reddymjm
09-10 01:10 PM
If there are no I-485 pending for EB2 I/C then the demand goes to zero (unless DOS/USCIS uses pending I-140s to decide demand). And if demand < supply then the category goes to current (atleast per the explanation in the demand data document).And definitely if EB2 I/C folks post July 2007 are allowed to file I-485 then USCIS will realize demand is not zero but say 50K. Then again next month PD goes back to late 2007.
I think visa numbers are assigned to I-485 before they are processed for demand data purposes, otherwise the demand data prior to CY 2006 for EB2 I will not be zero with some people with 05 PDs still waiting for GCs. But, again this is all speculation and the situation will be clear by Sep 2011 when almost all of EB2I/C pending I-485s will have been cleared.
There are 34k pending EB3 I and C till 2007. As per the quarterly quota both I and C get 750 a quarter which should place EB2 I and C in pending status. Coming to the last quarter yes they can Put all Current. Its all USCIS anything can happen.
I think visa numbers are assigned to I-485 before they are processed for demand data purposes, otherwise the demand data prior to CY 2006 for EB2 I will not be zero with some people with 05 PDs still waiting for GCs. But, again this is all speculation and the situation will be clear by Sep 2011 when almost all of EB2I/C pending I-485s will have been cleared.
There are 34k pending EB3 I and C till 2007. As per the quarterly quota both I and C get 750 a quarter which should place EB2 I and C in pending status. Coming to the last quarter yes they can Put all Current. Its all USCIS anything can happen.
wallpaper Darth Vader wallpaper for
desi3933
02-12 08:24 AM
The visa numbers reported as used for FY 2009 is 141,020 from http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09...ort_TableV.pdf
This was the response i got from Ron Gotcher.
"The employment based category is entitled to use the "unused" family based numbers from the previous year. Last year, the quota for EB was the base of 140,000, plus another 13,000 shifted over from FB. Unfortunately, the CIS failed once again to approve enough cases to use up the entire available quota."
.....
Would you mind asking source/link for "another 13,000 shifted over"?
As per this link - family based numbers were totally used up for FY2008
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105 against 226,000 available.
I think it is important to understand and read what is being said.
I suggest that you follow your own advice and read & understand what is being posted in this thread. What do you think? Is this information or "message" correct?
______________________
Not a legal advice.
This was the response i got from Ron Gotcher.
"The employment based category is entitled to use the "unused" family based numbers from the previous year. Last year, the quota for EB was the base of 140,000, plus another 13,000 shifted over from FB. Unfortunately, the CIS failed once again to approve enough cases to use up the entire available quota."
.....
Would you mind asking source/link for "another 13,000 shifted over"?
As per this link - family based numbers were totally used up for FY2008
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105 against 226,000 available.
I think it is important to understand and read what is being said.
I suggest that you follow your own advice and read & understand what is being posted in this thread. What do you think? Is this information or "message" correct?
______________________
Not a legal advice.
a_yaja
04-06 09:32 PM
well if the employer is not supporting you ..then maybe the IO does have the authority to refuse ?? (well assuming that these cases are correct ..then I guess we can assume that IO has recd instructions from his superiors) it is good to hear from Pappu that IV is ready to take up this issue ...but till someone comes foward ..can IV focus on other issues like recapture, removal of country limits etc (there is no shortage of issues where focus is needed)
To be denied entry, the visitor has to go through secondary inspection. That is the process. The CBP officer at the primary inspection does not have the authority to send some one home. Look at this link from Syracuse University that details this process:
http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/142/
Quotes from this page:
In a procedure known as Primary Inspections, the officers interview people appearing before them and check their documents. In addition, the documents are scanned into a computer to detect past immigration violations, criminal problems, and national security concerns. The entire process is very brief, averaging less than one minute per person to keep up with the crush of arriving travelers.
In Secondary, a new set of Inspectors have additional time and latitude to investigate whether a person's papers � and their reasons for coming to the U.S. � are legitimate and legal.
So whoever said that the CBP officer at the primary inspection called up employer and asked the employer if they cannot find US citizens is not telling the truth. Probably the guy started the rumor :D.
To be denied entry, the visitor has to go through secondary inspection. That is the process. The CBP officer at the primary inspection does not have the authority to send some one home. Look at this link from Syracuse University that details this process:
http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/142/
Quotes from this page:
In a procedure known as Primary Inspections, the officers interview people appearing before them and check their documents. In addition, the documents are scanned into a computer to detect past immigration violations, criminal problems, and national security concerns. The entire process is very brief, averaging less than one minute per person to keep up with the crush of arriving travelers.
