriages can be expected based on the men's desire for a submissive wife and the women's desire for a better life. At some point, after the alien bride has had time to adjust to the new environment, to make new friends, and to become comfortable with the language, her new independence and his domination are bound to conflict. The problem, according to Mila Glodava (Glodava and Onizuka, 1994) and Uma Narayan (Narayan, 1995), is largely due to the men's unrealistic expectations. While many state a desire for a submissive wife, they find that such dependence becomes a burden. To provide some relief, the husband seeks ways (friends, activities) that will get the wife "out of the house" on occasion. The resulting independence then angers the husband who manifests the anger on the wife, who may have only been guilty of trying to please her husband." http://www.uscis.gov...ies/Mobappa.htm

Does that help? There was testimony before the House Foreign Relations Committee in 2004 as well. I can try and find that online somewhere to if you want.

Anyone really who disputes that is in denial. I would go so far as to say the vast majority percentage of older men marying younger women is for this reason. Even domestic mariage between an older man and a younger naieve woman. Once the Woman gets older and more experienced, the control factor (fantasy world) the older man was seeking goes away and the real abuse starts becasue he feels there is a growing power struggle.

Even worse when the American man solely desires a wife strictly from a foreign country because she is younger and/or because she is considered "poor and humble" (a.k.a non-western) and he believes them to be culturaly submissive in comparison to the brass rude American style, he feels there is a greater chance to live the fantasy of control. The girl is more a pet, than a person at this point. Thats when it gets sick. Thats why IMBRA, on many levels, is a good thing, it makes it much harder for the easy venues these people go to, to order a wife/spouse.

Oh and P.S. don't waste time commenting on the un-pc sounding nature of my comparison with older men and younger women. Lets face it, it's rare that there is a brokered mariage between a woman petitioner and a male beneficiary. Although, I would suspect that in many more cases, even if the woman was older the relationship would work out much better. Or at least, the odds of success are much higher in comparison. Heck, I have a thing for older women (they know what they want), I just happened to find someone who I love dearly that happens to be more my age.

I agree IMBRA sucks, because it's delaying everybody's process. But I also agree it has one benefit: why do us foreigneirs have to show the police certificates and prove this and that while the USC don't need to? I think it's more than fair. If you need proof we are not lying about our past and we're not murderers, rapists, etc, why should the rule apply only 1 sided?

I believe the reason the government demands foreigners to have to show police certificates is to keep criminals out of the USA. Let's not pretend that they had the USC's welfare in mind. Do you really think they did that to keep us safe from abuse? Now the USC has to prove he/she is innocent of any crimes to solely protect the foreign spouse. They never really cared about "us" or that we may end up with a wife/husband who was at one time a prostitute or who once dealt drugs. The reasons for the criminal checks are different for both sides. Just my opinion.

Again well said, and I agree. It is very one sided with how these laws are being made and it goes to show how xenophobic America has become.

I M B R A

Imbicilic Magistrate Bought, Re-election Always

Edited by zethris, 23 June 2006 - 06:27 AM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-23 06:24:00

Keyword on evil feminists here. Not the real feminists who actually do good for people on not their own continued gain (monetarily/politicaly).

And by the same token, IMBRA is keyed toward the evil USC petitioners who import and abuse spouses. Not the real USC spouses who actually love their partners and want to live together in the US in happiness.

Sometimes the many get painted with a brush intended for only a few.

scary but true :blink:

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-22 14:26:00

I think the main flaw with the argument that IMBRA was concealed, hidden, etc. is that it assumes that 531 lawmakers didn't know what they're voting for. I would challenge anyone to show me where a single representative or senator who voted for passage has admitted (a) that they didn't know IMBRA was incorporated into the VAWA bill, and/or (B) had they known that, they would not have voted for it. I don't think you can assume that these lawmakers don't know what they're voting for. In fact, I think you should assume just the opposite, that they know exactly what they are voting on.

