212(a)(3)(B) of the INA Please Help

I sent a two pages letter to the the supervisor in TSC, I also submitted document shows that I need GC to get the job that I was applying to. their response was just simply that, You need to call the customer sevc: 1800.......

i found out the more I call them or send somethings to USCIC or TSC, their responses is increase my anger, frustration and the blood pressure....

Hello asylee 1999,

I do not think it helps to contact them individually as their response is the same and useless for us. From my understanding of the inadmissibility thing the decision is at the hands of DHS/DOJ/DOS. If we can write a petition to one or all of these they might do something. Or if there is an organization which might help us on this it will be better. I contacted AILF to help us on this matter but their response was to contact a lawyer.
 
Yeah. If any of us could find an organization or some sort of method via which we could file a joint petition then something could happen. Has anybody bothered writing to the New York Times or CNN?
 
Yeah. If any of us could find an organization or some sort of method via which we could file a joint petition then something could happen. Has anybody bothered writing to the New York Times or CNN?

That is a good idea. Why do not we try writing to CNN and New York Times simultaneously and see what will happen. If someone has an e-mail we can send it to, let us share it among us and write them.
 
Read this article below, I have contacted both the writer and the attorney mentioned in this article yesterday, He said the congress gave the USCIS the power to start issue these waiver, but since Sep 2007" the USCIS issued just ONE for high profile Iraqi case that set. NO ONE WHAT SO EVER had issued other waiver, so it is kind of disappointed to know that? He (the lawyer) in the committee that suppose to meet with USCIS quarterly to look for the improvement in implementation of these exemption, he said he doesn't think there will be any relief in the near future............. I think we need to collect some kind signature or names from all of us and the other people that are affected by this and try to contact one of the human right group that he told me about them. Also he said their next meeting with the USCIS is early Dec 2009, so if we could make any kind action before that, it might be the right step
NEED FEEDBACK from all of you.
Thanks



McClatchy Washington Bureau
Print This Article
Posted on Sun, Jul. 26, 2009

Why are U.S.-allied refugees still branded as 'terrorists?'
Marisa Taylor | McClatchy Newspapers
last updated: July 26, 2009 08:56:18 AM

WASHINGTON — Almost every day for three years, prison guards at one of Saddam Hussein's most notorious prisons tortured Sami Alkarim.

Now, in a cruel twist of fate, the accomplished Iraqi artist is being treated like a terrorist by the U.S., the country where he sought refuge.

U.S. officials have told him they can't give him permanent residency in Denver because of messenger work he did as a teenager for the same political party that counts the current prime minister of Iraq as a member.

Alkarim's problems have their roots in post-Sept. 11 anti-terrorism laws that the Obama and Bush administrations vowed to fix.

Despite that pledge, the number of people who've been told their requests for refugee status, asylum or green cards won't be processed because of the laws has risen from 5,304 in December to 7,286 in June.

The broad language of the Patriot Act and other laws bars refugees and asylum seekers from living and working in the U.S. if they supported or were members of an armed group in their homelands. They're considered terrorists or supporters of terrorists even if they opposed dictators or helped the U.S. government.

Although Congress has attempted to give the executive branch the power to grant waivers in such cases, the Obama administration, like the Bush administration before it, has yet to set up an efficient way to handle them, refugee advocates say.

"As far as I can tell, the situation has only grown worse," said Thomas Ragland, a former Justice Department lawyer attorney who now represents several immigrants affected by the laws. Ragland's clients include an Iraqi, an Ethiopian, a Nepali, and a Burmese.

Department of Homeland Security officials in charge of reviewing the matter declined a request for an interview.

Matthew Chandler, a DHS spokesman, said the department has granted more than 10,500 waivers to people impacted by the laws, proof that the cases aren't being ignored.

"While the department views this achievement as significant, we also understand that a more efficient authorization process than the one that has been in place would reach even more people," he said.

DHS is working with other agencies, such as the State Department, to come up with a solution that also would weigh U.S. security interests, he said.

