images CSC 2004 / 2005 csconstantine. Free shipping now at the Digg Shop!
  • Free shipping now at the Digg Shop!

  • krishna.ahd
    02-13 09:43 AM
    Please use this thread for education on the effect of lobbying on legislation. Thanks.
    First of all, Why We need Lobbying

    Check this out

    Steps involved in Lobbying

    wallpaper Free shipping now at the Digg Shop! csconstantine. WR Bentalha 0-0 CS Constantine
  • WR Bentalha 0-0 CS Constantine

  • alisa
    04-07 12:32 PM
    Why don't we let CompeteAmerica and Bill Gates and the geniuses in congress/senate figure out what the adequate number or H-1s should be. We don't care if the H1 numbers go up, or down, if I am not mistaken.

    We should only oppose increased hardships/obstacles in the form of LCA/administrative hurdles for H-1 renewals. Something that will only enrich the lawyers more, and increase the workload for USCIS.

    Whether there should be 65K H1s, or 115K, or zero. That should not be our concern.

    One possible solution is to establish a separate quotas for companies perfoming R&D in the US. Something like this already exists in the tax code where companies establish eligibility for the R&D tax credit. A similar bar could be used to administer a R&D quota for H1B or GC. That should address concerns around the quota for top US companies.

    csconstantine. csconstantine
  • csconstantine

  • GCScrewed
    07-13 08:29 PM
    I dont agree at all!!!!!!!

    How can you give consideration to people already in line at the expense of other people from a higher preference category also waiting patiently in line. Regardless of the duration of the wait EB3 is a lower prefrence category and will remain so under any interpretation. Remember that even under the 'old' interpretation EB3-I only got visa numbers after passing through the EB3 ROW and the EB2-I gate.

    Notwithstanding the 'new' interpretation, an argument can always be made that the 'old' interpretation was not only wrong but blatantly wrong where EB3ROW was given preference over an EB2 retro country.

    The only fix for this is elimination of country cap and/or increase in number of visas. The means to acheive that goal may be legislative or administrative. I'll defer to the experts on that!

    Can't beleive people can sound so arrogant. That's exactly some of the hispanic politicians unwilling to provide any relief to any employment based immigration. Some people think they are "superior" than others, the so called "smartest", "brightest", "highly skilled". A country like the US needs people from a diverse background. It does not need all the Phds or masters. It needs chefs, agriculture workers, doctors, nurses, business persons, all backgrounds. Can you imagine that this country only consists of Phds? That's why when arguing why EB applicants should be given relieve first and then illegals, we should not sound we are "superior". Rather we should simply state our confidence about the integrity of the legal system.

    As far as the so called "preference", how are you going to catergorize those under EB4, EB5, etc.? The so called "preference" is a myth. Otherwise, the law would only allow a "lower" perference to get a green card until all the "higher" ones get theirs. It is not the case, isn't? Rather it gives a % limit for each category.

    2011 WR Bentalha 0-0 CS Constantine csconstantine. http://www.csconstantine.
  • http://www.csconstantine.

  • bkarnik
    08-05 05:45 PM
    We always hear "the rules" from the female side. Now here are the rules from the male side. These are our rules! Print this out and pass to your partner for a greater understanding:

    1. Learn to work the toilet seat. You're a big girl. If it's up, put it down. We need it up, you need it down. You don't hear us bitching about you leaving it down.

    2. Birthdays, Valentines, and Anniversaries are not quests to see if we can find the perfect present yet again!

    3. Sometimes we are not thinking about you. Live with it.

    4. Don't cut your hair. Ever. Long hair is always more attractive than short hair. One of the big reasons guys fear getting married is that married women always cut their hair, and by then you're stuck with her.

    5. Crying is blackmail.

    6. Ask for what you want. Let us be clear on this one: Subtle hints do not work! Strong hints do not work! Obvious hints do not work! Just say it!

    7. We don't remember dates. Mark birthdays and anniversaries on a calendar. Remind us frequently beforehand.

    8. Most guys own three pairs of shoes - tops. What makes you think we'd be any good at choosing which pair, out of thirty, would look good with your dress?

    9. Yes and No are perfectly acceptable answers to almost every question.

    10. Come to us with a problem only if you want help solving it. That's what we do. Sympathy is what your girlfriends are for.

    11. A headache that lasts for 17 months is a problem.See a doctor.

    12. Check your oil! Please.

    13. Anything we said 6 months ago is inadmissible in an argument. In fact, all comments become null and void after 7 days.

    14. If you think you're fat, you probably are. Don't ask us. We refuse to answer.

    15. If something we said can be interpreted two ways, and one of the ways makes you sad or angry, we meant the other one.

    16. You can either ask us to do something or tell us how you want it done. Not both. If you already know best how to do it, just do it yourself.

    17. Whenever possible, please say whatever you have to say during commercials.

    18. Christopher Columbus did not need directions, and neither do we.

    19. All men see in only 16 colors, like windows default settings. Peach, for example, is a fruit, not a colour. We have no idea what mauve is.

    20. If it itches, it will be scratched. We do that.

    21. We are not mind readers and we never will be. Our lack of mind-reading ability is not proof of how little we care about you.

    22. If we ask what is wrong and you say "nothing," we will act like nothing's wrong. We know you are lying,but it is just not worth the hassle.

    23. If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.

    24. When we have to go somewhere, absolutely anything you wear is fine. Really.

    25. Don't ask us what we're thinking about unless you are prepared to discuss such topics as the shotgun formation, or monster trucks.

