Green.Tech
05-26 09:40 AM
Bump
wallpaper Jaden smith lyrics , never
paskal
07-17 07:40 PM
IV is basically saying EB3 folks stop all initiatives. Rather convert to EB2. It's comfortable to say IV core and decisionmakers are composed of EB2 folks.
you must know something i don't.
aman kapoor is the president and founder of iv- of course you can argue he now has his GC but that fact is he is still the heart and soul of iv and runs the organization on a day to day basis. he is EB3.
the "core group" does not much exist in practical terms right now. there is instead a large "leaders group" that helps coordinate actions and strategy.
this group has a lot of active members- and i find it "comfortable" to say that the majority are EB3. which may actually count for something- since i actually do know somethings you don't :-)
no one stops anyone from doing anything. but whatever you do (and yes you actually have to DO, not just keep talking), has to have a sound basis. Many of the suggestions put forward have flaws, and actually papu and others have been pretty helpful in politely helping to point those out and suggesting changes. of course reddog took objection even to that! incidentally, just for the record, you may want to look at pappu's profile . HE IS EB3!
so what do you want anyway? should we go tell USCIS that leftover Gc from EB2 ROW should go to EB3 ROW instead of EB2 I/C? what about the 28.6% that should belong to EB2? and since you are EB3 I- how does this help you in any way? or should we tell them to stop the preference catogories in INA and make EB1=EB2=Eb3? somehow i do not think that is going to fly.
where were you when USCIS implemented vertical spillover in 2006 and left EB2 I in a U state while giving EB2 Gc numbers to EB3 ROW?
did you object then? did you start a campaign? did EB2 I folks here start saying that iv did not care about them?
in 2007 ordinarily, (like 06) EB2 I and EB3 I would have got only 2,800 GC each. because of iv's efforts in reversing the july bulletin, EB3 I got a huge number of Gc instead. many more than any other category. i don't remember anyone else standing up and saying that this was unfair and that iv is all about EB3I. and that's what a lot of anti iv folks say. that iv is all about EB3 India. so this is very ironical.
and i see here a comment that every campaign has been bad for EB3 india.
i guess july reversal was bad. i guess the campaign for recapture is bad. and the 2 year EAD is bad too. not to mention the gathering support to end country quotas.
you opened my eyes :-)
you must know something i don't.
aman kapoor is the president and founder of iv- of course you can argue he now has his GC but that fact is he is still the heart and soul of iv and runs the organization on a day to day basis. he is EB3.
the "core group" does not much exist in practical terms right now. there is instead a large "leaders group" that helps coordinate actions and strategy.
this group has a lot of active members- and i find it "comfortable" to say that the majority are EB3. which may actually count for something- since i actually do know somethings you don't :-)
no one stops anyone from doing anything. but whatever you do (and yes you actually have to DO, not just keep talking), has to have a sound basis. Many of the suggestions put forward have flaws, and actually papu and others have been pretty helpful in politely helping to point those out and suggesting changes. of course reddog took objection even to that! incidentally, just for the record, you may want to look at pappu's profile . HE IS EB3!
so what do you want anyway? should we go tell USCIS that leftover Gc from EB2 ROW should go to EB3 ROW instead of EB2 I/C? what about the 28.6% that should belong to EB2? and since you are EB3 I- how does this help you in any way? or should we tell them to stop the preference catogories in INA and make EB1=EB2=Eb3? somehow i do not think that is going to fly.
where were you when USCIS implemented vertical spillover in 2006 and left EB2 I in a U state while giving EB2 Gc numbers to EB3 ROW?
did you object then? did you start a campaign? did EB2 I folks here start saying that iv did not care about them?
in 2007 ordinarily, (like 06) EB2 I and EB3 I would have got only 2,800 GC each. because of iv's efforts in reversing the july bulletin, EB3 I got a huge number of Gc instead. many more than any other category. i don't remember anyone else standing up and saying that this was unfair and that iv is all about EB3I. and that's what a lot of anti iv folks say. that iv is all about EB3 India. so this is very ironical.
and i see here a comment that every campaign has been bad for EB3 india.
i guess july reversal was bad. i guess the campaign for recapture is bad. and the 2 year EAD is bad too. not to mention the gathering support to end country quotas.
you opened my eyes :-)
extra_mint
01-15 03:11 AM
Well majority of the people on this thread and forum is finding this as just cause, I am totally for it.
