VISA DENIED 2ND TIME!!!

[john_and_marlene 162]

Some people just cannot be helped.

Endless posts about how things aren't fair or how they "should" be handled aren't addressing the realities of the situation.

Continue on ... stick by what you "want" to be the case. Don't go to any extra trouble because you think it shouldn't be necessary. Feel better because so many are in the same boat. At least you will have the comforting feeling of righteousness in your defeat.

[Jenn! 918]

Some people just cannot be helped.

Endless posts about how things aren't fair or how they "should" be handled aren't addressing the realities of the situation.

Continue on ... stick by what you "want" to be the case. Don't go to any extra trouble because you think it shouldn't be necessary. Feel better because so many are in the same boat. At least you will have the comforting feeling of righteousness in your defeat.

I don't know where you're getting this from. Yes, there has been a lot of complaining around here, and rightfully so - some people have been waiting a very long time here to be with their loved one. But there has also been a lot of effort in trying to figure out how to achieve successful resolutions in some of the trickier cases. I think everyone around here HAS gone through extra trouble because we know it IS necessary, even if we believe that it SHOULDN'T be.

Please don't step into one thread and spout sarcastic remarks when you haven't been around through it all. You obviously haven't seen all of the constructive advice given around here as much if not more than the comiseration.

And maybe, it's not that some people can't be helped, it's just that they can't be helped by you and others with similar comments. What solutions have any of the non ME/NA posters propsed here? Instead it's been a whole lot of, "Well, that's the way it is. Why don't you try to find a solution instead of complaining? The CO has a right to deny you if she thinks you smell funny." Which I sort of take as a euphemism for, "I agree with the COs, you all are a bunch of shams, and you deserve what you get for playing with your boytoys."

Sure, we can all turn off our "emotion switch", ummmm...and then what??? What is everyone REALLY trying to say here?

[john_and_marlene 162]

Some people just cannot be helped.

Endless posts about how things aren't fair or how they "should" be handled aren't addressing the realities of the situation.

Continue on ... stick by what you "want" to be the case. Don't go to any extra trouble because you think it shouldn't be necessary. Feel better because so many are in the same boat. At least you will have the comforting feeling of righteousness in your defeat.

I don't know where you're getting this from. Yes, there has been a lot of complaining around here, and rightfully so - some people have been waiting a very long time here to be with their loved one. But there has also been a lot of effort in trying to figure out how to achieve successful resolutions in some of the trickier cases. I think everyone around here HAS gone through extra trouble because we know it IS necessary, even if we believe that it SHOULDN'T be.

Please don't step into one thread and spout sarcastic remarks when you haven't been around through it all. You obviously haven't seen all of the constructive advice given around here as much if not more than the comiseration.

And maybe, it's not that some people can't be helped, it's just that they can't be helped by you and others with similar comments. What solutions have any of the non ME/NA posters propsed here? Instead it's been a whole lot of, "Well, that's the way it is. Why don't you try to find a solution instead of complaining? The CO has a right to deny you if she thinks you smell funny." Which I sort of take as a euphemism for, "I agree with the COs, you all are a bunch of shams, and you deserve what you get for playing with your boytoys."

Sure, we can all turn off our "emotion switch", ummmm...and then what??? What is everyone REALLY trying to say here?

I have been following this thread...every post...and I've seen much advice given that was picked apart and disregarded ... perhaps because the advice was not what some wanted to hear... at least is appeared that way. What I have seen is a whole lot of debate about wheter this or that should be allowed by the CO... if it's right for them to make the judgements they do.

[Jenn! 918]

Some people just cannot be helped.

Endless posts about how things aren't fair or how they "should" be handled aren't addressing the realities of the situation.

Continue on ... stick by what you "want" to be the case. Don't go to any extra trouble because you think it shouldn't be necessary. Feel better because so many are in the same boat. At least you will have the comforting feeling of righteousness in your defeat.

I don't know where you're getting this from. Yes, there has been a lot of complaining around here, and rightfully so - some people have been waiting a very long time here to be with their loved one. But there has also been a lot of effort in trying to figure out how to achieve successful resolutions in some of the trickier cases. I think everyone around here HAS gone through extra trouble because we know it IS necessary, even if we believe that it SHOULDN'T be.

Please don't step into one thread and spout sarcastic remarks when you haven't been around through it all. You obviously haven't seen all of the constructive advice given around here as much if not more than the comiseration.

