Maybe USCs should have more weight in the matter...

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I will just say this to sum up my thoughts. I believe a lot of things I will never say. But I never say anything I do not believe.

I believe my freedoms are in MY hands. I believe I can do anything I set my mind to and am willing to follow through with. I believe I make my own dreams come true. Too much has happened in my life that other people would say "can't happen" for me to believe anything else. It isn't possible for me to believe anything else. I believe anyone can do the same.

I will let someone else to juggle numbers and statistics, but the CO or IO, the President or Congress or my boss or the homeowner's association or an attorney is NOT holding my destiny in their hands...I AM!

I hadn't even heard of a fiancee visa when I proposed to Alla, but it didn't even cross my mind. Why would it? I loved the woman and wanted to be with her the rest of my life...I would FIND the way.

Thank you Daboyz. Your case was another good inspiration. I remember reading about it as you came across problems. I remember you didn't whine about it, you got on an airplane, got over there, grabbed the knobs and twisted until you were successful. Very admirable. Your fiancee (wife) has a good man.

[TBoneTX 45,312]

If the consulate will refuse to look at evidence or is known to do that...front load the petition. You know that.

It's known now, yet neither VJ nor outside sources would have been of any help at the time. Even today, the consular reviews of Guayaquil on VJ are deceptively positive -- arguably because those who finally pried their visas from that hellhole were/are too exhausted and livid to write the full truth. I'm willing to bet that the consulate receives very few after-visa complaints either directly or through the Department of State for the same reason -- and that the consulate knows and counts on this as carte blanche to continue their poppycock.

Yes, you were blind sided and YOU and your fiancee corrected the problem and you got your visa. YOU were incredibly influential in your case.

Perhaps in one way of thinking, but being a hosed, helpless victim doesn't equate to "influence" in my book. The four known Ecuador VJ couples who endured the same would likely agree that it was akin to being held under water and flailing to keep from drowning. Even a boxer who's getting the bejeezus pounded out of him can land a lucky roundhouse punch to knock out his opponent -- but if that's "influence," I haven't read that dictionary.

I have ALWAYS encouraged USCs to attend interviews, I went to ours and never regretted it. It is not required.

Here we go... I consider it required. We cannot and will never know how many potential visa-refusals never came to light simply because the USC's presence turned the tide in the CO's mind, silently, without comment or note.

the decision IS YOURS, again another influence the USC has on the process. MY POINT is that the USC has huge impact...for success OR failure in this process. Your decisions make it so.

This is an expansive view, not incorrect on its face, that I will never agree always applies specifically, when the chips are down. A CR-1 couple got hosed as badly as I was. Roy&Katy got hosed WORSE. A fourth couple, who as I learned JUST got their visa, got hosed worse than all of us put together. "Damage control" does not equal influence, and I believe that these other couples will agree. Edited July 2, 2009 by TBoneTX

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

If the consulate will refuse to look at evidence or is known to do that...front load the petition. You know that.

It's known now, yet neither VJ nor outside sources would have been of any help at the time. Even today, the consular reviews of Guayaquil on VJ are deceptively positive -- arguably because those who finally pried their visas from that hellhole were/are too exhausted and livid to write the full truth. I'm willing to bet that the consulate receives very few after-visa complaints either directly or through the Department of State for the same reason -- and that the consulate knows and counts on this as carte blanche to continue their poppycock.

Yes, you were blind sided and YOU and your fiancee corrected the problem and you got your visa. YOU were incredibly influential in your case.

Perhaps in one way of thinking, but being a hosed, helpless victim doesn't equate to "influence" in my book. The four known Ecuador VJ couples who endured the same would likely agree that it was akin to being held under water and flailing to keep from drowning. Even a boxer who's getting the bejeezus pounded out of him can land a lucky roundhouse punch to knock out his opponent -- but if that's "influence," I haven't read that dictionary.

I have ALWAYS encouraged USCs to attend interviews, I went to ours and never regretted it. It is not required.

Here we go... I consider it required. We cannot and will never know how many potential visa-refusals never came to light simply because the USC's presence turned the tide in the CO's mind, silently, without comment or note.

the decision IS YOURS, again another influence the USC has on the process. MY POINT is that the USC has huge impact...for success OR failure in this process. Your decisions make it so.