Immigrants and their lawyers, however, remain mystified by the government's inability to cut through the red tape to eliminate such problems. Many of the waivers were given to Burmese refugees, while other worthy refugees and asylum seekers are overlooked, advocates said.

"I can't tell how much of this madness is policy and how much of it is just madness," said Anwen Hughes, the senior counsel for Human Rights First's Refugee Protection Program.

Previously, immigrants who were denied a green card after being given asylum were told they wouldn't be deported. Officials said their cases would eventually be resolved.

However, the DHS began recently sending some immigrants letters informing them that the agency intends to revoke their asylum. As a result, they'd be deported.

The cases include immigrants who were granted asylum after fleeing Zimbabwe as members of the Movement for Democratic Change, the main opponent of autocrat Robert Mugabe. In June, President Obama met with the leader of the party, Morgan Tsvangirai, and praised him for his courage.

Some of the most startling stories involve Iraqis — some of whom have worked for the U.S. government under threat of death and now could have even more to fear as U.S. troops are redeployed.

In one recent case, a middle-aged Iraqi mother of two teenagers was deemed a terrorist and barred refuge in the U.S. despite her work for the State Department as an economic development adviser.

Anna, as she is known by her American colleagues, is seen as a supporter of terrorism because of her work for the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, a mainstream Iraqi political party that the current president of Iraq belongs to. She's no longer active in the party.

Anonymous callers have warned her that they'd take revenge for her work for the U.S. government.

Now, she wonders in a phone call from Iraq punctuated by sirens and static, "What will be my future?"

Army Lt. Col. Dennis Chapman, who worked with her when he was the chief of a military transition team in the Kurdish region of Iraq, said he doesn't understand why the U.S. government would reject someone who's proved to be an ally in need of help.

"It's an absurd finding," he said. "It deprives the word 'terrorism' of any meaning."

Anna, who's being helped by the international law firm Holland & Knight, is appealing the decision. As part of a nonprofit effort, the law firm has helped more than 300 Iraqis affiliated with the U.S. government.

Alkarim, who fled as a refugee to the U.S. in February 2001, can't work or travel, even though his wife and children have already become U.S. citizens.

In 2007, Alkarim sued the U.S. government in an effort to get his green card application moving. Although the Obama administration tried to get the lawsuit dismissed, a federal judge in Denver has allowed it to proceed and could rule soon.

Alkarim's lawyer, Jeff Joseph, agreed to take the case free. Justice Department attorneys, however, have told him if DHS is ordered by the judge to act, they'll likely deny Alkarim's request for permanent residency. The government lawyers suggested that his client might have better luck if he simply dropped the suit.

Recently, Alkarim's artwork was selected to be shown at Italy's Biennial of Florence, which bills itself as one of the largest exhibition of contemporary art in the world.

His abstract expressionist paintings were considered subversive by Saddam Hussein's regime — one of the reasons he was imprisoned.

His artwork will be displayed in December without him, however, because he doesn't have his green card. He said he's also had to turn down invitations to galleries in Switzerland, Dubai, France and London.

"It would be an honor to represent the United States," the 43-year-old said. "But I can't say I'm American."
 
Read this article below, I have contacted both the writer and the attorney mentioned in this article yesterday, He said the congress gave the USCIS the power to start issue these waiver, but since Sep 2007" the USCIS issued just ONE for high profile Iraqi case that set. NO ONE WHAT SO EVER had issued other waiver, so it is kind of disappointed to know that? He (the lawyer) in the committee that suppose to meet with USCIS quarterly to look for the improvement in implementation of these exemption, he said he doesn't think there will be any relief in the near future............. I think we need to collect some kind signature or names from all of us and the other people that are affected by this and try to contact one of the human right group that he told me about them. Also he said their next meeting with the USCIS is early Dec 2009, so if we could make any kind action before that, it might be the right step
NEED FEEDBACK from all of you.
Thanks



McClatchy Washington Bureau
Print This Article
Posted on Sun, Jul. 26, 2009

Why are U.S.-allied refugees still branded as 'terrorists?'
Marisa Taylor | McClatchy Newspapers
last updated: July 26, 2009 08:56:18 AM

WASHINGTON — Almost every day for three years, prison guards at one of Saddam Hussein's most notorious prisons tortured Sami Alkarim.