    26. You have enough clothes.

    27. You have too many shoes.

    28. No you really do have too many clothes and shoes.

    29. BEER is as exciting for us as handbags are for you.

    30. Thank you for reading this; Yes, I know, I have to sleep on the couch tonight, but did you know we really don't mind that, it's like camping.

    31. I'm in shape. ROUND is a shape.


    csconstantine. Ultras Loca Ragazzi (CS
  • Ultras Loca Ragazzi (CS

  • logiclife
    07-09 01:11 AM
    Well, we had a good debate on Radio on KPFK today.

    I would like to thank Rajiv Khanna, Stuart Anderson, Carl Shusterman, Ashish and Swadha for participating on this show. Also Aman and Ashish for arranging this with Debo.

    Today, a caller called the show when Debo opened the phone lines and this guy, named Mike, went on and on about how H1B program is similar to slave trade and H1B workers live like insects by piling up 10 people in a one-bedroom apartment and work 100 hours a week for 30 thousand dollars a year bla bla bla.

    Without studying due process, or policy analysis, simply crying "Slave Trade", "H1B stole my job...waaaah...waaah", "H1B replaced me...waaah...waaah", they create good sound bites and play victims.

    Really, H1B program and employment based greencard program, that brings professionals in skilled occupation into this country to fill a shortage of skilled workers has been vindicated beyond limit. And they keep beating the same drums. "They steal jobs". "They drive down wages". They make good soundbites. And they make good quotes for Lou Dobbs.

    Let me say this to Mike and the likes of

    Employers dont just go around spending thousands of dollars on H1B fees and greencard fees to hire a guy with foreign accent if a native citizen was available. And they do not underpay them, because they HAVE to pay prevailing wages based on the wages determined by the Department of labor. If they apply for greencard, then that's because they want him on a permenant basis and there is a another labor certification process for that too, where there are newspaper and other advertisements for the job available to citizens first. Upon not finding a suitable fit, they file for labor certification. And let me remind you all that it takes 2-3 years for department of labor to do that coz they do an exhaustive review of the job offer.

    Go Here on this link of Department of labor ( read the process for yourself. This system is designed to protect the citizens and IT WORKS.

    Now in a few cases, if there was fraud, then that doesnt mean that the system does not work and should be abolished. Its like saying that we should abolish driving privileges of everyone just because some drivers drive drunk and kill pedestrians. By that token, we must also ground all commercial air travel because sometimes the planes crash and they kill people.

    Another accusation is that H1B employees pay for their own fees sometimes and also for lawyer's fees. And they work like donkeys. Well, not everyone pays for the lawyers. In some rare cases, if the employees hire lawyers, its their own choice, for their own comfort and for their own complicated cases which are many time due to problems of their own making. Why would the employer pay for individuals immigration problems that are not tied to H1B or GC petitions filed by Lawyer? As to working additional hours, its called overtime my dear friend. And they are paid to do that. No one works for free. And no one works for less. If they are paid less than what they think they deserve, then they quit the employer and go to another employer next door who pays them more and treats them fairly.

    And ya, another thing. Biggest subscriber of H1B program, especially since the late 90s has be the IT industry. Unemployment in IT industry is less than 2%. If H1B program is really making life worse, I am sure IT industry unemployment would have been more than national average of 5%.

    And now, let me mention a few slaves and their slave-masters that I am really proud of...

    There are nearly 2000 doctors who are on their path to permenant residency(Green card) in America. They are under Conrad-30 (J1) program. They serve 4 million americans in medically underserved areas. These are rural areas where its hard to find a proper grocery store, let alone a Doctor.

    One of my friends works as a Doctor in Yuma, Arizona. The greencard process for him stalls him for years and years to move to a more desirable area even if he has done his due of serving in rural areas for X amount of years. His process would start over again if the area is no longer medically underserved.

    And then there are nurses, who also make it to America from all over the world on H1B program. Now, if you've ever been to a Hospital, you would know that its not really the most pleasant job in the world. And there is a severe shortage of nurses in America. Even a 5 year old knows this. So by abolishing H1B program and employment based immigration program, you would get rid of the SLAVE nurses too, who work 12-hour shifts on jobs that American born RNA nurses dont accept.

    Such Doctors and nurses are a beacon of hope to 4 million Americans where healthcare is difficult to come by. If such Doctors are slaves, then I am proud of those slaves and their slave masters, and I would love to be either one of them any given day of the week.

    -Have a great weekend-

    csconstantine. CSConstantine.NET.
  • CSConstantine.NET.

  • dpp
    05-16 12:43 PM
    I am not Ronald Regan but I am compelled to say, " There you go again...."

    Why are you consistently discussing about H-1B caps. Green card delays are not because of H-1B quota, I am sure you know this. H-1B caps have nothing to do who applied for the H-1s, whether those were consulting companies in US or a company in Japan. You are just saying it consistently in all your posts because you don�t like more people coming here after you are on path to green cards. In all your posts, you have this mid set where the door closes right behind you and more people should not be allowed on H-1. I am sure you qualify to be the member of IEEE-USA. Please Google search for their membership form. Just because the name of the organization is �Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers� doesn�t mean that every thing on their agenda is kosher.

