Problem with closed country and no meeting yet...HEEEELP!

[sarah and hicham 3]

For me there is a huge difference in having met and not meeting and filing the petition. The first time I went to Morocco I stayed with Hicham's family for one month. I met all of his family and we spent lots of time together. I went again for 5 weeks in December and after that I decided to file. To me it's the difference between night and day. We had some issues to work out after I visited but we worked things out and I went again and felt great filing the petition so he could come here and we could get married. To me it mattered how Hicham talked to me, how he treated me, how he touched me (just regular touches like holding hands) and I wanted to know I felt good with him and spending as much time as possible together. That's just me and I would not marry someone before physically spending time with him and his family.

Sarah

[Veiled Princess 1]

However, the Libyan Supreme Court itself has seen fit to throw out the convictions and order a re-trial.

After much outside pressure.

Anyway... back to the topic though I'm not sure there's much more to be said regarding that matter.

[ya falaha! 0]

Aren't I lucky to be your target today? I believe this is my second honor of the day.

I think there is a HUGE difference between physically meeting a man and his family even if it's for a few weeks or months and not meeting them at all. Now you tell me...would YOU petition for your now husband if you never met him in person? I'm highly doubting you would. As far as I'm concerned you can't even be engaged unless you meet in person.

I agree..this is one hell of a risky situation even if you have met your SO in person. I love my husband dearly but if I had it to do all over again...I'd step away from the computer.

what if this dude gets here and he turns out to be not what he portrayed himself to be? I dunno..I wouldn't risk it.

Caution...I am especially crabby today...........

I know arguing isn't nice, but this is basically the same risk we all took (or are taking). I just don't think anymore that you can say that playing house for about a week, a year before really plugging him in to the family, is that much better than petitioning him right in. I just don't like seeing the op get judged here because they could meet 10 times, and he'd still be a stranger on her doorstep. (if you don't think so, yours just isn't here yet) and we don't know that he has a military "problem". Military contract-commitment just might be a more accurate description so..... all I'm saying is it probably isn't appropriate to criticise the op's decisions on the matter because it's probably no more nuts than the filing as soon as you meet once..

the guy here just might be getting bad advise from the guys around him that don't know jack about immigration, and feed him scary lies about the border.

[dawnnhatem 0]

Aren't I lucky to be your target today? I believe this is my second honor of the day.

I think there is a HUGE difference between physically meeting a man and his family even if it's for a few weeks or months and not meeting them at all. Now you tell me...would YOU petition for your now husband if you never met him in person? I'm highly doubting you would. As far as I'm concerned you can't even be engaged unless you meet in person.

I agree..this is one hell of a risky situation even if you have met your SO in person. I love my husband dearly but if I had it to do all over again...I'd step away from the computer.

what if this dude gets here and he turns out to be not what he portrayed himself to be? I dunno..I wouldn't risk it.

Caution...I am especially crabby today...........

I know arguing isn't nice, but this is basically the same risk we all took (or are taking). I just don't think anymore that you can say that playing house for about a week, a year before really plugging him in to the family, is that much better than petitioning him right in. I just don't like seeing the op get judged here because they could meet 10 times, and he'd still be a stranger on her doorstep. (if you don't think so, yours just isn't here yet) and we don't know that he has a military "problem". Military contract-commitment just might be a more accurate description so..... all I'm saying is it probably isn't appropriate to criticise the op's decisions on the matter because it's probably no more nuts than the filing as soon as you meet once..

the guy here just might be getting bad advise from the guys around him that don't know jack about immigration, and feed him scary lies about the border.

said I was crabby

[Together4ever 1]

I loved Mohammed before I ever met him in person. I wasn't, however, 100% sure of him until I had met him face to face and spent a lot of time with him. Marriage is not always a joy ride. You face goods time and you face some cold and dark times too. If you want a strong foundation for your partnership you can't really go into a marriage with a lot of expectations built on what you believe this person to be via telephone and internet. Sure we all carry in our expectations to some extent, but its easier to be more realistic about your partners strengths and flaws if you actually spend time with him as he interacts with his world. And face it, I know we've all talked about this a million times here, there is a much bigger cultural difference at play in these relationships then say an SO from Europe or Canada. I will always remain grateful for the gift of spending so much time in Egypt just living a regular Egyptian life. It wasn't always easy for me but I understand this part of Mohammed's psyche much more easily, can accept it much more readily... and here's the biggy guys... I am able to prepare to help him adjust to MY culture knowing what he has left behind.

Sure plane tickets are expensive. Sure social/political tensions make travel in this part of the world scary and sometimes difficult. But you owe it yourself and him to meet face to face and really get to know each other up close for as much time as you can. It also builds a stronger case for your visa, but this really is secondary.

There. Just my 2 more cents.

[Jenn! 918]

For every person who thinks it is reckless to marry to someone they've never met there is someone else who thinks it's reckless to marry to someone they've only spent a week with in person, or a month, or to marry someone from another country/culture for that matter. We all have our individual tolerances for risk. The issue at hand is what is considered acceptable by USCIS.