In Secondary, a new set of Inspectors have additional time and latitude to investigate whether a person's papers � and their reasons for coming to the U.S. � are legitimate and legal.
So whoever said that the CBP officer at the primary inspection called up employer and asked the employer if they cannot find US citizens is not telling the truth. Probably the guy started the rumor :D.
2011 Widescreen Darth Vader
optimystic
03-18 08:26 PM
I am not saying anything about free speech. I realize this is a forum that belongs to a private organization and has not obligations to provide a platform for free speech to anybody. That's why I said that if you do not want me here, I'll leave.
As to the details provided, these were not required details and I didn't agree to anyone to call me at home. I entered the phone, because the form was broken and gave me some errors. Btw, the registration form is still broken, because it has a section for Required Information, and Additional Information. In Additional Information (which I assume is optional), it is still asking whether I'm going to attend DC Rally in 2007. If you do not answer the question about the rally, it doesn't allow you to register.
I haven't filled out all of details, because as I said, I thought they were optional. If there was anything missing that you want me to fill in, you could've told me so rather than ban the handle.
Tawlibann Foggs your real name...?? I donno but it still sounds like you are trying to be a smart aleck....to me. Your ?real? name sounds a lot like 'Taliban Fox' ...! (Googling on "Tawlibann celtic" did not turn up any results at all. Not that google is the final authority on such things. I apologize if its really your name. Dont start giving me red dots !!)
If it is really your name why not just use a non-controlversial handle and not attract any unnecessary attention at all in the first place? I have seen all your posts ( 3 -4 I think) so far and found them to be genuine ....so if its just the handle , why not give in and change it, rather than asking for trouble
As to the details provided, these were not required details and I didn't agree to anyone to call me at home. I entered the phone, because the form was broken and gave me some errors. Btw, the registration form is still broken, because it has a section for Required Information, and Additional Information. In Additional Information (which I assume is optional), it is still asking whether I'm going to attend DC Rally in 2007. If you do not answer the question about the rally, it doesn't allow you to register.
I haven't filled out all of details, because as I said, I thought they were optional. If there was anything missing that you want me to fill in, you could've told me so rather than ban the handle.
Tawlibann Foggs your real name...?? I donno but it still sounds like you are trying to be a smart aleck....to me. Your ?real? name sounds a lot like 'Taliban Fox' ...! (Googling on "Tawlibann celtic" did not turn up any results at all. Not that google is the final authority on such things. I apologize if its really your name. Dont start giving me red dots !!)
If it is really your name why not just use a non-controlversial handle and not attract any unnecessary attention at all in the first place? I have seen all your posts ( 3 -4 I think) so far and found them to be genuine ....so if its just the handle , why not give in and change it, rather than asking for trouble
more...
jetflyer
08-10 12:28 PM
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR07.shtm
see table 6 in that link
Thanks VDLRAO.
I looked at 2008 data from same source and surprised to see 70046 approvals for 2008-EB2.
Does that means there are not many old cases in line ahead of us?
Source link: DHS | Yearbook of Immigration Statistics: 2008 (http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm)
check for table 6
see table 6 in that link
Thanks VDLRAO.
I looked at 2008 data from same source and surprised to see 70046 approvals for 2008-EB2.
Does that means there are not many old cases in line ahead of us?
Source link: DHS | Yearbook of Immigration Statistics: 2008 (http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm)
check for table 6
injrav
03-12 11:06 AM
I support this.
I think its good idea
I think its good idea
more...
dohko
04-04 08:03 AM
I hope not. If they ban bodyshops the cap will never run out.
And people in Real companies will be able to get the visas.
And people in Real companies will be able to get the visas.
2010 Darth Vader for HTC Wildfire
prakashv44
09-21 02:51 PM
I am with you
more...
andycool
03-16 02:04 PM
141,020 visa numbers used in FY2009
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
hair Darth Vader for Samsung Corby
Ramba
07-14 06:39 PM
Thanks Ramba. I appreciate your positive comments. I guess the only doubt now is to find out a way whether employer had revoked my 140 before 180 days? If they didnt I am 100% safe now.
Yes. If they revoked the 140 before 180 days of 485 pending, USCIS might have directly denied your 485. They normally dont issue RFE. Since, you recived RFE, I guess it is after 180 days. So hang on. Reply correctly to RFE with all details. You will be fine.
Are you sure they are revoking your 140?
Yes. If they revoked the 140 before 180 days of 485 pending, USCIS might have directly denied your 485. They normally dont issue RFE. Since, you recived RFE, I guess it is after 180 days. So hang on. Reply correctly to RFE with all details. You will be fine.