    This shows that you have no clue about the reality. You have looked at the IEEE website and formulated the opinion about the nice people at IEEE-USA, who are working overtime for you to get your green card. This is what you think, right? Well! My friend we live in a very strange world in which political organization (like IEEE) show stuff on their website just so that they don�t appear to be outright anti-immigrants.
    Also, I do think that anybody who do not want to pick up their ass to find a job and rather chose to whine about someone else taking away the job is lazy and for sure undeserving. They are interested to put restrictions on H-1B because they want to eliminate their competition. Every community/group, big or small, have their opponents and enemies just because of the sheer nature of the competition for resource with other groups/communities. H-1B community now forms substantially large group of people. It is natural that orgs like IEEE-USA will be a natural opponent of H-1B community because there is a competition. Now, most members of IEEE-USA are older and middle aged folks, who are not able to compete with good quality engineers from other parts of the world. The folks on H-1 are young, dynamic and fast learners. IEEE-USA folks cannot compete with this group and so they are working to eliminate competition from H-1B folks by other means. Sometimes they call H-1Bs as indentured servants, sometimes promoting outsourcing, sometimes taking away their jobs and sometime depressing wages. They throw out all sorts of rationale to hurt H-1B community. And some idiots on this and other forums have not clue of the bigger picture and are hell bent on screwing the so called �body shoppers� as if it is ok to work at the client site to do the same job at the same amount if you are employees of KPMG or Accenture or Bearing Point. But it is not ok to do the same thing if you are an employee of TCS, INFY or SIFY etc. If this is not discrimination, then tell me what is????? I sincerely do want to understand your view and please consider me to be totally ignorant person who is here to learn from you. I sincerely mean it.

    So you do think that anything associated with the word �IEEE� is gospel. Let me share with you my friend that IEEE and IEEE-USA are totally different organizations. Just like any other organization in the world, IEEE-USA is working to address the issues of their members only. IEEE-USA is working to fix the issues of their members who live in USA ONLY. It has no clue and no desire and no objective to look at any of your issues, no matter what they are. We all acknowledge that are problems with the H-1B program but the question is, Is Durbin-Grassley approach the real solution to the problem? Congress did not address anything associated with H-1B visa for last 6-7 years. If you write to lawmakers they only understand only thing about the word �H-1B� and that is increase in H-1B� that�s it. Now every system in the world needs tweaking from time to time and this has not happened with H-1B program for a very long time. Either way, throwing out people waiting for green cards for 6-7 years is not the solution, putting in restrictions to undermine the entire H-1B program (because they know they will not have enough votes to reduce the visa numbers or eliminate the program) is not the solution, �investigating� companies when they hire someone on H-1B as if hiring someone on H-1B is a crime is not the solution, singling out companies from one country because the guy driving IEEE-USA (Ron Hira) doesn�t want more people to come from India because he hates his heritage � is not the solution. Yes there are problems, but Durbin-Grassley bill is not the solution.

    Who needs enemies if we have friends like you? I mean why do you want hard working people to unnecessary go through more problems before getting their green cards, as if the existing problems for us are not enough. You simple want to make the system difficult to test human endurance? You know what, we can do this, how about all the stringent conditions of Durbin-Grassley bill will apply ONLY on you and we are all sure that the �HIGH-SKILLED� that you are, you will pass all the �tests� with flying colors. For rest all the others, please consider us lowly skilled and please set a bar lower to the extent that is humanly achievable, we are not �highly-skilled� super-humans like yourself.

    Yes, you have not yet clearly said that �I support banning all H-1Bs�, not in those words, not yet. But reading your posts, it is apparent that you are headed there, as soon as you get your green card. As I said earlier, form now on, just think that all the Durbin-Grassley conditions apply on you and live your life as per the standard set by Durbin-Grassley. For the rest of us, please have mercy on us.

    Well said.


    csconstantine. منتدى شباب قسنطينة cs
  • منتدى شباب قسنطينة cs

  • nozerd
    12-28 09:08 PM
    I believe in the maxim that you cant control how others act. You can only control how you react. This is what India should do in the short and medium term that they do have full control over.


    I think the easiest thing India can do to send a message is to break off complete diplomatic relations with Pakistan.

    a) Recall the Ambassador permanantly and close down the High Commision.

    b) Ban anyone who owns (or has in the past owned) a Pakistani passport from entering India under any circumstances- exceptions need to be signed off by the External Affairs Minister himself)

    c) Not allow Indians to travel to Pakistan ( Place a stamp on all passports saying entry to Pakistan not allowed - similar to what we had for South Africa 15-20 yrs ago).

    d) Make it an obvious point to boycott any forum Pak is speaking on. So if the Paki guy is speaking at the UN or SAARC the Indian delegation just leaves the room.

    e) Ignore PAK to the point that it doesnt exist.


    a) Deal with internal security. Recruit and fill the Army and Intelligence agencies that are short staffed. If the trainers are not there get countries like Israel and Russia to train them or get ex US and UK army commandoes pay them the market fee and get them trained.

    b) Recruit a cadre of Indian Muslims in the IB. Get people who are Hafez (trained well in the Koran) and who are both strong muslims and patriotic Indians. Send them to Pak as sleeping agents and destabilize Pak from the inside. Infiltrate these terrorists.

    c) Leverage our influence and clout. If company X sells to Pak they can forget about any Indian company doing business with them. Pressurise govts not to allow their firms to sell to Pak.

    d) Build a cadre of polished charismatic foreign service officers with the gift of gab like Pak has. The day after the Bombay incident Pak had started working the media/ talk show circuit in the US with their honey tounged reps. They always seem to do a great job with PR while India is sleeping. Ban SC quota types from joining the IFS.