This is an expansive view, not incorrect on its face, that I will never agree always applies specifically, when the chips are down. A CR-1 couple got hosed as badly as I was. Roy&Katy got hosed WORSE. A fourth couple, who as I learned JUST got their visa, got hosed worse than all of us put together. "Damage control" does not equal influence, and I believe that these other couples will agree.

Damage control IS influence. They said NO, you changed it to yes. Were you blind sided? Yes. Could you have known before? No. So it is not your fault, unlike something done by a person that could have known before. YOU could choose to walk away and whine about how some other ONE person controlled your destiny, your freedoms and all that horse-squeeze But you did not. You know better. NO ONE controls YOUR destinuy and freedoms but YOU. Like any good Texican, you grabbed the knobs and twisted until you got what you wanted. Congratulations. YOU influenced the outcome more than any other person and ONLY the USC petitioner can do what you did. No one else in the process has that power.

I, myself, consider it required to go to the interview...for myself. I would not even THINK of sending my fiancee to an interview with a foreign government for something so important without being there myself. NEVER. Never gave it a thought. I went to our first and only interview. I would consider myself a lowlife slimy slug for entering into this process and then expecting my fiancee to go to an interview herself. If they didn't let me in I would stand outside in the rain, sleet, snow or dark of night if necessary. I took time off work unpaid to be there with her. From day one there was never a question I would be there. However I cannot post that it is required...it is not.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

If the consulate will refuse to look at evidence or is known to do that...front load the petition. You know that.

It's known now, yet neither VJ nor outside sources would have been of any help at the time. Even today, the consular reviews of Guayaquil on VJ are deceptively positive -- arguably because those who finally pried their visas from that hellhole were/are too exhausted and livid to write the full truth. I'm willing to bet that the consulate receives very few after-visa complaints either directly or through the Department of State for the same reason -- and that the consulate knows and counts on this as carte blanche to continue their poppycock.

Yes, you were blind sided and YOU and your fiancee corrected the problem and you got your visa. YOU were incredibly influential in your case.

Perhaps in one way of thinking, but being a hosed, helpless victim doesn't equate to "influence" in my book. The four known Ecuador VJ couples who endured the same would likely agree that it was akin to being held under water and flailing to keep from drowning. Even a boxer who's getting the bejeezus pounded out of him can land a lucky roundhouse punch to knock out his opponent -- but if that's "influence," I haven't read that dictionary.

I have ALWAYS encouraged USCs to attend interviews, I went to ours and never regretted it. It is not required.

Here we go... I consider it required. We cannot and will never know how many potential visa-refusals never came to light simply because the USC's presence turned the tide in the CO's mind, silently, without comment or note.

the decision IS YOURS, again another influence the USC has on the process. MY POINT is that the USC has huge impact...for success OR failure in this process. Your decisions make it so.

This is an expansive view, not incorrect on its face, that I will never agree always applies specifically, when the chips are down. A CR-1 couple got hosed as badly as I was. Roy&Katy got hosed WORSE. A fourth couple, who as I learned JUST got their visa, got hosed worse than all of us put together. "Damage control" does not equal influence, and I believe that these other couples will agree.

Your first comment is interesting because it goes directly to what I speak of. If the USCs they "hose" CHOOSE not to complain, not to continue, then the USCs, and no one else, has allowed them to control their and determine their destiny. The consulate cannot do it without the very powerful USCs consent. Expressed or implied, it is the same thing. You choose to walk away...you lose. You didn't. GOOD for you. YOU have the power and used it.

[TBoneTX 45,312]

The consulate cannot do it without the very powerful USCs consent.

Yes the consulates absolutely can, my friend, and they do. I'm happy for you and for others who did not have to endure it.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

The consulate cannot do it without the very powerful USCs consent.

Yes the consulates absolutely can, my friend, and they do. I'm happy for you and for others who did not have to endure it.

I think you misunderstood the meaning, TBone. What you endured, you also overcame, because YOU pursued it and the Consulate could not "do it" to YOU because YOU did not let them. Had you walked away from the love of your life because of what they did, then you would have given consent to that action by doing nothing. Implied consent. I am happy I did not have to endure it either, but I assure you I would have overcome it. And I must admit some amount of envy in that I am sure you must have a very strong marriage and committed wife. Insincere people would have thrown in the towel when they were on the ropes, but you went back in and scored the knockout punch (to expound on your boxing metaphor) NO ONE held YOUR head underwater.

