VSC Processing

[Karaoke 0]

Do you come from any sort of ex-Communist country where civil society and the government were not related?

Civil Society is NOT the government, but civil society INFLUENCES the government and vice-versa.

So you are suggest you are a-moral, you do not bring in your personal moral agenda when you make legislation as a politician? As a voter when you vote? Come on, be realistic.

I don't want to argue too much, you do not sound particularly well-versed in politics/history, but I'd like to suggest to you that 99% of the times, it has hardly anything to do with religions, be it Northern Ireland or Evangelical extremists. If I had to use your same shallowness of arguments, I'd tell you, what about the Revolutionary France? What about Communist Soviet Union? Does a lack of "religious moral" in government guarantee that legislation will be any better?

And I am atheist myself, but until you do not try to convert me, I do not mind if you bring forward even arguments and recommendations based on your moral believes. We all do that, consciously or not.

Now, back to USCIS!

My references are to a church (any church) playing a part in government, not civil society as you read it and wrote in your post.

I've seen what the 'religious right' has accomplished in my nation in the last 20 years or so. And I live with the human fallout of the Troubles in Northern Ireland. I'm simply diametrically opposed to people pushing their moral agenda into legislation. Especially when it is referred to as 'useful'.

You are easy to get offended!

May I know why you would tak offence if someone said that in another country a church plays a part in civil society?

I don't think he suggested the Catholic Church should do anything in the US (or anywhere else), nor did he try to make you join any specific confession.

Highway Star - Your comment about it being 'useful' for the Catholic Church to interject itself into constitutional matters is what elicited my response. I have a distinct aversion to these things. A constitution is just "le lettre de loi"; "l'esprit de loi" can be civil society, and in some countries, local communities and congregations/churches are actively part of civil society.

If you were offended by my reply, I apologize for that. But I was equally offended by your post.

[rebeccajo 14]

You are easy to get offended!

May I know why you would tak offence if someone said that in another country a church plays a part in civil society?

I don't think he suggested the Catholic Church should do anything in the US (or anywhere else), nor did he try to make you join any specific confession.

Highway Star - Your comment about it being 'useful' for the Catholic Church to interject itself into constitutional matters is what elicited my response. I have a distinct aversion to these things. A constitution is just "le lettre de loi"; "l'esprit de loi" can be civil society, and in some countries, local communities and congregations/churches are actively part of civil society.

If you were offended by my reply, I apologize for that. But I was equally offended by your post.

OK, first of all I am not a he, I am a she. I don't want to get into a fight with RJ, because I know better than to waste my time with people who think they are always right. However, there is a simple thing I'd like to say to her... Since she has researched the subject of immigration so extensively, I wonder why she didn't respond to the thread I started in the General K1 section, whose title was "A question for the experts". I could've benefited of her expertise in the matter, instead of having to listen to uncalled-for lectures about the American constitution or the separation between Church and State.

Highway Star -

I didn't see your thread. It's that simple. I have a new job where I am unable to surf the web and have little time for VJ these days. I also don't go looking for threads calling for 'experts'. Your question didn't really require one anyway. At any rate, I have reponded to it if you care to go back.

I'm also far from always being 'right'.

[Dr. Nick 0]

Every time I check USCIS web page it's like 'OMG there were so many millions of applications, we didn't see it coming at all" and "we are hiring additional employees.... bla bla".. Is there anyone at USCIS analyzing trends and trying to predict the number of applications (it should not be that hard)....and exactly how many of those 1500 new employees have they hired so far since summer 2007? Why don't they post those numbers?

Those of you that found yourself in my previous post, well it was you who thought that I was referring to your posts, its up to you if you find yourselves among the 'naysayers' I mentioned.

I don't think that the citizens of any EU country would ever put up with what we have to put up here in the US with USCIS, there would be an outrage. I mentioned EU just as an example of developed nations and how they handle immigration, the fact is that most countries in the world have better and more efficient USCIS type of agency. Shouldn't we strive to improve our agency too, or put up with it forever?

May God help us if the immigration bill ever goes thru and there is additional 10+ millions of currently illegals that would need to be processed. I bet USCS is going to be 'surprised' when this happens....and have some other ####### on their website explaining the new delays....we should consider ourselves lucky for waiting only 10 months or so.... Is that how we want the USCIS to operate??

Dr Nick -

I'm fairly certain that you are more interested in railing against anything I post because I'm 'done' with the 'visajourney' than you are with holding a civil conversation. Elsewise you wouldn't call me a naysayer. You aren't reading what I'm saying. You're just posting.

You are correct, however, in your assertion that 'God help us' if another immigration bill is passed. Because our government is not likely to pass such a bill without further restricting family processes. If you put your ear closely to the ground, you will hear the rumblings of US Citizens who would like nothing better than to further restrict or entirely eliminate the entry of all foreign-born persons to our nation.

When our government next addresses the issue of immigration, read closely and listen carefully. You may find that the pie you have right now is far better than the slice you will be offered in the future.

LIke I said above: Those of you that found yourself in my previous post, well it was you who thought that I was referring to your posts, its up to you if you find yourselves among the 'naysayers' I mentioned.

Trust me, I am not losing sleep over anybody's time line except my own.

The first step in fixing a problem is admitting there is one. Justifying long processing times with security, visa fraud....doesn't add up because if I filed at the CSC I probably would have been done with my visa journey by now. It's a matter of improving the efficiency, and assigning priorities to certain types of applications. It's a matter of choice, I think 'charisma' said it much better above. The processing times are not given by God, or the Catholic Church for that matter, some people high up decided that this is how the USCIS is to operate. It's up to us if we want to put up with it or not, CSC is already on the right track with processing (albeit still far behind the other nations, but we can live with that), so it's a matter of improving things at the VSC. Simple as that. And people who constantly say 'well that's how it is, it can never change, put up with it, be happy it's not worse...." to me they are the naysayers as they simply negate any possibility to improve things, and ease the journey for thousands and thousands of AMERICAN families.

[rebeccajo 14]

Dr. Nick -

Where in the thread have I justified anything?

This is what I am saying to you about reading thoroughly what I write. I justify nothing. I explain.