    2010 csconstantine csconstantine. CSC 2004 / 2005
  • CSC 2004 / 2005

  • mariner5555
    04-14 03:09 PM
    You will never learn. Anyways, if you read my earlier posts you would know that I have said that people who most people who live in apartments would be having valid reasons. I have also said that if I were in CA. I would be living in an apartment too. I am never against renting or living in an apartment, but I am against renting when it makes perfect sense to buy and when the time is right (which of course is NOT NOW).

    My counter arguments are for people who were scaring people into not buying a house when things are conducive for them. Note, when I say conducive it means all things considered as in the time is right, they have a good job, have found a very good deal in a location having a very good school and they have found something which has an extra room when their elderly parents visit them.
    I can say the same about you. let me clarify too ..and let me stop this since I (and I guess you) have better things to do
    my arguments were for people who are being pressurised to buy as if in 3 months prices will go sky high. or for those who are saying that owning a (big)house = better life ..(both are incorrect from a different angle look for your own angle ..for eg you need space ..(u get space but maintenance is more).
    if you have atleast a GC, good savings / or super pay, find a good deal (good location with less commute time) and you need the space ..then buy a house.
    there is an excess of supply and v.low demand (compared to past) if you can wait for some time to get a correct place then wait (and maybe keep looking / doing research etc) ..the worst thing you can do on a EAD (and in uncertain times) is rush and buy just because somebody told you to do that. the bottom line is ..this was a massive massive bubble ..something that has never occured on this scale ..and housing will be down for a long long time it makes sense to wait for a GC atleast.


    csconstantine. LE VRAI DOYEN NE MEURT JAMAIS

  • boreal
    08-30 11:28 PM
    This is hilarious........

    Funny...But this is so so made up..first of all this guy doesnt have an "Indian accent" is so "appu"..and every Indian can recognize an Indian accent from a mile! (and "raj" - how original!!)..and second - the woman's doesnt like that of someone who came from India only 3 yrs back (even counting those who start putting on an accent as soon as they land here)....I guess some ABCD ( no offense ) trying to make a funny clip...funny alright..but most probably made up...

    hair http://www.csconstantine. csconstantine. CSConstantine.
  • CSConstantine.

  • logiclife
    02-21 11:16 AM
    Today, Lou Dobbs has written on more article.

    This time, Lou Dobbs is having a lot of admiration and good words to say about.....guess what ...LOU DOBBS.

    Yes, Lou Dobbs loves Lou Dobbs. He has created a whole new class of people in this country. He says that there are 150 million "Lou Dobbs Democrats" in the country the no ones knows about.

    Read the whole article here (

    Excerpts of Lou Dobbs talking about how great and popular Lou Dobbs is...

    The ascension of the so-called Lou Dobbs Democrats in the November election gave hope to many that our representatives and senators were awakening to the need to represent the largest single group of voters in the country, 150 million working men and women and their families.
    --Lou Dobbs, Feb 21 2007.

    The Democratic Leadership Council is obviously frightened that my brand of independent populism is a threat.
    --Lou Dobbs again, on Feb 21 2007, when absolutely in awe of Lou Dobbs.

    I call that independent populism, not neo-populism. And I also call that truth.

    --Lou Dobbs, calling Lou Dobbs an INDEPENDENT populist while writing a column praising Lou Dobbs.

    In the case of the Democratic Party, there seems to be a rising fear that more Lou Dobbs Democrats are on the way and are going to demand truth over slogans and an improving reality for working men and women rather than ideological posturing that will salve the corporate masters of both parties.

    --Lou Dobbs, describing the Lou Dobbs brand of Democrats.

    Geeezzz...really. Why doesnt he just run for office instead of campaigning from CNN.


    csconstantine. JsmSkikda-CsConstantine / le
  • JsmSkikda-CsConstantine / le

  • new_horizon
    01-06 02:49 PM
    Israel is fully justified in responding to the rocket attacks from Gaza. How long can they show restraint by not responding to the unprovoked attacks. Do you think US will remain silent, if Canada were to lob rockets into US. Asbolutely not. Every country has the right to protect itself.
    Hamas is such a coward orgn that they hide behind school, mosque, hospitals to shoot their rockets, so they really are luring israel to bomb those areas. Unfortunately innocents die...the blame should be on hamas. In fact, before bombing Israel even goes to the extent of calling and texting people in the target area to warn them before bombing. which country at war you know does that. Inspite of all these the biased media portrays Israel as the evil one. time to think. if only india shows some courage like that.

    hot Ultras Loca Ragazzi (CS csconstantine. à Batna :: CSConstantine.
  • à Batna :: CSConstantine.

  • Macaca
    12-20 08:47 AM
    Resolve To End Hyper-Partisanship ( By Mort Kondracke | Roll Call, December 20, 2007

    Suppose Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) wins the Democratic nomination and picks Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel (Neb.) or Independent New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg as his running mate. Or, suppose Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) wins the GOP nomination and picks Independent Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman (Conn.) as veep.

    Suppose even further that, over this year's holidays, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and President Bush all resolve that next year they'll really try to live up to the pledges they all made in early 2007 to work across party lines to - as they all said - do the problem-solving work voters elected them for.

    Is it all fantasy? Perhaps it is, given the hyperpartisanship of contemporary politics. Yet, every poll on the subject indicates that Americans are fed up with their politicians' incessant tribal warfare and inability to address problems everyone agrees are becoming more serious from inattention.