Are you sure they are revoking your 140?
more...
rockstart
09-27 03:18 PM
I think this is pure ignorence on part of the reporter. Most Americans are not aware of either H1 or GC all they know is legal & Illegal immigrant. they dont understand the finer details of the system.
hot Darth Vader for Nokia N900
yagw
07-13 10:06 AM
Thanks...Excerpt from the same document
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st, 8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the fourteenth under the 8th, etc.)
It is not a contradiction to the previous statement.
Cut-off-date = 1 ==> PDs before 1st can file (i.e mar-01 cut-off date mean pds till apr-30 can file)
Cut-off-date = 8 ==> PDs before 8 can file (i.e pds 1 to 7 since they are in one bucket)
Cut-off-date = 15 ==> PDs before 15 can file (specifically pds in bucket 8-14 can file)
etc...
Hope it helps. As others predicted, I really think the numbers will not move back. You will get your GC soon.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st, 8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the fourteenth under the 8th, etc.)
It is not a contradiction to the previous statement.
Cut-off-date = 1 ==> PDs before 1st can file (i.e mar-01 cut-off date mean pds till apr-30 can file)
Cut-off-date = 8 ==> PDs before 8 can file (i.e pds 1 to 7 since they are in one bucket)
Cut-off-date = 15 ==> PDs before 15 can file (specifically pds in bucket 8-14 can file)
etc...
Hope it helps. As others predicted, I really think the numbers will not move back. You will get your GC soon.
more...
house Darth Vader Wallpaper for
GCVictim
07-23 02:55 PM
my lawyer also told same thing, no need employer letter for 485.
Only I submitted letter for LC and 140 only.
So, according to my knowledge no need of employer letter
Only I submitted letter for LC and 140 only.
So, according to my knowledge no need of employer letter
tattoo darth vader wallpaper
pappu
11-30 01:16 AM
thanks for the responses on this thread. Can one of you take the responsibility of contacting everyone and organizing the conference call? In the confrence call everyone can introduce themselves, discuss ideas and action items to work on.
more...
pictures Darth Vader iPhone Wallpaper
Polk1848
06-13 11:45 AM
We are not out of the CIR woods yet.
Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070612/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_immigration
......WE ARE OPPOSED AROUND THE WORLD BY A MONOLITHIC AND RUTHLESS CONSPIRACY THAT RELIES PRIMARILY ON COVERT MEANS FOR EXPANDING ITS SPHERE OF INFLUENCE...ON INFILTRATION INSTEAD OF INVASION...ON SUBVERSION INSTEAD OF ELECTIONS...ON INTIMIDATION INSTEAD OF FREE CHOICE...IT IS A SYSTEM WHICH HAS CONSCRIPTED VAST HUMAN AND MATERIAL RESOURCES INTO THEE BUILDING OF A TIGHTLY KNIT HIGHLY EFFICIENT MACHINE THAT COMBINES MILITARY DIPLOMATIC INTELLIGENT ECONOMIC, SCIENTIFIC, AND POLITICAL OPERATIONS. ITS PREPARATIONS ARE CONCEALED NOT PUBLISHED. ITS MISTAKES ARE BURIED, NOT HEADLINED. ITS DISSENTERS ARE SILENCED. NOT PRAISED. NO EXPENDITURE IS QUESTIONED. NO SECRET IS REVEALED. THAT IS WHY THE ATHENIAN LAWMAKER SOLO DECREED IT A CRIME FOR ANY CITIZEN TO SHRINK FROM CONTROVERSY. I AM ASKING YOUR HELP IN THE TREMENDOUS TASK OF INFORMING AND ALERTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. CONFIDENT THAT WITH YOUR HELP MAN WILL BE WHAT HE WAS BORN TO BE...FREE AND INDEPENDENT" John F Kennedy
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8450558837192717138&hl=en
Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070612/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_immigration
......WE ARE OPPOSED AROUND THE WORLD BY A MONOLITHIC AND RUTHLESS CONSPIRACY THAT RELIES PRIMARILY ON COVERT MEANS FOR EXPANDING ITS SPHERE OF INFLUENCE...ON INFILTRATION INSTEAD OF INVASION...ON SUBVERSION INSTEAD OF ELECTIONS...ON INTIMIDATION INSTEAD OF FREE CHOICE...IT IS A SYSTEM WHICH HAS CONSCRIPTED VAST HUMAN AND MATERIAL RESOURCES INTO THEE BUILDING OF A TIGHTLY KNIT HIGHLY EFFICIENT MACHINE THAT COMBINES MILITARY DIPLOMATIC INTELLIGENT ECONOMIC, SCIENTIFIC, AND POLITICAL OPERATIONS. ITS PREPARATIONS ARE CONCEALED NOT PUBLISHED. ITS MISTAKES ARE BURIED, NOT HEADLINED. ITS DISSENTERS ARE SILENCED. NOT PRAISED. NO EXPENDITURE IS QUESTIONED. NO SECRET IS REVEALED. THAT IS WHY THE ATHENIAN LAWMAKER SOLO DECREED IT A CRIME FOR ANY CITIZEN TO SHRINK FROM CONTROVERSY. I AM ASKING YOUR HELP IN THE TREMENDOUS TASK OF INFORMING AND ALERTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. CONFIDENT THAT WITH YOUR HELP MAN WILL BE WHAT HE WAS BORN TO BE...FREE AND INDEPENDENT" John F Kennedy
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8450558837192717138&hl=en
dresses Download middot; Angry Darth
javadeveloper
12-12 03:56 PM
No one has answered my question yet - If we are so "highly skilled", why no one is listening to us in this country.