Now, in a cruel twist of fate, the accomplished Iraqi artist is being treated like a terrorist by the U.S., the country where he sought refuge.

U.S. officials have told him they can't give him permanent residency in Denver because of messenger work he did as a teenager for the same political party that counts the current prime minister of Iraq as a member.

Alkarim's problems have their roots in post-Sept. 11 anti-terrorism laws that the Obama and Bush administrations vowed to fix.

Despite that pledge, the number of people who've been told their requests for refugee status, asylum or green cards won't be processed because of the laws has risen from 5,304 in December to 7,286 in June.

The broad language of the Patriot Act and other laws bars refugees and asylum seekers from living and working in the U.S. if they supported or were members of an armed group in their homelands. They're considered terrorists or supporters of terrorists even if they opposed dictators or helped the U.S. government.

Although Congress has attempted to give the executive branch the power to grant waivers in such cases, the Obama administration, like the Bush administration before it, has yet to set up an efficient way to handle them, refugee advocates say.

"As far as I can tell, the situation has only grown worse," said Thomas Ragland, a former Justice Department lawyer attorney who now represents several immigrants affected by the laws. Ragland's clients include an Iraqi, an Ethiopian, a Nepali, and a Burmese.

Department of Homeland Security officials in charge of reviewing the matter declined a request for an interview.

Matthew Chandler, a DHS spokesman, said the department has granted more than 10,500 waivers to people impacted by the laws, proof that the cases aren't being ignored.

"While the department views this achievement as significant, we also understand that a more efficient authorization process than the one that has been in place would reach even more people," he said.

DHS is working with other agencies, such as the State Department, to come up with a solution that also would weigh U.S. security interests, he said.

Immigrants and their lawyers, however, remain mystified by the government's inability to cut through the red tape to eliminate such problems. Many of the waivers were given to Burmese refugees, while other worthy refugees and asylum seekers are overlooked, advocates said.

"I can't tell how much of this madness is policy and how much of it is just madness," said Anwen Hughes, the senior counsel for Human Rights First's Refugee Protection Program.

Previously, immigrants who were denied a green card after being given asylum were told they wouldn't be deported. Officials said their cases would eventually be resolved.

However, the DHS began recently sending some immigrants letters informing them that the agency intends to revoke their asylum. As a result, they'd be deported.

The cases include immigrants who were granted asylum after fleeing Zimbabwe as members of the Movement for Democratic Change, the main opponent of autocrat Robert Mugabe. In June, President Obama met with the leader of the party, Morgan Tsvangirai, and praised him for his courage.

Some of the most startling stories involve Iraqis — some of whom have worked for the U.S. government under threat of death and now could have even more to fear as U.S. troops are redeployed.

In one recent case, a middle-aged Iraqi mother of two teenagers was deemed a terrorist and barred refuge in the U.S. despite her work for the State Department as an economic development adviser.

Anna, as she is known by her American colleagues, is seen as a supporter of terrorism because of her work for the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, a mainstream Iraqi political party that the current president of Iraq belongs to. She's no longer active in the party.

Anonymous callers have warned her that they'd take revenge for her work for the U.S. government.

Now, she wonders in a phone call from Iraq punctuated by sirens and static, "What will be my future?"

Army Lt. Col. Dennis Chapman, who worked with her when he was the chief of a military transition team in the Kurdish region of Iraq, said he doesn't understand why the U.S. government would reject someone who's proved to be an ally in need of help.

"It's an absurd finding," he said. "It deprives the word 'terrorism' of any meaning."

Anna, who's being helped by the international law firm Holland & Knight, is appealing the decision. As part of a nonprofit effort, the law firm has helped more than 300 Iraqis affiliated with the U.S. government.

Alkarim, who fled as a refugee to the U.S. in February 2001, can't work or travel, even though his wife and children have already become U.S. citizens.

In 2007, Alkarim sued the U.S. government in an effort to get his green card application moving. Although the Obama administration tried to get the lawsuit dismissed, a federal judge in Denver has allowed it to proceed and could rule soon.