    If the two parties' presidential nominees reached out across party lines to pick their running mates - Obama and McCain seem the likeliest to do so - it would serve as dazzling notice that times were changing.

    It would be even more astounding if Congressional leaders and Bush could decide that, instead of repeating the dismal, few-achievements record of 2007, they'd resolve to solve at least one major problem in 2008 - say, pass tough but compassionate comprehensive immigration reform.

    Over the holidays, America's political actors - and observers - would do themselves and the country a favor by reading Ron Brownstein's new book, "The Second Civil War," whose subtitle begins to tell it all: "How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America."

    Brownstein, formerly with the Los Angeles Times and now political director of Atlantic Media Co. publications, vividly describes the historical origins of "hyperpartisanship," a term he borrows from a sometime practitioner of it, former Republican National Chairman Ken Mehlman.

    More importantly - Brownstein eloquently laments the consequences of the disease and offers some fascinating remedies, some derived from former President Bill Clinton, whom he interviewed at length. Brownstein doesn't suggest picking vice presidents across party lines. Those are my radical imaginings - though they are derived from conversations with participants in presidential campaigns.

    Brownstein has this right: America is the richest, most powerful nation on Earth, but its leaders can't agree on a plan to reduce dependence on foreign oil, can't balance the budget, can't provide health insurance to a sixth of its population, can't align its promises to retirees with its ability to pay the cost and can't agree on strategies to combat Islamic terrorism.

    Why not? Because solutions to these problems require bipartisan "grand bargains" that polarized politicians are unwilling to make.

    "Our politics today encourages confrontation over compromise," Brownstein writes. "The political system now rewards ideology over pragmatism. It is designed to sharpen disagreements rather than construct consensus. It is built on exposing and inflaming the differences that separate Americans rather than the shared priorities and values that unite them."

    Brownstein puts primary blame on conservative Republicans for the rise of "warrior" politics, especially former Speaker Newt Gingrich (Ga.) and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (Texas), Bush and his former guru, Karl Rove, and their allies on talk radio.

    But he observes that Democrats are catching up in hyperpartisanship, flogged on by and leftist bloggers. Mainstream media, too, encourage conflict over consensus. And the public has become ideologically "sorted," as well, making the GOP more conservative, Democrats more liberal and moderates torn.

    Brownstein gives rather more credit to Clinton than I would as a model centrist. He was that on policy - the "Great Triangulator" -but his personal misdeeds, slipperiness and tendency to respond savagely to threats made him as divisive as Bush, the "Great Polarizer."

    But how can we end the war and engender vigorous, substantive debate that leads to consensus? Brownstein recommends that states banish closed primaries and allow registered independents to participate in picking candidates.

    He also advises that political leaders look to a growing corps of cross-interest coalitions - such as the Business Roundtable, Service Employees International Union, AARP and National Federation of Independent Business - working to develop consensus solutions to problems such as health care and entitlement reform.

    But the prime requirement is presidential leadership - a willingness to spend time with leaders of the opposition party, include them in policy deliberations, really heed their concerns and try to build electoral coalitions and Congressional support of 55 or 60 percent, not Bush's 50-plus-one.

    "Imagine ... that such a president told the country that he would accept some ideas counter to his own preferences to encourage others to do the same. Surely such a president would face howls of complaint about ideological betrayal from the most ardent voices of his own coalition.

    "But that president also might touch a deep chord with voters. ... It has always been true that a president can score points by shaking a fist at his enemies. But a president who extends a hand to his enemies could transform American politics." Amen.

    Think about it over Christmas.


    house Blog de csconstantine-25 csconstantine. Dorothy Parvaz is believed to
  • Dorothy Parvaz is believed to

  • delax
    08-05 09:45 AM
    Not a good idea to go down this road.

    tattoo CSConstantine.NET. csconstantine. CS Constantine - Web
  • CS Constantine - Web

  • axp817
    03-26 05:50 PM
    I tried looking for the baltimore case but I don't have it on this computer. You might want to search for it on

    That case had a lot more things in it.

    1) person never worked at the location as specified by the greencard labor
    2) person acknowledged he wasn't going to work there upon greencard approval
    3) person was claiming ac21 within same employer for different location

    Administrative appeals office; concurred that ac21 wasn't specific to geographic location and didn't have to be done with another company; it could be done within same company.

    Then AAO went another way and picked on some other issues: Other issues they picked on was information on his g-325a and his work locations. They picked onthat he didn't have h-1b's approved for those particular locations or LCA's and he was out of status. he was good on the ac21 but was out of status prior to filing 485.

    So when they started picking on these other things, do you know what eventually ended up happening - denial/approval?

    I tried looking on, a lot of hits came up when i searched for "baltimore AC21" but none of them were this particular case.

    Aren't there many consulting scenarios where the labor is filed in a certain state but the employee (although worked for the same employer) worked in another location on H-1B (with due LCA amendments of course). Is that not acceptable from a GC perspective?

    sorry, I don't mean to drag this topic on forever.



    pictures منتدى شباب قسنطينة cs csconstantine. Blog de csconstantine-alg
  • Blog de csconstantine-alg

  • truthinspector
    01-02 12:58 PM
    It's about time we accept that we are not a Nation, but a mere labor pool with some 535 odd "Mukadams" at national level and hundreds of "Thekedaars" at state level.