The idea of amending different pieces of legislation to each other is commonplace. Congress (both parties) does it all the time -- sometimes for efficiency, and sometimes for political reasons (remember the Republicans tacking on the ANWR drilling amendment to the money for Iraq bill?)

And, various senators (both parties) spoke on the senate floor (before passage) about IMBRA and why it should be supported. It's all in the Congressional Record (the various anti-imbra website have villified these senators and can point you to their statements). So I just don't think that the argument that the evil feminists put one over on the Congress really holds much water.

Keyword on evil feminists here. Not the real feminists who actually do good for people on not their own continued gain (monetarily/politicaly).

With that, you have the nail, and almost hit it on the head. (I am not republican either by the way, I see both sides for what extremes they can take and how it is wrong either extreme) But I want to make the point though that many times laws are encapsulated into another when they strategicaly know the law in which it is now hiding is will force many to vote for "yey" on the bigger law because it would be "political suicide" if they didn't. Or the bigger law is so important to pass as soon as possible that the collateral damage of the deviously placed smaller bits becomes somewhat artificialy acceptable. Sometimes it just even comes right down to pay-offs and political favor trading.

It is fact that some of these guys truely never read over the laws. They just go by what others say or their political party leader "recommends" (forces, depending on who you talk to), or the vague descriptions they hear from one extreme or the other in their debates. Realisticaly, do you seriously believe that people of this calibur would ever admit they didn't know the full details of the law they voted on? Not likely. They want to keep the easy job.

The exploitation and passage of laws is extreme and it causes things like this to happen all the time. Unfortunatly, most of the detrimental stuff comes from the liberal side in multiple disguises. They have mastered the art of encapsulation much better than the conservative side.

Edited by zethris, 22 June 2006 - 10:46 AM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-22 10:42:00

"just because one woman got murdered"??? You don't really think that's why it was passed do you? Please don't make me repost the horror stories of murders, rapes, and child molestations that Congress cited. Did you not see that in the last 10 years, over 30,000 "battered spouse waiver" self-petitions were filed by immigrant women and children who were subjected to abuse by their USC sponsor spouses?

Well I agree with the evidence you mention because I have seen it, and I wish there was a law that addressed the issues that lead to this only. So because of that, IMBRA is "ok" but not great. I vehemently disagree with how the law was underhandedly passed though. The reason it didn't pass in 2003 is because of it's flaws that was very much seen by the voting reps. So, the woman (who is a feminisim advocate) encapsulated the law within a law to hide it under the umbrella of the bigger law. That is the liberal/feminism I think the OP of that comment was vaguly getting at.

Most commonly, it is very well known that the far left (liberals) do that as a general practice when an absurd law they want passed doesn't pass on it's own merrits and the writer refuses to make it better out of pride or emotional and irrational vindication (what too many feminists these days have, forgetting that the orginal goal was equality). So it's actually people like that, that give feminism a dirty name. While feminism is extremely and very much so a fantastic thing for our society, many have just gone too far with it.

On a side note, if we truely did have equality within the sexes, the feminist advocacy would be out of controversy to keep the votes coming in, and money being made. Thats one reason why there are those that take it too far. To keep the controversy alive.

IMBRA is simply one more stupid thing you can thank the feminists for.
I agree IMBRA sucks, because it's delaying everybody's process. But I also agree it has one benefit: why do us foreigneirs have to show the police certificates and prove this and that while the USC don't need to? I think it's more than fair. If you need proof we are not lying about our past and we're not murderers, rapists, etc, why should the rule apply only 1 sided?

Bingo! and thats A-number 1 why IMBRA should have ONLY been that and only that. Instead the writer took it too far and thats why it didn't pass iniitally because of all the extra cruft and fat of the written law. To me it's a no brainer. We should have had background checks for us on the applications long ago, and should have even had to have a law to say so. It would have been long accepted as just part of the application process by now if that was the case.

Edited by zethris, 22 June 2006 - 10:26 AM.

zethris

Not Telling

2006-06-22 10:23:00