And maybe, it's not that some people can't be helped, it's just that they can't be helped by you and others with similar comments. What solutions have any of the non ME/NA posters propsed here? Instead it's been a whole lot of, "Well, that's the way it is. Why don't you try to find a solution instead of complaining? The CO has a right to deny you if she thinks you smell funny." Which I sort of take as a euphemism for, "I agree with the COs, you all are a bunch of shams, and you deserve what you get for playing with your boytoys."

Sure, we can all turn off our "emotion switch", ummmm...and then what??? What is everyone REALLY trying to say here?

I have been following this thread...every post...and I've seen much advice given that was picked apart and disregarded ... perhaps because the advice was not what some wanted to hear... at least is appeared that way. What I have seen is a whole lot of debate about wheter this or that should be allowed by the CO... if it's right for them to make the judgements they do.

Maybe true for this thread, but there have been so many others where we've discussed so many things that pertain to this issue. I don't think people that don't have to go through the ME/NA realize just how long and painful the journey can be. And you're right that we should be concentrating on what we can do not what what the CO's should or shouldn't do. I'm just pointing that we do do that, all the time. Sometimes it's just cathartic to mouth off against what you feel is an injustice.

Also, as for certain posts that may seem to you to have been picked apart and disregarded, it's because there is a history there from past threads and sometimes even other discussion groups. It's really hard to get the entire picture here by viewing just one of the threads.

Edited June 22, 2006 by jenn3539

[chiquita 0]

Untrue, denials must be from concrete evidence, not suspision or opinions!

Nope, not at all. However, they need to follow the law, not their thier opinions. This is the problem.

You missed the point.

EXCUSE ME BUT THE POINT IS....THE LAW! Not their opinions or suspicions.

Opinions as to whether the applicant meets the requirement as established by law and regulation, of which the ConOff is and should be aware.

OH ABSOLUTELY!!! How I wish this was true!!!!

Now, in the case of an alien at an interview, there are many factors involved: demeanour and comportment, answers to enquiries, evidence etc. All come into play. If a ConOff does not ask for evidence, it could be that something in the other factors triggered an impression, that he/she believes could not be overcome.

I SO DISAGREE!!! demeanour and comportment????????????? factors triggered an impression, that he/she believes could not be overcome?????????????????

OMG...GUILTY!!!! The law is very clear...the CO must have concrete evidence. Most Americans are nervous when in front of a goverment official, how much more is an immigrant??? We are talking LEGAL immigrants with all the paperwork right there in front of the CO. IMMPRESSION?? How on earth does that by pass the law??

However, not being there, and not being the ConOff all of this is simply idle speculation. If the ConOff in Chiquita's opening post stated that he/she did not believe the relationship is real, then one has to conclude one of two points:

YOU ARE RIGHT...idle speculation.

1) Either the applicant demonstrated genuine eligibility in all areas being reviewed as above, and the ConOff made a mistake and the applicant is eligible for the visa

MOST LIKELY

2) Or the ConOff picked up on something which lead him/her to believe that the applicant is not

PICKED UP??? USCIS found him to be eligible 2 times now!!! They will be married 3 years next month.

It would be wrong for us to determine which of the two was the case. It could be either.

IF THERE WAS REAL PROOF to the reason she denied him a visa I would agree. However, this couple has jumped every hoop thrown at them and still we have a CO who is using her "feelings".

WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[chiquita 0]

Why did you say "boy toy"?

Oh pleeeeeeeez........every womans dream....a real boy toy.

Dont tell me that you have never heard the expression. I have a real good friend that specializes in them. Her average length of a relationship is about two weeks.

WHAT A SICKOOOOO!!!!

I AM A WOMAN AND I HAVE NEVER EVER EVEN THOUGHT SUCH THINGS LET ALONE DREAMED OF THEM.

PERVERTED MALES THINK LIKE THIS. GET SOME HELP DUDE, YOU NEED IT.

I FEEL SORRY FOR YOUR WIFE.

YOUR FRIEND SOUNDS LIKE A VERY VERY HURTING WOMAN SEARCHING FOR SOMETHING SHE THINKS IS IN SEX. SORRY, BUT REAL LOVE IS NOT BASED ON SEX.

TAKE HER WITH YOU TO GET HELP!!! I CAN GIVE YOU A REFERRAL IF YOU NEED ONE.

ALSO, YOUR ####### IS NOT NEEDED HERE...GO SOMEWHERE ELSE TO SPEW YOUR HATRED. PEOPLE COME TO VJ FOR SUPPORT.