They'll definitely listen , but It takes some time , may be 5,6 years
They'll listen to you in 1 year if you have "extraordinary ability(EB1)"
They'll definitely listen , but It takes some time , may be 5,6 years
They'll listen to you in 1 year if you have "extraordinary ability(EB1)"
more...
makeup Darth Vader for Blackberry
Nil
03-10 09:27 PM
How abt showing the US govt - what is in it for them?
If they recapture x number of visas and y % buys a house soon after, it is a win-win situation. They provide solid ground under the feet of LEGALs and the benefactors build on top of that ground.
A key item will be to get a petition from a number of IVeans pledging to buy a house if they get a green card. If that number turns out high, this will be a good blil-board for our cause.
If they recapture x number of visas and y % buys a house soon after, it is a win-win situation. They provide solid ground under the feet of LEGALs and the benefactors build on top of that ground.
A key item will be to get a petition from a number of IVeans pledging to buy a house if they get a green card. If that number turns out high, this will be a good blil-board for our cause.
girlfriend Darth vader Myspace Layout
imh1b
11-12 04:26 PM
If EB2 I becomes current , who benefits its EB3 I as the spillover will go EB3 India as India is the most retrogressed country. Our effort does not impact ROW EB2 as they are current any way. EB2 China will also benefit as spill over will help them. So supporting quarterly spillover is in EB3 India's. Make EB2 C and all over flow goes to EB3 I. Finally by opposing this it will not help EB3 I any way unless it makes you happy to see everybody suffer as long as you are suffering.
WRONG.
YOU are an EB2 India guy for sure and your PD is close.
If spillover happens, all visas will get used up by EB2 India only. EB3 India gets nothing. There are way too many Indians in the system. Even if something is left from EB2 India, EB3 ROW will get breadcrums.
EB3 India gets nothing. So stop giving wrong logic. I will oppose IV helping EB2 guys with close priority dates and not caring about everyone else.
WRONG.
YOU are an EB2 India guy for sure and your PD is close.
If spillover happens, all visas will get used up by EB2 India only. EB3 India gets nothing. There are way too many Indians in the system. Even if something is left from EB2 India, EB3 ROW will get breadcrums.
EB3 India gets nothing. So stop giving wrong logic. I will oppose IV helping EB2 guys with close priority dates and not caring about everyone else.
hairstyles Darth Vader 3:
Circus123
02-20 04:05 PM
Here is Mr. Gotcher's perspective on EB3 movement ...
In terms of EB3 movement for India do you think that the slow movement as predicted will atleast move the cut off dates to Dec 2001 (India) by end of FY 08 ?
I doubt very much that we will see any EB3 cutoff date movement until October.
James Ronald Gotcher
In terms of EB3 movement for India do you think that the slow movement as predicted will atleast move the cut off dates to Dec 2001 (India) by end of FY 08 ?
I doubt very much that we will see any EB3 cutoff date movement until October.
James Ronald Gotcher
gvenkat
10-20 01:24 PM
//Folks, look at the BIGGER picture, and not your own selfish needs. There is no point getting a GC to a land that was not the one you had in mind.//
well said.. but wait a minute.. why are we all debating.. we dont have voting rights... :D:D:D.. but whoever thinks mccain is the savior... god help them
well said.. but wait a minute.. why are we all debating.. we dont have voting rights... :D:D:D.. but whoever thinks mccain is the savior... god help them
prioritydate
06-29 05:06 PM
I am really happy for all those people who got their GC :)
No comments:
Post a Comment