The purpose of this topic, as I understood it, was that USCs should have "more weight" in the matter of visas. It is my belief the USC has ALL the weight in the matter. Rather than be disagreeable, it was my intent to encourage people and remind them, as your case does and Daboyz' case does that YOU can do it. YOU do have a lot of power.

Oddly enough, I do not think you an I disagree. I think perhaps you are bit pessimistic and cautious (with good reason) and see the glass as half empty. I am more optomistic and see the glass as half full...and ALL mine.

In the end, both of us did what we had to do, yours took more doing, to be sure, and both of us were successful. I never once considered that my future with Alla was in anyone's hands but my own. Neither did you.

[TBoneTX 45,312]

YOU pursued it and the Consulate could not "do it" to YOU because YOU did not let them.

I see what you're saying, but I maintain that the consulates can "do" anyone they want, without accountability within the control of the USC, except if USCIS reaffirms the petition. The CIS decision to reaffirm is not within the USC's influence.

NO ONE held YOUR head underwater.

Sorry, but they did. Flailing against all odds is NOT "influence." We were merely 221(g)'d, and it so happened that whatever "flailing" we did just happened to hit enough of a mark. No power, influence, or control was involved. Roy&Katy were refused. I know for a fact that Roy tried every potential remedy available. There was no recourse. It happened that CIS reaffirmed the petition (out of Roy's control). Regardless of Roy's actions, CIS could have reaffirmed the petition or accepted the consulate's recommendation -- both decisions out of his influence.

YOU do have a lot of power.

This frame of reference is understood. However, if being gratuitously hosed and then rolling over on our backs and exposing our soft underbellies to the fangs of a consulate until the beast has had its fill (meaning, kowtowing and accepting and repeating "Yowza, Massa!") constitutes "power," then we must again be using different dictionaries.

I do not think you an I disagree.

We do not entirely disagree, but see the following.

I never once considered that my future with Alla was in anyone's hands but my own. Neither did you.

Yes I did, and yes Roy did, and yes THREE other couples did. There is no more helpless of a feeling: it was VERY real and actual, we will never forget it, we may never regain trust in elements of OUR government, and it goes to prove that the OP has at least some valid concern about the power or lack thereof that USCs have during the immigration process.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

YOU pursued it and the Consulate could not "do it" to YOU because YOU did not let them.

I see what you're saying, but I maintain that the consulates can "do" anyone they want, without accountability within the control of the USC, except if USCIS reaffirms the petition. The CIS decision to reaffirm is not within the USC's influence.

NO ONE held YOUR head underwater.

Sorry, but they did. Flailing against all odds is NOT "influence." We were merely 221(g)'d, and it so happened that whatever "flailing" we did just happened to hit enough of a mark. No power, influence, or control was involved. Roy&Katy were refused. I know for a fact that Roy tried every potential remedy available. There was no recourse. It happened that CIS reaffirmed the petition (out of Roy's control). Regardless of Roy's actions, CIS could have reaffirmed the petition or accepted the consulate's recommendation -- both decisions out of his influence.

YOU do have a lot of power.

This frame of reference is understood. However, if being gratuitously hosed and then rolling over on our backs and exposing our soft underbellies to the fangs of a consulate until the beast has had its fill (meaning, kowtowing and accepting and repeating "Yowza, Massa!") constitutes "power," then we must again be using different dictionaries.

I do not think you an I disagree.

We do not entirely disagree, but see the following.

I never once considered that my future with Alla was in anyone's hands but my own. Neither did you.

Yes I did, and yes Roy did, and yes THREE other couples did. There is no more helpless of a feeling: it was VERY real and actual, we will never forget it, we may never regain trust in elements of OUR government, and it goes to prove that the OP has at least some valid concern about the power or lack thereof that USCs have during the immigration process.

Sorry to hear that, really. I never had any trust in the government so there is nothing to lose there for me. But I am sorry to hear you had doubts of yourself. Anyway, the results should have restored your faith in yourself. I hope the two of you never forget what you went through to be together. It should be a source of strength for life.