    Here is a recommended motto for our currency(in replacement of "Satyamev Jayate")

    One Side : "Chalta Hain"

    Other Side : "Khao Khujao , Batti Buzao"

    Let's move on ( yes, that's the only option with any breed of politicians that may come to power in India).

    dresses à Batna :: CSConstantine. csconstantine. منتدى شباب قسنطينة cs
  • منتدى شباب قسنطينة cs

  • Macaca
    12-14 11:40 AM
    Plan B For Pelosi And Reid ( By E. J. Dionne | Washington Post, December 14, 2007

    WASHINGTON -- Congressional Democrats need a Plan B.

    Republicans chortle as they block Democratic initiatives -- and accuse the majority of being unable to govern. Rank-and-filers are furious their leaders can't end the Iraq War. President Bush sits back and vetoes at will.

    Worse, Democrats are starting to blame each other, with those in the House wondering why their Senate colleagues don't force Republicans to engage in grueling, old-fashioned filibusters. Instead, the GOP kills bills by coming up with just 41 votes. Senators defend themselves by saying that their House colleagues don't understand how the august "upper" chamber works these days.

    If Bush's strategy is to drag Congress down to his low level of public esteem, he is succeeding brilliantly. A Washington Post/ABC News poll released earlier this week found that only 33 percent of Americans approved of Bush's handling of his job -- and just 32 percent felt positively about Congress' performance. The only comfort for Democrats: The public dislikes Republicans in Congress (32 percent approval) even more than it dislikes congressional Democrats (40 percent approval).

    The Democrats' core problem is that they have been unable to place blame for gridlock where it largely belongs, on the Republican minority and the president.

    In an ideal world, Democrats would pass a lot of legislation that Bush would either have to sign or veto. The president would have to take responsibility for his choices. The House has passed many bills, but the Republican minority has enormous power in the Senate to keep the legislation from ever getting to the president's desk. This creates the impression that action is being stalled through some vague and nefarious congressional "process."

    Not only can a minority block action in the Senate, but the Democrats' nominal one-vote majority is frequently not a majority at all. A few maverick Democrats often defect, and the party runs short-handed when Sens. Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd and Barack Obama are off running for president.

    And Bush is learning that even when bills reach his desk, he can veto them with near impunity. On Wednesday, Bush issued his second veto of a bill to extend coverage under the State Children's Health Insurance Program to 10 million kids. Democrats have the high ground on the issue and more than two-thirds support in the Senate, but the bill lacks a veto-proof House majority.

    After Bush vetoed the first version of the SCHIP bill, Democrats changed it slightly to make it more attractive to Republicans. And the new version passed both houses too. When Bush vetoed the SCHIP measure again, almost nobody paid attention. The Washington Post ran a three-paragraph story on the corner of page A18; The New York Times ran a longer story -- on page A29.

    Democrats can't even get credit for doing the right thing. If Congress and Bush don't act, the alternative minimum tax -- originally designed to affect only Americans with very high incomes -- will raise taxes on about 20 million middle- and upper-middle-class people for whom it was never intended.

    Democrats want to protect those taxpayers, but also keep their pay-as-you-go promise to offset new spending or tax cuts with tax increases or program cuts elsewhere. They would finance AMT relief with $50 billion in new taxes on the very wealthiest Americans or corporations. The Republicans say no, just pass the AMT fix.

    Here's a guarantee: If the Democrats fail to pass AMT relief, they will be blamed for raising taxes on the middle class. If they pass it without the tax increase, deficit hawks will accuse them of selling out.

    What's the alternative to the internecine Democratic finger-pointing of the sort that made the front page of Thursday's Washington Post? The party's congressional leaders need to do whatever they must to put this year behind them. Then they need to stop whining. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid should put aside any ill feelings and use the Christmas break to come up with a joint program for 2008.

    They could start with the best ideas from their presidential candidates in areas such as health care, education, cures for the ailing economy and poverty-reduction. Agree to bring the same bills to a vote in both houses. Try one more time to change the direction of Iraq policy. If Bush and the Republicans block their efforts, bring all these issues into the campaign. Let the voters break the gridlock.

    If Democrats don't make the 2008 election about the Do-Nothing Republicans, the GOP has its own ideas about whom to hold responsible for Washington's paralysis. And if House and Senate Democrats waste their time attacking each other, they will deserve any blame they get next fall.


    makeup LE VRAI DOYEN NE MEURT JAMAIS csconstantine. Blog de csconstantine-25
  • Blog de csconstantine-25

  • kc_p21
    01-07 05:32 PM

    I would suggest that you get a DONKEY and move to Saudi or Afghanistan and practice your religion. You don't deserve to live in any country other than YOUR Country. Live in stone age since you can't think anything else.

    If you would have taken initiative like this and spent time like this we all would have GC by now. You are preaching to wrong people here. We won't be brain washed by your BS.

    girlfriend CS Constantine - Web csconstantine. Blog de csconstantine-25
  • Blog de csconstantine-25

  • Macaca
    05-11 05:28 PM
    The 'Education' Mantra ( By Thomas Sowell | Investor's Business Daily

    One of the sad and dangerous signs of our times is how many people are enthralled by words, without bothering to look at the realities behind those words.

    One of those words that many people seldom look behind is "education." But education can cover anything from courses on nuclear physics to courses on baton twirling.

    Unfortunately, an increasing proportion of American education, whether in the schools or in the colleges and universities, is closer to the baton twirling end of the spectrum than toward the nuclear physics end. Even reputable colleges are increasingly teaching things that students should have learned in high school.

