Never met my fiance but sent in the K-1 application

[Sheri&Carl 0]

No, I don't think that learning disabilities are the reason for making dumb questions.. most of the times we are just too lazy to read, if you are going to start this journey on your own, do yourself a favor and read and read and read again, get informed as much as you can, read books, read the guidelines, and please read the instructions! If you have a question you can always come here and ask.

You'll learn so much more doing some reading first.

I don't think so either, I was just saying maybe being so harsh isn't the best way to handle these posts. But sometimes you read and read and something may be right there and you don't see it, so you ask, then get flamed. This is an extreme case and you would have to be quite out of touch to not know. I agree that it was either a joke, or someone asking to see if anyone has gotten away with it. Maybe it is someone who is totally in love with his gf but can't afford to fly over. I know I know if you can't afford that marriage shouldn't be in the picture so on and so forth, but being in love makes people do odd things lol

[*julez* 124]

If one cannot read (and follow) the instructions of a simple form, they have bigger issues than getting flamed on a messageboard.

Amen to that my sistah!

And sorry, there ARE dumb questions. I would hope that a learning disabled person would understand enough about his/her disability to make a decision about what they are or are not capable of doing.

And I don't think anyone in this thread was particularly harsh, either. The fact is the 2 yr requirement is just that a requirement. People responded with the cold hard facts. Since the OP made this drive-by post, I think its reasonable to assume that he is a TROLL.

Either way, there is no evidence to suggest the OP is LD, but plenty to suggest he is a TROLL.

[kitkat1 5]

If one cannot read (and follow) the instructions of a simple form, they have bigger issues than getting flamed on a messageboard.

Amen to that my sistah!

And sorry, there ARE dumb questions. I would hope that a learning disabled person would understand enough about his/her disability to make a decision about what they are or are not capable of doing.

And I don't think anyone in this thread was particularly harsh, either. The fact is the 2 yr requirement is just that a requirement. People responded with the cold hard facts. Since the OP made this drive-by post, I think its reasonable to assume that he is a TROLL.

Either way, there is no evidence to suggest the OP is LD, but plenty to suggest he is a TROLL.

I love it when someone shows a voice of reason!

[TracyTN 237]

No, I don't think that learning disabilities are the reason for making dumb questions.. most of the times we are just too lazy to read, if you are going to start this journey on your own, do yourself a favor and read and read and read again, get informed as much as you can, read books, read the guidelines, and please read the instructions! If you have a question you can always come here and ask.

You'll learn so much more doing some reading first.

I don't think so either, I was just saying maybe being so harsh isn't the best way to handle these posts. But sometimes you read and read and something may be right there and you don't see it, so you ask, then get flamed. This is an extreme case and you would have to be quite out of touch to not know. I agree that it was either a joke, or someone asking to see if anyone has gotten away with it. Maybe it is someone who is totally in love with his gf but can't afford to fly over. I know I know if you can't afford that marriage shouldn't be in the picture so on and so forth, but being in love makes people do odd things lol

If you can't afford a plane ticket, why on earth would filing a $455 petition (that will no doubt be denied) be anymore fiscally responsible?

To coin a favorite phrase of mine, you may as well throw the $455 in the toilet and eliminate the middle man.

Edited August 16, 2007 by TracyTN

[Jason-Sasha 1]

There's not a toilet around that I wouldn't go into for that money either....nah, who am I kidding?? you ever see Trainspotting? eh hem...ok sorry........

[Jason-Sasha 1]

Hahaha, you know this topic was only started about 7 hours ago and already has over 1200 views. That's just crazy. Is that a troll record??

[MM_MS 0]

My neice works for UNICEF in Nairobi, Kenya, and arrived home for a visit last week. Based on her description of life for 99% of Kenyans, emails and webcam communication is impossible. The suggestion that "Stanley" and his fiancee communicated via email and webcams is absurd. Only a very few very wealthy Kenyans would have access to the Internet. Thus, "Stanley's" story is implausible and ridiculous.

Add kitkat's observation below, and it's not a great leap to deduce that our new friend "Stanley" is a TROLL.