However no one is sure if this logic will hold water. Well none of us are lawyers, thus our arguments for or against doesn't hold. Someone said at the start of this thread that let's consult some big lawyers.
People are ready to contribute (including me) and I personally think that IV Core will be the best forum to take this up with lawyers. They already have an existing network, have folks that have participated in efforts related to legal immigration,
To IV Core
--------------
Country Quota is single biggest reason for retrogression, Have you guys (in the past) discussed with lawyers if removing Country Quota for EMPLOYMENT BASED can be legally challenged ??
If this has not been discussed do you guys think some one from lawyer forum (one that is on IV) can research on this ??
If above research shows things can be challenged then let's get it challenged through some esteemed lawyers !!
Also since so many people (once again including me) are ready to contribute, IV can become forum to raise money for this Legal challenge...like another pool.
I am sure people have talked, discussed about removing country quota in the past. However I am not sure if serious effort have been made to see if this can be challenged and that is the focus we all should have.
However no one is sure if this logic will hold water. Well none of us are lawyers, thus our arguments for or against doesn't hold. Someone said at the start of this thread that let's consult some big lawyers.
People are ready to contribute (including me) and I personally think that IV Core will be the best forum to take this up with lawyers. They already have an existing network, have folks that have participated in efforts related to legal immigration,
To IV Core
--------------
Country Quota is single biggest reason for retrogression, Have you guys (in the past) discussed with lawyers if removing Country Quota for EMPLOYMENT BASED can be legally challenged ??
If this has not been discussed do you guys think some one from lawyer forum (one that is on IV) can research on this ??
If above research shows things can be challenged then let's get it challenged through some esteemed lawyers !!
Also since so many people (once again including me) are ready to contribute, IV can become forum to raise money for this Legal challenge...like another pool.
I am sure people have talked, discussed about removing country quota in the past. However I am not sure if serious effort have been made to see if this can be challenged and that is the focus we all should have.
2011 Never Say Never (Ft. Jaden
mallickarjunreddy
09-25 08:49 AM
Hi - I have had a very bad experience with Fragomen, everything was filed correctly but the way they treat their client is pathetic. I have heard a lot of people are victims of this big corporation, lets get together to fix this.
I have a deja vu
cause when i wanted to bring to the notice similar BAD lawyers nobody paid attention . I put in time to create a blog and if you would have researched on immigrationvoice u wont have been in this position the first place
http://badimmigrationattorneys.blogspot.com/
its 3rd on my list
I have a deja vu
cause when i wanted to bring to the notice similar BAD lawyers nobody paid attention . I put in time to create a blog and if you would have researched on immigrationvoice u wont have been in this position the first place
http://badimmigrationattorneys.blogspot.com/
its 3rd on my list
more...
Devils_Advocate
03-06 02:54 AM
They wrote "ass" instead of "all". Is it a freudian slip or they are deliberately calling us names on the sly :)
Dude, if you see the keyboard, s and L are on oppposite ends, so no way Ass was a typo on ALL, LMAO, USCIS taking out their frustration on ass i mean us ;)
Dude, if you see the keyboard, s and L are on oppposite ends, so no way Ass was a typo on ALL, LMAO, USCIS taking out their frustration on ass i mean us ;)
paskal
09-22 11:45 AM
... and it also means those who do not want to attent are free not to attend.
c'mon gc_lover let's not get into a self defeating spiral. i believe you are a rational person with good motivation to help reach the goals that iv has set.
let's find ways forward. how can i help you get more involved with local stuff?
c'mon gc_lover let's not get into a self defeating spiral. i believe you are a rational person with good motivation to help reach the goals that iv has set.
let's find ways forward. how can i help you get more involved with local stuff?
more...
rajttu
05-27 05:28 PM
My first $100 contribution
2010 justin , abr never Lyrics
waiting4gc
06-13 07:12 PM
This is excellent news and we should step back and celebrate for a moment, however we need to concentrate on IV goals.
I am sure we will have to fight retrogression soon again and other issues, probably name check etc. Please continue contributions to IV...
GO IV..
I am sure we will have to fight retrogression soon again and other issues, probably name check etc. Please continue contributions to IV...