    We don't have a backlog of serious students trying to take serious courses. If you look at the fields in which American students specialize in colleges and universities, those fields are heavily weighted toward the soft end of the spectrum.

    When it comes to postgraduate study in tough fields like math and science, you often find foreign students at American universities receiving more of such degrees than do Americans.

    A recent headline in the Chronicle of Higher Education said: "Master's in English: Will Mow Lawns." It featured a man with that degree who has gone into the landscaping business because there is no great demand for people with Master's degrees in English.

    Too many of the people coming out of even our most prestigious academic institutions graduate with neither the skills to be economically productive nor the intellectual development to make them discerning citizens and voters.

    Students can graduate from some of the most prestigious institutions in the country, without ever learning anything about science, mathematics, economics or anything else that would make them either a productive contributor to the economy or an informed voter who can see through political rhetoric.

    On the contrary, people with such "education" are often more susceptible to demagoguery than the population at large. Nor is this a situation peculiar to America. In countries around the world, people with degrees in soft subjects have been sources of political unrest, instability and even mass violence.

    Nor is this a new phenomenon. A scholarly history of 19th century Prague referred to "the well-educated but underemployed" Czech young men who promoted ethnic polarization there-- a polarization that not only continued, but escalated, in the 20th century to produce bitter tragedies for both Czechs and Germans.

    In other central European countries, between the two World Wars a rising class of newly educated young people bitterly resented having to compete with better qualified Jews in the universities and with Jews already established in business and the professions. Anti-Semitic policies and violence were the result.

    It was much the same story in Asia, where successful minorities like the Chinese in Malaysia were resented by newly educated Malays without either the educational or business skills to compete with them. These Malaysians demanded-- and got-- heavily discriminatory laws and policies against the Chinese.

    Similar situations developed at various times in Nigeria, Romania, Sri Lanka, Hungary and India, among other places.

    Many Third World countries have turned out so many people with diplomas, but without meaningful skills, that "the educated unemployed" became a cliche among people who study such countries. This has not only become a personal problem for those individuals who have been educated, or half-educated, without acquiring any ability to fulfill their rising expectations, it has become a major economic and political problem for these countries.

    Such people have proven to be ideal targets for demagogues promoting polarization and strife. We in the United States are still in the early stages of that process. But you need only visit campuses where whole departments feature soft courses preaching a sense of victimhood and resentment, and see the consequences in racial and ethnic polarization on campus.

    There are too many other soft courses that allow students to spend years in college without becoming educated in any real sense.

    We don't need more government "investment" to produce more of such "education." Lofty words like "investment" should not blind us to the ugly reality of political porkbarrel spending.

    Tiger Mom: Here's how to reshape U.S. education ( By Amy Chua | USA Today
    The American Idea: An Open Letter To College Graduates ( By Carl Schramm | Forbes
    The Myth of American Exceptionalism ( By Richard Cohen | Washington Post
    The Role of Economics in an Imperfect World ( By EDWARD L. GLAESER | New York Times
    Where the Jobs Were Lost ( By CASEY B. MULLIGAN | New York Times
    No, We Are Not a Nation of Hamburger Flippers ( By Elizabeth MacDonald | Fox Business
    Multinationals Dump U.S. Workers for Foreign Labor ( By JAMES C. COOPER | The Fiscal Times
    California Economy Gets a Jolt From Tech Hiring ( By JIM CARLTON | Wall Street Journal

    hairstyles JsmSkikda-CsConstantine / le csconstantine. Re: Ultras Loca Ragazzi (CS
  • Re: Ultras Loca Ragazzi (CS

  • americandesi
    08-06 04:29 PM
    Bihari professor
    This is a true incident which happened in a college. A new lecturer (also a Bihari professor) was unable to control the class. The guys were just talking without giving any attention to him. So he wanted to send a guy
    who was creating most of the problem out. But he doesn't know how to put it in English.
    He went near the guy. Shouted "follow me" .The guy followed him till he went out of the class. Now the lecturer turned back and again shouted
    "Don't follow me" and went inside the class..........

    #Inside the Class :
    * Open the doors of the window. Let the atmosphere come in.
    * Open the doors of the window. Let the Air Force come in.
    * Cut an apple into two halves - take the bigger half.
    * Shhh...Quiet, boys...the principal just passed away in the corridor
    * You, meet me behind the class. ( meaning AFTER the class )..
    * Both of u three, get out of the class.
    * Close the doors of the windows please .. I have winter in my nose today...
    * Take Copper Wire of any metal especially of Silver.....
    * Take 5 cm wire of any length....

    # About his family :
    * I have two daughters. Both of them are girls...(?)

    # At the ground :
    * All of you, stand in a straight circle.
    * There is no wind in the balloon.

    # To a boy, angrily :
    * I talk, he talk, why you middle middle talk ?

    # Giving a punishment :
    * You, rotate the ground four times...
    * You, go and under-stand the tree...
    * You three of you, stand together separately.
    * Why are you late - say YES or NO ....(?)

    # Sir at his best :
    Sir had once gone to a film with his wife. By chance, he happened to see one of our boys at the theatre, though the boy did not see them.
    So the next day at school... (to that boy) - " Yesterday I saw you WITH MY
    WIFE at the Cinema Theatre."