[Mike B. 231]

No offense or anything, but can you imagine if any other facet of the government was run the way our immigration system was? It'd be totally outrageous. I can just see it now: "Every single appealate court was just disestablished by Congress and the Supreme Court was abolished by constitutional amendment." "So what? YOU have the power. YOU can present a good defense at your criminal trial. Grab those knobs and squeeze them. If YOU get convicted in some shame trial, that's your fault."

I mean, the most basic understanding of government seems to show that without oversight and transparency, government will never work well. It's almost a law of nature.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

No offense or anything, but can you imagine if any other facet of the government was run the way our immigration system was? It'd be totally outrageous. I can just see it now: "Every single appealate court was just disestablished by Congress and the Supreme Court was abolished by constitutional amendment." "So what? YOU have the power. YOU can present a good defense at your criminal trial. Grab those knobs and squeeze them. If YOU get convicted in some shame trial, that's your fault."

I mean, the most basic understanding of government seems to show that without oversight and transparency, government will never work well. It's almost a law of nature.

Government doesn't work well, agreed. If USCIS or the State Dept. had any competition in the visa market we would be bailing them out like an automaker.

I hope you did not take any of my comments to insinuate I trust the government. I trust myself to do what is best for myself and my family. If I represented myself in a criminal trial, sham or otherwise, which I have the right to do...and lost, it WOULD be my fault. Though I did not feel compelled to make up scenarios when we have perfect examples of real accomplishments by real people.

Forgive me if I offend by expressing belief that I have ownership of my life, not the government, not the consulates and definitely not one faceless person I never saw.

My wife is at my side, and Tbone's is at his side, due to what we did. I will, and have, conceded Tbone had to do more than I did. But HE did it.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

No offense or anything, but can you imagine if any other facet of the government was run the way our immigration system was? It'd be totally outrageous. I can just see it now: "Every single appealate court was just disestablished by Congress and the Supreme Court was abolished by constitutional amendment." "So what? YOU have the power. YOU can present a good defense at your criminal trial. Grab those knobs and squeeze them. If YOU get convicted in some shame trial, that's your fault."

I mean, the most basic understanding of government seems to show that without oversight and transparency, government will never work well. It's almost a law of nature.

And the sad thing is Mike, the immigration system is one of the better government agencies!

[Mike B. 231]

No offense or anything, but can you imagine if any other facet of the government was run the way our immigration system was? It'd be totally outrageous. I can just see it now: "Every single appealate court was just disestablished by Congress and the Supreme Court was abolished by constitutional amendment." "So what? YOU have the power. YOU can present a good defense at your criminal trial. Grab those knobs and squeeze them. If YOU get convicted in some shame trial, that's your fault."

I mean, the most basic understanding of government seems to show that without oversight and transparency, government will never work well. It's almost a law of nature.

Government doesn't work well, agreed. If USCIS or the State Dept. had any competition in the visa market we would be bailing them out like an automaker.

I hope you did not take any of my comments to insinuate I trust the government. I trust myself to do what is best for myself and my family. If I represented myself in a criminal trial, sham or otherwise, which I have the right to do...and lost, it WOULD be my fault. Though I did not feel compelled to make up scenarios when we have perfect examples of real accomplishments by real people.

Forgive me if I offend by expressing belief that I have ownership of my life, not the government, not the consulates and definitely not one faceless person I never saw.

My wife is at my side, and Tbone's is at his side, due to what we did. I will, and have, conceded Tbone had to do more than I did. But HE did it.

I think that this is demonstrably false -- court cases are overturned all the time due to proceedual errors that are not the fault of the defendant. There are plenty of governmental actions that have built-in adminstrative appeals. I've actually probably won perhaps fifty to one hundred administrative appeals with the Department of State in the course of my job. I don't think it's a total stretch to say that if there was a real administrative appeal process for visa interviews, consular decisions would be overturned all the time also.

[Mike B. 231]

No offense or anything, but can you imagine if any other facet of the government was run the way our immigration system was? It'd be totally outrageous. I can just see it now: "Every single appealate court was just disestablished by Congress and the Supreme Court was abolished by constitutional amendment." "So what? YOU have the power. YOU can present a good defense at your criminal trial. Grab those knobs and squeeze them. If YOU get convicted in some shame trial, that's your fault."

