Revoke GC?

[TheRealCanadian]

Stop BSing on this forum and get back to your rat hole, Also take your buddy with you as well , He is no better than YOU. Made for Each Other. Everybody know how full sh*t you are, keep that off this forum and enjoy yourself.

You were saying something about barking just so that someone might listen?

Glad to see you've stopped quoting obsolete, superceded court decisions and have progressed to insults. Bravo!

 

[qwertyisback]

You were saying something about barking just so that someone might listen?

Glad to see you've stopped quoting obsolete, superceded court decisions and have progressed to insults. Bravo!

TRC... How about you don't take sides on this unwarrentedly???
And coming back to original discussion, just because you think something is obsolete, superceded that does not mean its TRUE. If you don't agree with my opinion , discuss that on seperate page.

 

[pralay]

Glad to see you've stopped quoting obsolete, superceded court decisions and have progressed to insults. Bravo!

Call it old habit. Never goes away.

 

[TheRealCanadian]

TRC... How about you don't take sides on this unwarrentedly???

I'm not. Your behavior is perfect justification.

And coming back to original discussion, just because you think something is obsolete, superceded that does not mean its TRUE.

No, but when the courts agree with me then that does tend to make it true.

 

[pralay]

I'm not. Your behavior is perfect justification.

There are people who always believe in "taking side". Eventually they deflect from real topic and blindly start "them vs. us". They tend to forget that the human race came out from animal kingdom long time back.

 

[qwertyisback]

I'm not. Your behavior is perfect justification

Justification for what?? more BS??? lohith is putting very valid point of view , if anybody got argument, put it forward but don't start like "I am always RIGHT and you are WRONG" attitude. Take a chill pill.

No, but when the courts agree with me then that does tend to make it true.

If you find something new, then start arguing your side again. Till then I am RIGHT and you are WRONG. Take it easy. Good night.

 

[pralay]

lohith is putting very valid point of view , if anybody got argument,

What valid point!!! At this point he has no idea what is talking about. His "placeholder" concept is overstreatching of law. It's like if cop allows driving 42 miles/hour in 40 miles/hour speed limit zone, then why not 50, why not 60, why not 70 (to the a point where the original law does not make sense at all).

JTill then I am RIGHT and you are WRONG. Take it easy. Good night.

Then why do you argue at all. Just keep posting those words with bold letters again again, so that people will know you are always right without knowing what you are talking about. It's good and effective for someone who hardly puts in point in argument.

 

[qwertyisback]

What valid point!!! At this point he has no idea what is talking about. His "placeholder" concept is overstreatching of law. .

Didn't you find any other silly objection??? He is using that word "overstretch" to describe something which at the base atleast exist. But YOU, without any basis, just making FALSE statement again and again that "AC-21 changes sponsor". This statement is not "overstretch" but completely WRONG. Period.
And still Lohith is asking justification for such statements? And you just showing off like YOU know everything. Come on Get a life, everybody posting here is "lemon", nothing more or less.

Then why do you argue at all. Just keep posting those words with bold letters again again, so that people will know you are always right without knowing what you are talking about. It's good and effective for someone who hardly puts in point in argument.

Have you heard "humor"?? I bet not.Do you know why those lines are bolded and highlighted???? I guess not. Then I am sure you don't know what is "lemon". FYI, its humorous word for "layman" .You need to get more 101 books.

 

[pralay]

And still Lohith is asking justification for such statements?

Because he has no idea what he is talking about. One week back he had on idea if GC is for future employment and people can get GC "sitting idle".

Come on Get a life, everybody posting here is "lemon", nothing more or less.

All I can say, better than a rotten "lemon" with a bag of "guesswork".

Have you heard "humor"?? I bet not.Do you know why those lines are bolded and highlighted???? I guess not. Then I am sure you don't know what is "lemon". FYI, its humorous word for "layman" .You need to get more 101 books.

Don't care about humor. I am just suggesting something that could be very good and effective for people like you. Don't you like suggestions???? Too bad!!

 

[TheRealCanadian]

Its YOU who had no idea about anything. Lohith posts are based on laws and supported by strong arguments.

That's interesting, considering the discussion we had in this thread.

Lohith claimed that intent was not needed for AC21. I then suggested that according to that logic, one could claim AC21 benefits and explicitly tell USCIS that one did not intend to work for the sponsoring employer. Did Lohith agree with this statement?

He has never answered my question. Strong argument indeed.

 

[pralay]

He has never answered my question.

Actually indirectly he did, when he mentioned "suicidal mission". (unless he was talking about employer or USCIS commiting suicide - which is quite possible in his argument).

 

[pralay]

call them names and act like a jerk...

Why "act", when it comes naturally?

 

[qwertyisback]

That's interesting, considering the discussion we had in this thread.

Lohith claimed that intent was not needed for AC21. I then suggested that according to that logic, one could claim AC21 benefits and explicitly tell USCIS that one did not intend to work for the sponsoring employer. Did Lohith agree with this statement?

He has never answered my question. Strong argument indeed.

Why you want to provide some indormation which INS don't care about?? And if you provide such unsolicited information,its one more "what if", anything can happen, you might become Governer of CA or end up in "donkey riding" in your own country!!! Make your best guess.Also Ask "what if" expert, he can give you some clue.

 

[pralay]

Why you want to provide some indormation which INS don't care about?? And if you provide such unsolicited information,its one more "what if", anything can happen, you might become Governer of CA or end up in "donkey riding" in your own country!!! Make your best guess.Also Ask "what if" expert, he can give you some clue.

qwerty,
This is best posting I read that came from you. And it makes sense. Unfortunately, it's irrelevent in the context we are arguing about.

 

[chinabee]

You guys have wayyyy too much time day dreaming.

When you talk about 'intent', you need to quote specific law/regulations and cases to support your statement. When you quote cases, not something from news media or 'I know somebody ....', you need to quote the exact court decision related to the cases.

Everything else is just bullsh*t.