I can't seem to get the quotes to work, so I've put Zyggy's comments in italics

Actually this is not exactly the case, the CO has the authority to send a petition back to the USCIS if in their opinion there is evidence that if the USCIS had known it would have resulted in a different outcome on their end. The evidence does not need to be written, it can be empirical, cultural or otherwise...

From http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegram...grams_1415.html

4. Providing solid evidence of fraud or misrepresentation in a petition relationship may not be achievable in many cases, particularly those involving marriage or relationship fraud. The FAM guidance on revocations makes this point on several occasions -- posts seeking revocations must show the "factual and concrete reasons for revocation." BCIS has asked us to remind consular officers that revocation requests must provide solid, factual evidence of fraud or misrepresentation, evidence that is likely to stand up in a court of law. In the case of sham marriages, for example, 9 FAM 42.43 N2.2 notes that BCIS requires at the least either documentary evidence that money changed hands between the petitioner and beneficiary or factual evidence that would convince "a reasonable person" that the marriage was entered into solely to evade immigration laws. Without such evidence, BCIS will be unlikely to obtain a petition''s revocation if a petitioner chooses to contest a notice of intent to revoke.

So it can't just be cultural... Saying that muslim men don't marry older women certainly wouldn't hold up in a court of law.

From http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegram...grams_1388.html

6. In adjudicating visa cases involving petitions, posts should

bear in mind three important factors: A. the consular officer''s

role in the petition process is to determine if there is

substantial evidence relevant to petition validity not

previously considered by DHS, and not to merely readjudicate the

petition; B. the memo supporting the petition return must

clearly show the factual and concrete reasons for recommending

revocation (observations made by the consular officer cannot be

conclusive, speculative, equivocal or irrelevant) and; C.

consular officers must provide to the applicant in writing as

full an explanation as possible of the legal and factual basis

for the visa denial and petition return.

From http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegram...grams_1415.html

Where Congress has placed responsibility and

authority with DHS to determine whether the requirements for

status which are examined in the petition process have been met,

consular officers do not have the authority to question the

approval of petitions without specific evidence, generally

unavailable to DHS at the time of petition approval, that the

beneficiary may not be entitled to status (see 9 FAM 41.53, Note

2, 41.54 Note 3.2-2, 41.55 Note 8, 41.56 Note 10, 41.57 Note 6,

and 42.43 Note 2) due to fraud, changes in circumstances or

clear error on the part of DHS in approving the petition.

Conoffs should not assume that a petition should be revoked

simply because they would have reached a different decision if

adjudicating the petition.

Second of all, the rules say that the petitioner and beneficiary may present additional evidence attempting to refute the CO's decision prior to the petition's being sent back. Most of the Moroccan petitions, on the contrary, have been sent back the following day. It's pretty hard to present additional evidence when you don't know what the CO's objection is and they send the application back immediately.

Can you cite the provision where this is the case...

I saw this in the Foreign Affairs Manual

9 FAM 41.81 Notes

d. Consular officers should return the K-1 petition to DHS for reconsideration if not satisfied with respect to the bona fides of the relationship or if the petitioner indicates that he or she no longer intends to go forward with the marriage.

I see nothing in the FAM that states that the opportunity for more information must be given...

Again from http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegram...grams_1415.html

Rather, a consular officer should only seek revocation of the petition if the officer knows, or has reason to believe, that the petition approval was obtained through fraud, misrepresentation or other unlawful means, or that the beneficiary is not entitled to the status conferred by the petition. Petitions generally should not be returned unless the post uncovers new information not known to BCIS at the time of petition approval. The FAM cautions that posts should seek revocations "sparingly," to avoid inconveniencing the petitioners and applicants and to avoid creating an additional administrative burden for BCIS.

and

VO supports this use of 221(g) with IV petitions, as returning a petition based on suspicion alone is not appropriate, and providing the applicant an opportunity to address post''s doubts is a fairer way of dealing with suspect cases. We encourage posts to use 221(g), except in those IV cases in which fraud, misrepresentation, or ineligibility for status can be clearly established. 221(g) allows petitioners and beneficiaries to supplement the initial application and in many cases overcome the refusal.

and

Posts should be generous in allowing applicants every opportunity to supplement their applications following a 221(g) refusal.

So you're right, it is only strongly encouraged that people be given the opportunity to refute the CO's decision. I don't think it's too much to ask that COs do what they are strongly encouraged to do.

You can find more here in a very helpful thread created by a woman whose petition for her fiance was sent back to DHS.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=2687

THIS IS THE LAW!! SO WHY DOES CASA NOT FOLLOW IT?

[desert_fox 32]

thats a funny post......none of it true...