I mean, the most basic understanding of government seems to show that without oversight and transparency, government will never work well. It's almost a law of nature.

And the sad thing is Mike, the immigration system is one of the better government agencies!

If you mean USCIS is one of the better government agencies, I'm not sure about that. They seem to be horribly ineffcient. People make fun of the post office and the social security administration all the time, but they deal with way more paperwork than USCIS does and get things done way faster as well. Even the Department of Defense, which I think is probably terribly run, manages to overcome huge logistical problems, oversee an enormous and highly decentralized defense system, actually pay the million plus employees it has, and do at least a semi-decent job of fighting two wars all at the same time. Even though I have not had any problem with it, I'm not convinced that USCIS is well-run.

When talking about how great the immigration system is, it also should be remembered that the government is unable to figure out where in the hell millions of people it is supposedly tracking are, which right there seems to indicate that things might not be going smoothly.

[PDXbicycleboy 5]

I was reading this thread

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=205093

And someone brought up something that seems to hit home for almost everyone that is going through on this process. When it is all said and done, all the paperwork and the hassles of securing your loved one a visa to enter the country.. It all comes down to a single person at the embassy to be given the duty to interview you and ultimately decide whether or not your loved one should be allowed to enter the country or not. Now i know that this single job is a very demanding and stressful job.. Golly I cannot imagine living with the nightmares some of these people deal with on a daily basis but leaving it up to just a single person who decides on the whole case is pretty unfair. Should the worse of experiences happens, you or your spouse/fiancee/relative get ridiculed for bringing insufficient/overwhelming evidence, treated unfairly/biassedly/rudely, or just plain put into a stereotypical category from first glance. We should have protections set in place that a USC can petition for or complain about. The thread that i spunned this other subject from there was a man and his significant other who brought sufficient evidence but the CO said it was not enough and flat out told her to return. To protect us and valid couples, what have people done to complain or petition for another review? Like i said in that thread, "I do not like the idea of someone deciding the fate of our lives, the military does that enough for me.."

What can we do in case this happens? What are our rights as USCs? What can we do to not let aholes, ignorant people, biased, and not properly trained COs dictate our lives? I'm only writing this topic thread because I want to look out for everyone else and see what our are options are in the matter. I have not experienced this myself but reading up on it from other people's experiences make me a little worried... Your opinions and discussion is greatly appreciated.

James

You, as a USC have a right to petition a visa for your SO. Your SO as a foreign national has NO right to a visa. NO visa is denied based on a single person's decision. Petitionss are returned to USCIS for review with a recommendation of denial. USCIS often re-affirms and re-sends the petition back to the consulate (we see threads about this here all the time) and there is a forum dedicated just to such denials and what you can do about them.

It is a mis-statement to say that ONE PERSON makes a decision to deny, simply isn't true.

In just as many...actually far more cases, the visa is approved with no questions asked. (i see no one complaining about that) And even then it is not the decision of one person. For one thing, the ONE person doing the interview follows the rules and practices of the consulate which was the result of many people's work. One person may do the interview but it is a mistake to assume it was his/her on the spot decision. The decision has usually been made before the interview (hence the frequent "no questions asked" interviews) by reviewing the documents YOU have presented. YOU and your fiancee have a right to present your case and provide evidence of a bona fide relationship. I suggest you prepare for it.

The TWO people most influential in this process are YOU and your FIANCE(E) If you go around blaming it on the "one mysterious person" or think it is so, you are doomed to fail.

It is REQUIRED at the Guayaquil Consulate to be at the interview. I get where you're coming from and it sounds like you have a lot of life experience but trust me, I have endured the stuff you say you would go through for your woman (the fighting of the proverbial demons, dragons, standing in the rain for hours, etc). Not to toot my own horn, but I am as tough as they come and love this woman with all my heart and soul but it seems to me that the consulate you went through was easy and your comments are not grounded from the experience of going through what a growing number of us have gone through. Contrary to what you have heard or what the law is in these matters, ONE person CAN and does determine the fate of your case at Guayaquil. I understand that your response to this statement might be that if someone loves a person then they will tear down the walls for them and deal with it because you love them etc.