    12-27 02:15 AM
    I am ambivalent about eliminating Pakistan's nuclear program. On the one hand, you are right that nukes in the hands of militants is a scary scenario. (Ironically, you increase the probability of the nukes falling into wrong hands by having a destabilizing war between Pakistan and India.)
    But then equally scary is a defenseless Pakistan against India. Atleast, thats our perception.
    I don't know who all controls the nukes. The army is certainly one part of it.

    Don't worry, those nukes don't work. Pakistan first tried to test its devices in 1998. And after much "troubleshooting", the home grown devices did not explode in 1998. Chinese had to step in for face saving to explode 5 devices just for sake of exploding "nukes". The reality is, those arrow shaped hollow metal shells are risky because that metal is heavy. Other than the weight of the metal shell, there is no risk from Pakistani "nukes" :p

    12-29 08:07 PM
    Watch Out for Russian Wild Card in Asia-Pacific ( By John Lee | Australian

    Just before we were tucking into Christmas turkey and plum pudding, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev met his Indian counterpart Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in New Delhi to reaffirm what the Russian leader called a "privileged partnership" between the two countries.

    By contrast, Australia sees little role for Moscow in the future Asian balance of power, where the former superpower was mentioned in passing only twice in the 2009 defence white paper.

    But other countries are not making the same mistake.

    If India is the "swing state" in Asia's future balance of power, as a prominent CIA 2005 report put it, New Delhi is well aware that Russia remains the wild card in the region.

    Medvedev and Singh signed more than 20 agreements ranging from agreements to supply India with natural gas, reaffirming a commitment for a third Indian nuclear power plant to be built by Russian engineers, and the signing of a contract for the joint development of between 250-300 fifth generation fighter aircraft.

    Over the next 15 years, it is estimated that every second overseas nuclear reactor built by the Russians will be in India, while New Delhi could be the destination for more than half of all Russian arms exports in the next five years.

    It is no surprise that Russia is pulling out all the stops to court India.

    After all, its two main exports - energy and arms - are exactly what India needs.

    There is a long economic and strategic history of partnership between the two countries that began in the 1950s when the former Soviet Union and India became allies.

    But just as Moscow sees new opportunities in a rising India, New Delhi still sees value in a declining Russia.

    The problem for Russia is not just the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and a patchy commitment to economic reform after the Boris Yeltsin era, but a declining population.

    Russia has experienced periods of dramatic population decline before, from 1917-23, 1933-34 and 1941-46.

    Since 1992, and despite the absence of famine or war, Russian deaths have exceeded births by a staggering 13 million.

    With 141 million people now, numbers could be as low as 120 million by 2030.

    Nevertheless, there are strong reasons to believe that Russia can play the wildcard role in Asia's future balance of power.

    First, the common wisdom that Russia is moving closer to China in order to counterbalance America and its European and Asian allies and partners is incorrect, meaning that the Russian wild card is still very much in play.

    While Russia is preoccupied with regaining its influence in parts of eastern Europe, Moscow is also warily watching China's unauthorised movements into Siberia and the Far East.

    Beijing is about six times closer to the port city of Vladivostok than is Moscow, which has very weak administrative control over its eastern territories.

    Already, an estimated 200,000 to 500,000 Chinese nationals have illegally settled in these oil, gas and timber-rich areas.

    Beijing is also tempted by Siberia's freshwater supply, given that China already has severe shortages throughout the country.

    The Russian Far East is inhabited by only six million people, while the three provinces in northeast China have about 110 million Chinese inhabitants. By 2020, more than 100 million Chinese will live less than 100km to the south of these Russian territories, whose population will then number between five million and 10 million.

    As Medvedev recently admitted, if Russia does not secure its presence in the Far East, it could eventually "lose everything" to the Chinese.

    The point is that Russia will have as much reason to balance against China's rise as encouraging it. As the godfather of geopolitics, Nicholas Spykman, put it, the key is to control the Rimland (Western, Southern and Eastern) Eurasia.

    A small handful of long-sighted strategists in Washington, Tokyo, Moscow and New Delhi see potential for a grand alliance of convenience that can effectively constrain Chinese influence in Central, South and East Asia. How Russia plays its strategic cards in this context will go a long way in shaping Eurasia.

    That Russia may choose to tilt the balance against China in the future is also backed by diverging world views of these two countries.

    Should China continue its rise, Washington, Tokyo, New Delhi and Moscow will seek a favourable multipolar balance of power in Asia, even if it remains under American leadership.

    By contrast, China sees the coming regional and world order as a bipolar one defined by US-China competition, with powers such as the EU countries, Japan, India and Russia relegated to the second tier, something that is very difficult for a proud "Asian" power such as Russia to accept.

    Second, a declining Russia retains significant national and institutional strengths. For example, Russia will remain a legitimate nuclear military power with a large and pre-existing nuclear arsenal. It is also a genuine energy superpower and a global leader in advanced weaponry technologies.

    These factors all but guarantee Moscow a prominent position in the future strategic-military balance.

    Furthermore, Russia will retain its veto as a permanent member of the Security Council.

    Given the difficulty of reforming the council, Moscow will continue to exercise a disproportionate influence through the UN, even if it continues to decline as a country.

    Finally, Russia has that indefinable quality of seeing itself as a natural great power. This all adds up to Russia remaining a big player in Asia, with significant ability to influence, disrupt and complicate the plans of other great powers, even if it can no longer be dominant.

    New Delhi and Beijing believe that Moscow is well position to remain Asia's wild card.

    Australia should prepare for this as well.

    John Lee is a foreign policy fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies in Sydney and a visiting fellow at the Hudson Institute in Washington, DC.