As far as my ex-wife...she is happily married and I think thats great as we are still good friends.

Im sure that no one liked the words "boy toy", but how do you think the Consulate views your relationship. They know that these kind of marriages do not have much success in survival in the US. Not only is it against the culture there, it is almost against our culture here.

Do you have any info on how long these relationships survive here??? I dont, but Im sure the Consulate has much antidotal evidence. This is what you have to overcome....somehow convince him/her that your case is different.

Im sure that the Consulate doesnt question the motives of the US wifes/fiancees here, but they question the motives of the visa applicant, and for good reason.

[chiquita 0]

Why did you say "boy toy"?

Oh pleeeeeeeez........every womans dream....a real boy toy.

Dont tell me that you have never heard the expression. I have a real good friend that specializes in them. Her average length of a relationship is about two weeks.

OH I FORGOT, SINCE YOU ARE A FOX, GO BACK IN YOUR HOLE WHERE YOU CAME FROM AS WE DONT CARE TO READ YOUR HATERED!!!!!

YOU HAVE NOI RESPECT FOR THIS FORUM OR THE PEOPLE IN IT AND WE SURE DON'T APPRECIATE YOUR DEGROGATORY REMARKS!!!

POOF...BE GONE!!

Instead of everyone focusing their energies on how the consulate doesn't have a right to do what they did (which by the way they do)... maybe everyone should be focusing their energies on solutions...

Zyggy, you make some good points, but I object to your opening statement. Does the consulate really have the right to ignore their own regulations? Their regulations say that, first of all, they are required to present, in writing, as detailed an explanation as possible detailing why the CO believes that the couple is not eligible for a visa. All the cases that have been sent back have gotten a piece of paper stating simply that the case is being sent back to DHS. That does not seem to me to be a detailed explanation.

Second of all, the rules say that the petitioner and beneficiary may present additional evidence attempting to refute the CO's decision prior to the petition's being sent back. Most of the Moroccan petitions, on the contrary, have been sent back the following day. It's pretty hard to present additional evidence when you don't know what the CO's objection is and they send the application back immediately.

As for "the fox," he's certainly not worth wasting any energy on.

GREAT INFO!!!!!!

DITTO FOR THE SICKO FOX!!!

As for "the fox," he's certainly not worth wasting any energy on.

Then you can continue to fail to see the reality of what is really happening. Dont see many of these kind of posts from folks dealing with other Consulates in the world.

REALLY???? YOU NEED TO CHECK A FEW MORE AREAS DUDE...LIKE ASIA!!!!!

I haven't been on VJ for very long but I have done a lot of reading and observing.

I honestly do not see any rhyme or reason to the people who are denied or approved through the Moroccan Consulate. I truly wish I did.

As for Morocco 'specializing' in 'boy toys'...I don't see it either. I do believe that in every culture and in every country you will see boy toys, women marrying younger men, and relationships based on 'ulterior' motives.

Does Morocco have fraudulent marriages...YEP! Does the US have fraudulent marriages...YEP! Does every country in the world have fraudulent marriages...YEP!!!!!!!!!!!

And all of the above countries have honest relationships.

And that is why we are all here on this website.

I am pretty shocked at the boldness of someone to more or less label an entire region as frauds.

But I am glad to see variety and the environment to express all opinions.

Best wishes to all on their journeys!

WELCOME! WELL SAID!!!

[iceyspots 0]

rose colored glasses.......

[chiquita 0]

you can all say what you want about me...becuase I really dont care.

GOOD CUZ I DON'T EITHER...

Here we have 7 pages of a thread of people being denied,

OPS...ONE QUESTIONS WAS ASKED ABOUT A SECOOND DENIAL HERE...

and other threades dealing with the same isses from Morrocco. You all talk about evidence, etc...but you all ignore the reality of it all....They simply do not believe that it is a valid relationship. \

OPS AGAIN...DOESN'T MATTER IF "THEY" BELIEVE IT, THEY MUST HAVE EVIDENCE TO BACK IT UP!!

Its contrary to the norms of the country, etc.

NORMS???? HELLO AMERICA HAS A VERY DIVERSE CULTURE SO WHERE DID THIS COME FROM???

Im sure that your petitions will bounce back and forth forever from the State Dept to Homeland Security. Im not sure that one has a say-so over the other. The state department has the final say-so when it comes to interviews and who gets visas.

OH NOT TRUE...ONCE IT GOES TO COURT THE JUDGE HAS THE FINAL SAY

So until all of you develop a strategy to deal with this issue...you will continued to be denied. Saying that its againt regulations, or against the law will do no good. They are beyond the reach of the law and the courts.