Does anyone really believe that this is NOT a troll? Yes there are a lot of dumbos out there -- but this is a case where the I-129F makes it CRYSTAL CLEAR that you have to prove you've met in the prior two years and describe that meeting. The form even clearly says "Explain also in detail any reasons you may have for requesting that the requirement that you and your fiancé(e) must have met should not apply to you".

I don't believe a real applicant filling out the form would just decide to skip that part.

My call = TROLL

[Dakine 26]

We all "could" be wrong as here is a guy that claims he pulled off Service Center approval without having met his fiance in person.

If he's trolling; He's GOOD at doing so!

http://www.theworldoffilipinas.com/forum/i...sult_type=posts

[chris4gretchen 1]

however there is a guy on theworldoffilipinas.com who just receved his NOA2 approval from CSC, and he has never met his filipina fiance. he has mental fatigue and financial hardships he says and got a lawyer to say he cant travel. he got approved yesterday. it will be interesting to see if his fiance is approved in manila. and he is not wheelchair bound etc. he looks fine to me. i dont know how me will afford her expenses there for the visa or the AOS here in the states. im not even sure how he afforded a lawyer. he seems to still live at home. his posts said he asked his dad if he could marry the girl. they have chatted online since 2004. He did get a RFE for more on the relationship, so he wrote them a letter telling them it. he posted his letter back in may. he filed in march but the way.

in the end, he did get approved. he posted the email stating the approval.

chris

Edited August 17, 2007 by chris4gretchen

[JoeMama 0]

however there is a guy on theworldoffilipinas.com who just receved his NOA2 approval from CSC, and he has never met his filipina fiance. he has mental fatigue and financial hardships he says and got a lawyer to say he cant travel. he got approved yesterday. it will be interesting to see if his fiance is approved in manila. and he is not wheelchair bound etc. he looks fine to me. i dont know how me will afford her expenses there for the visa or the AOS here in the states. im not even sure how he afforded a lawyer. he seems to still live at home. his posts said he asked his dad if he could marry the girl. they have chatted online since 2004. He did get a RFE for more on the relationship, so he wrote them a letter telling them it. he posted his letter back in may. he filed in march but the way.

in the end, he did get approved. he posted the email stating the approval.

chris

He's got a dog. If he can afford to feed the dog, maybe they'll end up sharing the dog food to survive. It's not unheard of

[Jasman0717 9]

Does anyone really believe that this is NOT a troll? Yes there are a lot of dumbos out there -- but this is a case where the I-129F makes it CRYSTAL CLEAR that you have to prove you've met in the prior two years and describe that meeting. The form even clearly says "Explain also in detail any reasons you may have for requesting that the requirement that you and your fiancé(e) must have met should not apply to you".

I don't believe a real applicant filling out the form would just decide to skip that part.

My call = TROLL

[yogib37 3]

Does anyone really believe that this is NOT a troll? Yes there are a lot of dumbos out there -- but this is a case where the I-129F makes it CRYSTAL CLEAR that you have to prove you've met in the prior two years and describe that meeting. The form even clearly says "Explain also in detail any reasons you may have for requesting that the requirement that you and your fiancé(e) must have met should not apply to you".

I don't believe a real applicant filling out the form would just decide to skip that part.

My call = TROLL

:thumbs:

[Laynie 0]

Does anyone really believe that this is NOT a troll? Yes there are a lot of dumbos out there -- but this is a case where the I-129F makes it CRYSTAL CLEAR that you have to prove you've met in the prior two years and describe that meeting. The form even clearly says "Explain also in detail any reasons you may have for requesting that the requirement that you and your fiancé(e) must have met should not apply to you".

I don't believe a real applicant filling out the form would just decide to skip that part.

My call = TROLL

:thumbs:

LOL Just got done reading all the posts on here concerning Stanley WoW that was fun I really needed a pick me up and all your posts did it thanks guys,, really down in dumps today,,but you made me feel a little better!!

[chris4gretchen 1]

i think stanley misunderstood the words "having met". he thought that meant they met on the internet vs met in another country or met thru family etc. i dont think he understood having met meant personally in the physical. i think he missed that part. and i think reading here he discovered everyone had physically met.

chris

[bora bora 1]

There's not a toilet around that I wouldn't go into for that money either....nah, who am I kidding?? you ever see Trainspotting? eh hem...ok sorry........

I love that movie !