Alkarim's lawyer, Jeff Joseph, agreed to take the case free. Justice Department attorneys, however, have told him if DHS is ordered by the judge to act, they'll likely deny Alkarim's request for permanent residency. The government lawyers suggested that his client might have better luck if he simply dropped the suit.

Recently, Alkarim's artwork was selected to be shown at Italy's Biennial of Florence, which bills itself as one of the largest exhibition of contemporary art in the world.

His abstract expressionist paintings were considered subversive by Saddam Hussein's regime — one of the reasons he was imprisoned.

His artwork will be displayed in December without him, however, because he doesn't have his green card. He said he's also had to turn down invitations to galleries in Switzerland, Dubai, France and London.

"It would be an honor to represent the United States," the 43-year-old said. "But I can't say I'm American."

We can use FACEBOOK to create a group - that will give us high visibility. We can send our FB link to all the media people.
 
Hi Guys,
I don't think the facebook idea will be effective in term of action, but it could be useful as the way of communication. I am also thinking if we could all organize a peaceful demonstration in DC with signs explain our problem, because this is the only way that our voices will be heard. How is every one feel about this?
 
I might be wrong but I don't think any non U.S. Citizens are allowed to demonstrate in DC. Besides, demonstrations of any form could be detrimental for our own good.
 
Hi guys,
any new ideas? I can't tell you how frustrated I am... I am ready to do whatever it takes....I was even thinking about contacting the CNN as someone mentioned here and wish our voices will be heard....

I am so tired of my life now and I could use some good news to cheer me up.....keep thinking guys...we should really put our hands together and come up with something to draw the attention to us...

Keep it up
 
Hey guys you are in the List for the reason. The reasons are different, some of you guys have been working for the government or have been involved in any illegal activities in your country, or even just your parents were involved in such activities. Right now we talking about National Security of the United States. If USA has doubts in your moral character, US has the right to ban you from getting immigration benefits. Immigration benefit is a PRIVILEGE not a right. I'm not saying that all of you guys have been involved in such activities, but majority of you have different thoughts about US. Majority of Middle Eastern people and majority from certain countries were celebrating September 11 terrorist attack on US. Do you agree with me that those people are potential treats to this country? I've been talking about this with my friends and colleagues, and all of us agree that it's a bad decision to give away waivers to people in this List. Before giving the waiver, make sure this person is not a treat to US. Simple words like "Im not terrorist" doesn't make you good person.
 
You really believe in that crap Uncle Joe? My dad sought asylum here in the states because he was threatened by the rebels. He didn't donate a single penny to them and now he's been put in the same bracket. How illogical and ridiculous is that. Further, I don't believe except for the Iraqi national who received a waiver, anybody else has EVER issued a waiver over the past 3 years! This is totally ridiculous. Nobody's saying that its a right or anything but sleepless nights are highly likely to cause distresses.

Something's gotta be done. I will be writing to NY times and CNN this week about this.
 
You really believe in that crap Uncle Joe? My dad sought asylum here in the states because he was threatened by the rebels. He didn't donate a single penny to them and now he's been put in the same bracket. How illogical and ridiculous is that. Further, I don't believe except for the Iraqi national who received a waiver, anybody else has EVER issued a waiver over the past 3 years! This is totally ridiculous. Nobody's saying that its a right or anything but sleepless nights are highly likely to cause distresses.

Something's gotta be done. I will be writing to NY times and CNN this week about this.

Dude, Are you considering yourself a good moral person who Respects the Law of this country? Who will never disobey it and will never let somebody knowingly do the same. Give me an answer, YES or NO. and I'll explain what I was talking about!
 
I don't really know why you're bringing "Respect" for the Laws of the United States in this discussion. Everybody including myself respects the laws. I don't break laws and comply with everything that the law asks me to do. This isn't a case of respecting or disrespecting the laws or rules. This is a classic case of the U.S. govt. that has failed to bring amendments that would better the lives of over 6,000 families who're desperate to stick together with their family members. There seems to be no end to this ordeal and the DHS has shown absolutely no signs whatsoever to make any corrections.