GO IV..
more...
ak27
02-26 10:12 AM
You should make an appointment with info pass and carry all needed documents with you. They should be able to help. It is not perfect solution but it works. My wife had applied her AP which did not show up even after three months, in mean time we have had an emergency. I made an appointment with info pass, it was approved within a day. It is worth a try.
hair Justin Bieber: Never Say Never
kanaihya
09-25 11:09 AM
leave Fragomen alone..man..if he visit this forum he will get heart attack ..
more...
Lasantha
06-19 04:48 PM
See the bold text. Because the bill is yanked out, amendments are added to the bill and now it is going to be put back as a new bill.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/2007legislation_2.cfm
The Senate's Second Secret Immigration Bill
by The Heritage Foundation
FYI
For weeks, Americans were told that there are only two options for dealing with the nation's illegal immigration problem: stay with the status quo or accept a "grand bargain"--a tenuous behind-closed-doors deal, first made public by The Heritage Foundation, which contained nearly 800 pages of flawed policies. In the face of overwhelming criticism from all sides, this legislation was withdrawn from the Senate.
Now, an altogether new bill (S. 1639) has been introduced by Senators Ted Kennedy and Arlen Specter. It seems to incorporate the previous legislation, with some amendments. After it is read into the Senate calendar on Wednesday, the Majority Leader will be able to proceed to consider this legislation anew at any time; debate is likely to follow later this week, with a final vote very soon thereafter.
This schedule will afford lawmakers even less time for consideration and deliberation than they had before. It will deny them the various procedures long associated with America's deliberative lawmaking process--hearings, testimony, committee debate and amendments, floor debate, and the possibility of further amendments. Instead, according to reports, this legislation will proceed based on an altogether new and expedited procedure designed for the sole purpose of forcing the bill's many ill-conceived policies over legitimate minority objections.
As it has before, for the sake of open deliberation and public education, The Heritage Foundation is making this legislation publicly available to encourage widespread debate and discussion. Heritage Foundation analysts will be reading this legislation and considering its implications--as will everyone outside the confines of the narrow group that conceived it--as quickly as possible.
So if this bill is introduced as a new one with a new bill number, does that May 15th provision still stand? Or is it now gonna be June 19th ?
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/2007legislation_2.cfm
The Senate's Second Secret Immigration Bill
by The Heritage Foundation
FYI
For weeks, Americans were told that there are only two options for dealing with the nation's illegal immigration problem: stay with the status quo or accept a "grand bargain"--a tenuous behind-closed-doors deal, first made public by The Heritage Foundation, which contained nearly 800 pages of flawed policies. In the face of overwhelming criticism from all sides, this legislation was withdrawn from the Senate.
Now, an altogether new bill (S. 1639) has been introduced by Senators Ted Kennedy and Arlen Specter. It seems to incorporate the previous legislation, with some amendments. After it is read into the Senate calendar on Wednesday, the Majority Leader will be able to proceed to consider this legislation anew at any time; debate is likely to follow later this week, with a final vote very soon thereafter.
This schedule will afford lawmakers even less time for consideration and deliberation than they had before. It will deny them the various procedures long associated with America's deliberative lawmaking process--hearings, testimony, committee debate and amendments, floor debate, and the possibility of further amendments. Instead, according to reports, this legislation will proceed based on an altogether new and expedited procedure designed for the sole purpose of forcing the bill's many ill-conceived policies over legitimate minority objections.
As it has before, for the sake of open deliberation and public education, The Heritage Foundation is making this legislation publicly available to encourage widespread debate and discussion. Heritage Foundation analysts will be reading this legislation and considering its implications--as will everyone outside the confines of the narrow group that conceived it--as quickly as possible.
So if this bill is introduced as a new one with a new bill number, does that May 15th provision still stand? Or is it now gonna be June 19th ?
hot say never lyrics ft jaden
poorslumdog
03-28 02:57 PM
Well Well Well ................
getgreensoon1 with you being a junior memeber how on the earth were you able to get a quote of my post if all my post have been stopped and nothing i post gets on any page.
Remember if you make any edits then it reflects on your birth.:D
My god...you are back. May be IV should ban even your ip. Let the fight begin.
getgreensoon1 with you being a junior memeber how on the earth were you able to get a quote of my post if all my post have been stopped and nothing i post gets on any page.