However, I don't get the impression from your posts you acknowledge or appreciate how difficult, ambiguous and absurd these Ecuador cases really are and that people are getting HAMMERED by this place. They have written their government representatives, have submitted loads of evidence and have fought the bloody battle and STILL are being HOSED. It turns out that one person dictates the pace and life of your case (in other words, this one person cups your jewels the entire time and from time to time kicks them and whatever else they want to do with them because there are no rules, no laywers, no protection for the USC--end of story).

I agree with your take that we control our own destiny and that the gist of what you're saying about taking action and getting stuff done when things get tough. However, Guayaquil is a different place. This is a place where logic, reason, and rationale are not. Guayaquil is a place with its own set of shifting rules and the rogue Consulate is no exception. So, I would encourage you to do some research about this city before you make generalizations regarding the tactics that worked in other parts of the world and expect them to apply them to this rathole consulate; the consulate mirrors the community it is in. When the Civil Registro of Ecuador is a better run and more trustworth outfit than the U.S. Consulate, we have major problems and believe me, I have the experience of having to go to the Civil Registro to get a identification card for our son who was born down there. Oddly, I was treated with more respect in my 3 hours there at the Civil Registro of Ecuador than at ANY time dealing with the United States Guayaquil Consulate.

I missed his birth and helping my fiance and being with her because of one woman--our C.O. and there was nothing that could be done about it because she decided she didn't want to give the visa. It is the truth. One person determined that I couldn't get down to be there for my fiance and son despite having had mounds of evidence. No amount of positive thinking or taking time off work, etc. could have changed this situation because there was a woman who was determined to be a thorn in our side because of the unchecked power given to her. And what is even scarier is that this person seemed to enjoy throwing down an idiotic guantlet of requirements to prove our relationship.

So, I wanted to side with T-Bone on his points because they are all true and valid when it comes to GUAYAQUIL. I am absolutely 100 percent FIRED UP that they got away with what they did. However, the visa is in her hands and yes it is so because I made it so with over a six months of smash-mouth fighting with this psycho consular officer.

Everything, I mean everything about this consulate's interactions with us were deceiving. I commend and admire people that go through the process of brining someone they love to our country. As we all know, the process isn't easy and I understand what your position is, I just had to chime in from the sidelines and because this is such a hot button for me and needed to defend the position that this consulate's practices have to be reigned in.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

No offense or anything, but can you imagine if any other facet of the government was run the way our immigration system was? It'd be totally outrageous. I can just see it now: "Every single appealate court was just disestablished by Congress and the Supreme Court was abolished by constitutional amendment." "So what? YOU have the power. YOU can present a good defense at your criminal trial. Grab those knobs and squeeze them. If YOU get convicted in some shame trial, that's your fault."

I mean, the most basic understanding of government seems to show that without oversight and transparency, government will never work well. It's almost a law of nature.

Government doesn't work well, agreed. If USCIS or the State Dept. had any competition in the visa market we would be bailing them out like an automaker.

I hope you did not take any of my comments to insinuate I trust the government. I trust myself to do what is best for myself and my family. If I represented myself in a criminal trial, sham or otherwise, which I have the right to do...and lost, it WOULD be my fault. Though I did not feel compelled to make up scenarios when we have perfect examples of real accomplishments by real people.

Forgive me if I offend by expressing belief that I have ownership of my life, not the government, not the consulates and definitely not one faceless person I never saw.

My wife is at my side, and Tbone's is at his side, due to what we did. I will, and have, conceded Tbone had to do more than I did. But HE did it.

I think that this is demonstrably false -- court cases are overturned all the time due to proceedual errors that are not the fault of the defendant. There are plenty of governmental actions that have built-in adminstrative appeals. I've actually probably won perhaps fifty to one hundred administrative appeals with the Department of State in the course of my job. I don't think it's a total stretch to say that if there was a real administrative appeal process for visa interviews, consular decisions would be overturned all the time also.

OK, Mike, YOU have no control over your life. It is too bad. I on the other hand have always had a great amount of control on MINE. I suppose since you let people jerk you around, lose court cases on technicalities and such, you would feel that way. Sorry, I do not, and will not agree with you that I have little control over my life, the visa process or my future.

You are welcome to wait for Obama to fix yours or you.