People are frustrated, and understandably so.

Btw, I just sent an email to the Executive Editor of NY times and plan on doing the same to CNN.
 
I don't really know why you're bringing "Respect" for the Laws of the United States in this discussion. Everybody including myself respects the laws. I don't break laws and comply with everything that the law asks me to do. This isn't a case of respecting or disrespecting the laws or rules. This is a classic case of the U.S. govt. that has failed to bring amendments that would better the lives of over 6,000 families who're desperate to stick together with their family members. There seems to be no end to this ordeal and the DHS has shown absolutely no signs whatsoever to make any corrections.

People are frustrated, and understandably so.

Btw, I just sent an email to the Executive Editor of NY times and plan on doing the same to CNN.


18th February 2009, 01:33 PM
The.Walker The.Walker is offline
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 322
777us,

I'd suggest you to book a flight to go to Nepal. From there, you can use your citizenship and take a flight to travel to India.

Triple Citizen :

I'm a derivative asylee. Would you advise me against traveling back to my native country?

Just trying to understand your nature. You're giving advice How fake asylee can sneak into COP.
http://forums.immigration.com/showthread.php?t=293016&highlight=Indian+Asy+COP+travel

And after that you call yourself a good moral character?
 
Uncle Joe, you're being absolutely ridiculous here. Why is my morality being questioned on that occasion? Did I advise Triple Citizen to lie to the U.S. government? Did I urge him to perform any fraudulent act? Don't be using your ridiculous judgment and assume that someone is immoral based on such insensible evidences.

So, say someone from Iraq sought asylum here fearing the Al-Qaeda terrorists, it is immoral for him to sneak into his country and see his family members? Where did you come up with such sort of morality man?

On that occasion, I advised him to sneak through Nepal because Nepal and India share open borders. Further, if he were to sneak in through his country's airport, he might get arrested or the terrorists or whatever party he's fearing from might somehow manage to know about his return which could end up being fatal.
 
Uncle Joe, you're being absolutely ridiculous here. Why is my morality being questioned on that occasion? Did I advise Triple Citizen to lie to the U.S. government? Did I urge him to perform any fraudulent act? Don't be using your ridiculous judgment and assume that someone is immoral based on such insensible evidences.

So, say someone from Iraq sought asylum here fearing the Al-Qaeda terrorists, it is immoral for him to sneak into his country and see his family members? Where did you come up with such sort of morality man?

On that occasion, I advised him to sneak through Nepal because Nepal and India share open borders. Further, if he were to sneak in through his country's airport, he might get arrested or the terrorists or whatever party he's fearing from might somehow manage to know about his return which could end up being fatal.

Dude, you gave illegal advice. Person that you gave advice has expired Indian Passport, and he was going to India(COP) sneaking through third country. We are not talking about Iraq and Al Qaeda. I understand that he's going to third country to hide his trip to COP. And you are calling yourself a person who respect the law?

That advice you gave wasn't for Triple Citizen!!!


Original Post
777us 777us is offline
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 23
Indian Asylum Renewing NP
Hi friends,

I am Indian asylum in USA, is there anyone who can give me good suggestion on how i can get NP renewed, coz I want to travel to India. Can I just tell that I am illegal here and no status in order to get NP ?

Thanks

So don't be surprise about your background checks, why it's so talking so long
 
Further, if he were to sneak in through his country's airport, he might get arrested or the terrorists or whatever party he's fearing from might somehow manage to know about his return which could end up being fatal.

Ok it explains everything, so if you fear to get arrested you can get away with everything with every law violation? Let's say I have a fear to get arrested and to avoid that I can sneak into the country illegally.
It doesn't give you a right to disobey the Law.
So you think that if you fear to get arrested you can do pretty much everything? and get away with that?
 
So Uncle Joe whats your suggestion to solve thier problem?

My suggestion? My suggestion is if you're in the List you're in the List for the reason. Wait your turn, when DHS will finish the background check to make sure you are fitable for the society. That's the National Security Reason. adjusting your status is a privilege not your right.
 
Top