Remember if you make any edits then it reflects on your birth.:D
My god...you are back. May be IV should ban even your ip. Let the fight begin.
more...
house Justin+ieber+never+say+
legalVoice
07-06 12:57 PM
pass it around...it will make us forget our problems for a while
Good one :-)
:p
Well it would be easier to work with Oracle, Microsoft etc and get their support and provide your support to them.
Good one :-)
:p
Well it would be easier to work with Oracle, Microsoft etc and get their support and provide your support to them.
tattoo justin, ieber, ft Info title
go_guy123
08-06 03:38 PM
You stand a better chance of getting it through your kids if they are citizens than getting it through EB3. There are a few options to get green card faster. Canada is not one of them.
1. Get a Ph.D, get a job in a univ and apply in EB-1.
2. Get a MBA and get a management job and apply in EB-1.
3. Become a religious worker in some temple and apply in the religious worker category.
PhD is no trivial thing. One does a phd only if one is truly motivated.
Plus PhD doesn't guarantee EB1 either.
Since 2001 downturn PhD graduates are having a hard time getting faculty positions
as education budgets haven't increased much and therefore faculty positions are very hard to get unless you are from a top school like UIUC, Stanford etc.
You will have to do 1-2 years of post doc at 30K per annum salary to land a
faculty position.
So you are looking at 6 (phd) years + 2 (post doc)years to land a job as faculty
and after that it might take1 years to get GC.
Living on 6 years of 18K per annum salary(Phd) + 2 years of 30K per annum salary (post doc) is no easy.
You are better off working on H1B . At least you will earn more and have a better life.
1. Get a Ph.D, get a job in a univ and apply in EB-1.
2. Get a MBA and get a management job and apply in EB-1.
3. Become a religious worker in some temple and apply in the religious worker category.
PhD is no trivial thing. One does a phd only if one is truly motivated.
Plus PhD doesn't guarantee EB1 either.
Since 2001 downturn PhD graduates are having a hard time getting faculty positions
as education budgets haven't increased much and therefore faculty positions are very hard to get unless you are from a top school like UIUC, Stanford etc.
You will have to do 1-2 years of post doc at 30K per annum salary to land a
faculty position.
So you are looking at 6 (phd) years + 2 (post doc)years to land a job as faculty
and after that it might take1 years to get GC.
Living on 6 years of 18K per annum salary(Phd) + 2 years of 30K per annum salary (post doc) is no easy.
You are better off working on H1B . At least you will earn more and have a better life.
more...
pictures say never lyrics ft jaden
Nagireddi
07-14 06:19 PM
Just based on the definition given by DOL I decided Level III and Level IV to be EB2. Besides I am EB2 and my wage level is Level IV. I agree it is hard to conclude the cat based on wage level, I saw there were some Senior welders in Level III as well as Vice presidents of the companies. Quite a contradiction isn't it!!
Does these levels matters, when it comes to adjudication. please anybody clarify my doubt?:confused:
Does these levels matters, when it comes to adjudication. please anybody clarify my doubt?:confused:
dresses say never lyrics ft jaden
aupadh
01-26 03:27 PM
Well it seems the idea to get a Stimulus for 2008 for people having spouses with ITIN is nearing dead end (no action). Now the government is planning another stimulus. I think we should work on taking the necessary steps to prevent the same happening this year (being dropped out). I think we should raise awareness and write to all people including President Obama.
Ideas / comments?
Ideas / comments?
more...
makeup say never lyrics ft jaden
ncrtpMay2004
03-26 12:23 PM
Just to add.... porting process is legit for EB-2 as well. EB-1 is current now. :p
***
The Indian CRAB is the story of how a fisherman kept a basket with crabs, uncovered. When asked, he replied " They�re Indian Crabs - If one tries to climb out, the others will pull it back in, hence there�s no need for a lid "
***
The Indian CRAB - Contribute - MSNIndia (http://content.msn.co.in/MSNContribute/Story.aspx?PageID=222e21f3-f981-4a9c-9f9b-a5706f249433)
Porting process is a legit process and for well qualified EB-3 india folks thats the only ray of Hope.
You can rant about it but noone going to stop the porting process becaue the folks who initially filed under EB-3 are now eligible to get Job promotions , new roles and responsibilities in their Career and in some cases new Sr. Job positions which are qualified EB-2. By the way they do file new PERM labor and new I-140, it is not a automatic qualification just based on number of years waiting in the endless EB-3 india queue.