[Together4ever 1]

I don't personally feel its "reckless" but I was just offering that it makes a better launching pad to marriage and obviously the USCIS has a pretty strong stance on this.

[mybackpages 0]

I think it is risky to marry someone you have never met. Look at arranged marriages- one reason these marriages work at more or less the same rate as love matches is that while the bride and groom may not meet, the whole family does. Your parents brothers sisters aunts uncles etc meet his/her parents brothers sisters, aunts uncles etc... The bride meets the women of the future inlaws and the Groom meets the men of the future inlaws.

Marriage is more than the union of two people, its the union of 2 families esp for ME/NA men and women

[SaroryH 0]

what if this dude gets here and he turns out to be not what he portrayed himself to be? I dunno..I wouldn't risk it.

Caution...I am especially crabby today...........

I know arguing isn't nice, but this is basically the same risk we all took (or are taking). I just don't think anymore that you can say that playing house for about a week, a year before really plugging him in to the family, is that much better than petitioning him right in. I just don't like seeing the op get judged here because they could meet 10 times, and he'd still be a stranger on her doorstep. (if you don't think so, yours just isn't here yet) and we don't know that he has a military "problem". Military contract-commitment just might be a more accurate description so..... all I'm saying is it probably isn't appropriate to criticise the op's decisions on the matter because it's probably no more nuts than the filing as soon as you meet once..

the guy here just might be getting bad advise from the guys around him that don't know jack about immigration, and feed him scary lies about the border.

I agree... I'm not for judging the OPs relationship... You can be married to someone for 10 years and not know them while on the other hand there are plenty of people around the world who married after meeting once or twice in person (maybe never) and have a perfectly content marriage

There should be a warning on VJ that if you choose to post, however, you are at extreme risk of being ripped to shreds

Thank you , youre absolutely right. I can only say that our relationship is not common but it makes us very happy. God knows best!

[SaroryH 0]

Aren't I lucky to be your target today? I believe this is my second honor of the day.

I think there is a HUGE difference between physically meeting a man and his family even if it's for a few weeks or months and not meeting them at all. Now you tell me...would YOU petition for your now husband if you never met him in person? I'm highly doubting you would. As far as I'm concerned you can't even be engaged unless you meet in person.

I agree..this is one hell of a risky situation even if you have met your SO in person. I love my husband dearly but if I had it to do all over again...I'd step away from the computer.

what if this dude gets here and he turns out to be not what he portrayed himself to be? I dunno..I wouldn't risk it.

Caution...I am especially crabby today...........

I know arguing isn't nice, but this is basically the same risk we all took (or are taking). I just don't think anymore that you can say that playing house for about a week, a year before really plugging him in to the family, is that much better than petitioning him right in. I just don't like seeing the op get judged here because they could meet 10 times, and he'd still be a stranger on her doorstep. (if you don't think so, yours just isn't here yet) and we don't know that he has a military "problem". Military contract-commitment just might be a more accurate description so..... all I'm saying is it probably isn't appropriate to criticise the op's decisions on the matter because it's probably no more nuts than the filing as soon as you meet once..

the guy here just might be getting bad advise from the guys around him that don't know jack about immigration, and feed him scary lies about the border.

I will do it and I will do it again. He is worth it. You're entitled to your opinion and I appreciate it.It makes me think for a minute but I don't doubt his love.

[Fandango 1,439]

what if this dude gets here and he turns out to be not what he portrayed himself to be? I dunno..I wouldn't risk it.

Caution...I am especially crabby today...........

I know arguing isn't nice, but this is basically the same risk we all took (or are taking). I just don't think anymore that you can say that playing house for about a week, a year before really plugging him in to the family, is that much better than petitioning him right in. I just don't like seeing the op get judged here because they could meet 10 times, and he'd still be a stranger on her doorstep. (if you don't think so, yours just isn't here yet) and we don't know that he has a military "problem". Military contract-commitment just might be a more accurate description so..... all I'm saying is it probably isn't appropriate to criticise the op's decisions on the matter because it's probably no more nuts than the filing as soon as you meet once..

the guy here just might be getting bad advise from the guys around him that don't know jack about immigration, and feed him scary lies about the border.

Without a doubt, it is imo

[Bosco 1]

I think there is a difference between not meeting at all and meeting even for a few days.

Sure, you can marry someone for ten years and not really "know" someone.

However, we are not talking about necessarily really "getting to know" a person in a week or two weeks time. These are high fraud countries filled with large numbers of guys willing to profess their love for any woman who will respond to their instant messages. It doesn't matter her age, her looks, how many times she has been divorced or the amount of children she has. It is about saying whatever it takes to this woman so he can get to the United States. Some don't even speak English the way they pretend to, using a friend or an online translation service (it is a plug-in on Yahoo messenger now). Even a short visit can open up a woman's eyes to many things. Learn he doesn't speak English the way he claimed, which can be an indicator he was Western wife shopping. Another huge red flag is if he won't take you to meet his family, which can indicate he is embarrased by her. A man could claim to be a devout Muslim but obviously doesn't even know how to pray when you meet him. Some of these guys bark orders at their mothers and sisters and that can be a huge turnoff that you can only see in person. His cell phone can ring constantly and it is women calling. You could go there just to hear from his own family how another woman had come before to meet him (yes, I know someone this happened to).