REALLY??????? SO SAD THAT OUR OWN GOVERNMENT IS BEYOND THE LAW???? BUT NOT BEYOND THE COURTS

I would suggest that every woman go to the interview...even if you sit outside and they ask you no questions....it shows support.

NOW FOR ONCE YOU GAVE GREAT ADVICE!!!!!

[desert_fox 32]

you can all say what you want about me...becuase I really dont care.

GOOD CUZ I DON'T EITHER...

Here we have 7 pages of a thread of people being denied,

OPS...ONE QUESTIONS WAS ASKED ABOUT A SECOOND DENIAL HERE...

and other threades dealing with the same isses from Morrocco. You all talk about evidence, etc...but you all ignore the reality of it all....They simply do not believe that it is a valid relationship. \

OPS AGAIN...DOESN'T MATTER IF "THEY" BELIEVE IT, THEY MUST HAVE EVIDENCE TO BACK IT UP!!

Its contrary to the norms of the country, etc.

NORMS???? HELLO AMERICA HAS A VERY DIVERSE CULTURE SO WHERE DID THIS COME FROM???

Im sure that your petitions will bounce back and forth forever from the State Dept to Homeland Security. Im not sure that one has a say-so over the other. The state department has the final say-so when it comes to interviews and who gets visas.

OH NOT TRUE...ONCE IT GOES TO COURT THE JUDGE HAS THE FINAL SAY

So until all of you develop a strategy to deal with this issue...you will continued to be denied. Saying that its againt regulations, or against the law will do no good. They are beyond the reach of the law and the courts.

REALLY??????? SO SAD THAT OUR OWN GOVERNMENT IS BEYOND THE LAW???? BUT NOT BEYOND THE COURTS

I would suggest that every woman go to the interview...even if you sit outside and they ask you no questions....it shows support.

NOW FOR ONCE YOU GAVE GREAT ADVICE!!!!!

I think that you will find that Consular decisions are not subject to judicial review. They are located in the US. They cant be served. Federal courts have no jurisdiction. Congress exempted them from judicial review.

[chiquita 0]

Aside from the "boy toy" comment, I don't see what's so unreasonable about what desert fox has said. I don't think we can deny that Morocco has become a high fraud consulate. And there is also a disproportionately high number of couples where the USC is a female who happens to be several years older than the Moroccon male, and therefore this has become a red flag. He did not say that is]f you have this red flag that means your relationship is a fruad.

DANG JENN, WHEN I MET MY HUSBAND IT NEVER OCCURED TO ME THERE WAS A FRAUD ISSUE GOING ON IN MOROCCO. THAT WAS THE LAST THING I WAS THINKING OF, WELL I NEVER EVEN THOUGHT OF IT.

I CAN'T SEE WHERE A WOMAN BEING OLDER HAS TO BE AN ISSUE SINCE THEY KNOW IT IS NOT UNHEARD OF BECAUSE THEIR PROPHET DID THE SAME THING!

I AGREE COUPLES NEED TO WORK ON THE RED FLAGS AT THE USCIS LEVEL AS WELL AS THE DOS LEVEL.

HOWEVER, SINCE I MUST FOLLOW ALL THE LAWS AND GUIDELINES I CERTAINLY EXPECT THOSE WHO WORK IN THE GOVERNMENAL AREA TO DO THE SAME!

[iceyspots 0]

prophet had lots and lots of wives, all at the same time.. use the same reasoning and he'll say your fiance/husband is a polygamist.

[chiquita 0]

Aside from the "boy toy" comment, I don't see what's so unreasonable about what desert fox has said. I don't think we can deny that Morocco has become a high fraud consulate. And there is also a disproportionately high number of couples where the USC is a female who happens to be several years older than the Moroccon male, and therefore this has become a red flag. He did not say that is]f you have this red flag that means your relationship is a fruad.

The term "boy toy" in itself implies no intention of marriage... hence fraudulent relationship in his implication.

Sorry I lost my cool. I'm getting weary from the waiting and all the other crud I'm dealing with.

{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{HUGS TO YOU!!}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

prophet had lots and lots of wives, all at the same time.. use the same reasoning and he'll say your fiance/husband is a polygamist.

ONLY AFTER HIS FIRST WIFE DIED...

[iceyspots 0]

we are simply not in the same era as mohammed... large age gaps are pretty rare in morocco today... as are marriages to divorced women and women with children... so why are a huge proportion of women applying for moroccan fiancés much older

Edited June 22, 2006 by iceyspots