Under the current circumstances where EB-3 india doesnt get any spillover numbers or any such relief like VISA recapture bill, do you expect them to go behind the lines with new EB-2 PD? What about the wait period in the backlog centres, in the PERM process and for few I140 stage waiting period? Its the law and people are following it. You can try porting to EB1 if you are qualified enough and port your EB-2 PD to EB-1.
Just because you are qualified initially for EB-2 doesnt mean others are inferior and they are not eligible to port to EB-2.
***
The Indian CRAB is the story of how a fisherman kept a basket with crabs, uncovered. When asked, he replied " They�re Indian Crabs - If one tries to climb out, the others will pull it back in, hence there�s no need for a lid "
***
The Indian CRAB - Contribute - MSNIndia (http://content.msn.co.in/MSNContribute/Story.aspx?PageID=222e21f3-f981-4a9c-9f9b-a5706f249433)
Porting process is a legit process and for well qualified EB-3 india folks thats the only ray of Hope.
You can rant about it but noone going to stop the porting process becaue the folks who initially filed under EB-3 are now eligible to get Job promotions , new roles and responsibilities in their Career and in some cases new Sr. Job positions which are qualified EB-2. By the way they do file new PERM labor and new I-140, it is not a automatic qualification just based on number of years waiting in the endless EB-3 india queue.
Under the current circumstances where EB-3 india doesnt get any spillover numbers or any such relief like VISA recapture bill, do you expect them to go behind the lines with new EB-2 PD? What about the wait period in the backlog centres, in the PERM process and for few I140 stage waiting period? Its the law and people are following it. You can try porting to EB1 if you are qualified enough and port your EB-2 PD to EB-1.
Just because you are qualified initially for EB-2 doesnt mean others are inferior and they are not eligible to port to EB-2.
girlfriend justin bieber never say never
delax
07-15 05:18 PM
How we are getting 50k is like this.
1) EB1 Over Flow (50% of EB1 was unused last year) 46k/2= 23k
2) EB2 Over Flow , this number is still fuzzy. But lets say around 10k.
3) EB2 India has quota of 3500.
So approx 40k.
Thanks for the post. However I read testimony that said more than 80% of EB visas have been used up. That leaves only 28k (20% of 140k) at most as spill over for Fiscal 2008. Thoughts?
1) EB1 Over Flow (50% of EB1 was unused last year) 46k/2= 23k
2) EB2 Over Flow , this number is still fuzzy. But lets say around 10k.
3) EB2 India has quota of 3500.
So approx 40k.
Thanks for the post. However I read testimony that said more than 80% of EB visas have been used up. That leaves only 28k (20% of 140k) at most as spill over for Fiscal 2008. Thoughts?
hairstyles say never lyrics ft jaden
rkumar18
07-05 11:36 AM
What a bunch of morins we are. We are calling USCIS to find out if they are going to accept our applications that were sent on Jul 2nd 7 55 am and Jul 2nd 9 01 am will be accepted. Lord have some mercy on us and give us some brains to read the USCIS update. Damn it. The morons who answer the phone lines do not know jack about W T F is going on. Thats why you were being put on hold. Stop calling USCIS crazily.
I guess they(morons, per your definition) are all techincally correct based on past memo's explaining USCIS stand on postmark dates,last working day in a month rule, the time at which the application was received(the revised bulletin was not yet published) etc etc
no matter what, the decision of accepting the applications is at USCIS's discretion.They can reject applications received in the last week of June as well if they want to.Period.
I guess they(morons, per your definition) are all techincally correct based on past memo's explaining USCIS stand on postmark dates,last working day in a month rule, the time at which the application was received(the revised bulletin was not yet published) etc etc
no matter what, the decision of accepting the applications is at USCIS's discretion.They can reject applications received in the last week of June as well if they want to.Period.
angelfire76
02-24 05:41 PM
I am finding it difficult understanding what author meant here...