There is plenty you can learn about your potential future partner in just a few days that could make or break your decision to get married without actually "getting to know" him. Meeting isn't a guarantee but it is harder to hide certain things face-to-face and I know a few women who went to meet their online fiance and came home choosing to be single.

Edited October 10, 2006 by Bosco

[dawnnhatem 0]

what if this dude gets here and he turns out to be not what he portrayed himself to be? I dunno..I wouldn't risk it.

Caution...I am especially crabby today...........

I know arguing isn't nice, but this is basically the same risk we all took (or are taking). I just don't think anymore that you can say that playing house for about a week, a year before really plugging him in to the family, is that much better than petitioning him right in. I just don't like seeing the op get judged here because they could meet 10 times, and he'd still be a stranger on her doorstep. (if you don't think so, yours just isn't here yet) and we don't know that he has a military "problem". Military contract-commitment just might be a more accurate description so..... all I'm saying is it probably isn't appropriate to criticise the op's decisions on the matter because it's probably no more nuts than the filing as soon as you meet once..

the guy here just might be getting bad advise from the guys around him that don't know jack about immigration, and feed him scary lies about the border.

Without a doubt, it is imo

Obviously with a UK-to-US experience, theres no excuse for not already knowing -before filing- how he is in your home, in the US, maybe work, with your family, with money, in a disagreement, all in your real life setting...I'm sure most would like to have any of those important considerations before marrying or filing anything.

But you are posting in the ME/NA room, where its a little more of an ordeal to have that kind of time together, and so many here have chosen to except that and hope for the best. Anyway, we were talking about risky petitioning and my comparison was between filing after one brief visit in an almost artificial setting vs. filing without meeting. Its my position at this time there is little difference. Any visit might be better than none, but the difference in "risk" isn't big enough that the brief-visit-filers are any better than the no-visit filers.

still crabby, btw so hope this doesn't come out too offensively

[JenT 0]

David and I did not begin our relationship over the internet (our story is in my profile for those of you who don't know it and care to read....) but we didn't spend much time together before I left to come back to the US. After 2 months, I broke it off because I was overwhelmed by how intensely he felt about me and I couldn't accept that he could feel that way about me after such a short time...

When I wished him a 'happy birthday' in January and our relationship was re-ignited, I knew I had to see him again to be sure that my sense about him was true. I needed to see him interact with his family and friends... to see his house and how he lived... to know how we would interact with each other when we were together longer than 24 hours... to validate that his actions reflected his words on the phone. I would never subject my daughters to an unsafe situation, and to me, petitioning for him, without having spent more time together, and without seeing how my girls interacted with him would have been unsafe. I went back again in March with my girls after visiting alone in February and that was when he proposed. I accepted on the condition that he visit me as well... to see me in my own environment and how chaotic my life can be at times. I wanted to know that he could accept me and my lifestyle with my girls without having to experience a major upheaval in priorities and relationships. Of course there will be compromises, but there are things I am not willing to compromise about (my faith and my girls being a priority, for starters) and I needed to see how he would accept that in 'real life'. As it turns out, that was the most 'telling' visit of all.

Everyone is responsible for the risks they take in life... and there are always consequences to every action... and some are greater than others. We make decisions with the 'best available' information we have and sometimes those decisions are very wrong. Sometimes they work out for the best. So, SaroryH, only you will know for sure. I hope things work out for you the way that will make you the happiest in the long run.

Jen

Edited October 10, 2006 by JenT

[dawnnhatem 0]

I think there is a difference between not meeting at all and meeting even for a few days.

Sure, you can marry someone for ten years and not really "know" someone.

However, we are not talking about necessarily really "getting to know" a person in a week or two weeks time. These are high fraud countries filled with large numbers of guys willing to profess their love for any woman who will respond to their instant messages. It doesn't matter her age, her looks, how many times she has been divorced or the amount of children she has. It is about saying whatever it takes to this woman so he can get to the United States. Some don't even speak English the way they pretend to, using a friend or an online translation service (it is a plug-in on Yahoo messenger now). Even a short visit can open up a woman's eyes to many things. Learn he doesn't speak English the way he claimed, which can be an indicator he was Western wife shopping. Another huge red flag is if he won't take you to meet his family, which can indicate he is embarrased by her. A man could claim to be a devout Muslim but obviously doesn't even know how to pray when you meet him. Some of these guys bark orders at their mothers and sisters and that can be a huge turnoff that you can only see in person. His cell phone can ring constantly and it is women calling. You could go there just to hear from his own family how another woman had come before to meet him (yes, I know someone this happened to).

There is plenty you can learn about your potential future partner in just a few days that could make or break your decision to get married without actually "getting to know" him. Meeting isn't a guarantee but it is harder to hide certain things face-to-face and I know a few women who went to meet their online fiance and came home choosing to be single.

I really agree with everything you say here...its just that a guy with an agenda is going to behave well as long as he has to and his family will too. Meeting him and is fam is important, but its hardly any assurance of ultimate marriage quality.