Can some one please help me understanding the text below from (paragraph 8)
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0225-endelman.shtm
USCIS does not have to define "immediate availability" strictly on the cut-off dates listed in the Visa Bulletin. Rather, both State and CIS could post estimated "qualifying dates" on their websites so that, precisely as now happens in a consular case, USCIS would now allow pre-filing of adjustment applications so that applicants could begin to assemble the necessary documentation and send in their I-485 packages so that USCIS could conduct necessary checks and get the case ready for formal submission when the priority date is reached. Only at that point would CIS formally request an immigrant visa number from the State Department. Not until then would the adjustment of status be considered "filed". The beauty of this is that Congress need not lift a finger; all that need be done is for USCIS to modify the definition of filing contained in 8 CFR Sections 103.2 (a)(7) and 245.2(a)(2). If Congress wanted to ratify what the USCIS had done, it could certainly do so after the fact. Everything that we now consider to be the adjustment of status process could take place before the I-485 is "filed". Nothing could be simpler. The reason to seek Congressional modification of INA 245(a) is not because it is only way forward but because, by enshrining such a procedural benefit in the INA itself, it will be a much more secure right, one not subject to administrative whim or unilateral repeal. This process would not only afford the Visa Office a more accurate picture of adjustment demand but it holds out the potential of drastically slashing processing times. Far from granting adjustment applicants any special or unfair advantage, the use of qualifying dates as a way to define immediate visa availability would serve to harmonize the green card process in and out of the United States. Clearly, close and constant coordination between the Visa Office and USCIS would be required and integration of this procedural innovation with the Child Status Protection Act is transparently necessary. Given the obvious and not insignificant benefits, any transitional angst is surely worth the effort.
Does it mean pre filing can be done through executive power?
Thank you.
The suggestion here is that it is pre-filing without pre-filing (if that makes any sense) i.e. it will enable USCIS to "look ahead" into a candidate's eligibility for 485 approval without providing any of the benefits (EAD,AP) that comes with filing a 485. It is supposed to help USCIS drastically cut 485 processing times with minimal upheaval, not give us any benefits.
Can some one please help me understanding the text below from (paragraph 8)
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0225-endelman.shtm
USCIS does not have to define "immediate availability" strictly on the cut-off dates listed in the Visa Bulletin. Rather, both State and CIS could post estimated "qualifying dates" on their websites so that, precisely as now happens in a consular case, USCIS would now allow pre-filing of adjustment applications so that applicants could begin to assemble the necessary documentation and send in their I-485 packages so that USCIS could conduct necessary checks and get the case ready for formal submission when the priority date is reached. Only at that point would CIS formally request an immigrant visa number from the State Department. Not until then would the adjustment of status be considered "filed". The beauty of this is that Congress need not lift a finger; all that need be done is for USCIS to modify the definition of filing contained in 8 CFR Sections 103.2 (a)(7) and 245.2(a)(2). If Congress wanted to ratify what the USCIS had done, it could certainly do so after the fact. Everything that we now consider to be the adjustment of status process could take place before the I-485 is "filed". Nothing could be simpler. The reason to seek Congressional modification of INA 245(a) is not because it is only way forward but because, by enshrining such a procedural benefit in the INA itself, it will be a much more secure right, one not subject to administrative whim or unilateral repeal. This process would not only afford the Visa Office a more accurate picture of adjustment demand but it holds out the potential of drastically slashing processing times. Far from granting adjustment applicants any special or unfair advantage, the use of qualifying dates as a way to define immediate visa availability would serve to harmonize the green card process in and out of the United States. Clearly, close and constant coordination between the Visa Office and USCIS would be required and integration of this procedural innovation with the Child Status Protection Act is transparently necessary. Given the obvious and not insignificant benefits, any transitional angst is surely worth the effort.
Does it mean pre filing can be done through executive power?
Thank you.
The suggestion here is that it is pre-filing without pre-filing (if that makes any sense) i.e. it will enable USCIS to "look ahead" into a candidate's eligibility for 485 approval without providing any of the benefits (EAD,AP) that comes with filing a 485. It is supposed to help USCIS drastically cut 485 processing times with minimal upheaval, not give us any benefits.
rongch60
06-26 02:35 PM
I just called and was asked for names and comments. I told her my personal experience: came 10 years ago, worked 5 years, approved I-140 2 years ago, stuck in the queue, working as a scientist at Stanford University, and can not apply fund and have difficulty attending international conference. She asked the state I am from. I strongly urge TX members to call. It is very easy.
No comments:
Post a Comment