park jung min pictures

images PARK JUNG MIN ]÷••)— —(••÷[

A Special Tribute to Park Jung

harikris

06-03 12:16 AM

You might find better luck taking your question to a relevant forum.
Here, we mainly discuss immigration issues.

---

wallpaper A Special Tribute to Park Jung

*Photo* Park Jung Min for Hat

pointlesswait

11-21 02:37 PM

Premium- only if u meet certain criteria!


I was looking into user profile options.

there are two choices for - I140 Filing Type
- Regular
- Premium

What is the difference b/w two. Can EB3 candidate file for I140 Filing Type in Premium category.

Thanks.

---

[Pics] Park Jung Min fotos

martinvisalaw

05-11 02:41 PM

You cannot file for a new EAD more than 120 days before the old one expires. You are within that 120-day period, so I would apply ASAP.

---

2011 *Photo* Park Jung Min for Hat

[pics] Park Jung Min Model For

Canadian_Dream

01-11 01:29 PM

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Disenfranchised_Indians_take_to_the_streets_agains t_HSMP/articleshow/1142198.cms

Can this event set a precedent for Western Immigration programs to treat people fairly ?
A similar thing had happened in the past when Canadian Immigration Agency increased the eligibility pass mark. Six months later a court ruled that they have to accomodate those who are already in the system.

I wonder if this open a judicial precedent for unjust affect of 245(i) on all of us. Interesting enough, UK skilled immigrants also have something similar to immigration voice.
http://www.vbsi.org.uk/

---

more...

SS501#39;s cool guy Park Jung Min

Karthikthiru

09-23 05:21 PM

Thanks. Easy for doing calculations

---

So like Jung Min.

Comiccmadd

07-23 09:36 AM

hah cool characters

---

more...

Jungmin Will be Back.

srikondoji

05-23 07:57 AM

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AsmEHycltlq6vUGnxJrypr7sy6IX?qid=200705 23053847AAIKPOX

---

2010 [Pics] Park Jung Min fotos

PARK JUNG MIN ]÷••)— —(••÷[

drirshad

06-19 07:46 PM

Jaani the visas that opened up are effective from July 1st so if there are more to come that will be for August ........

---

more...

Prev: [Pics] Park Jung Min#39;s

DesiGuy

09-19 04:43 PM

hi gurus, a question.

I am currently out of US but working for same company in Europe

I have approved 140, but waiting for PD to be current - (Jan/03, EB3-I).

I am now a sr manager and seem to be eligible for EB1C (if company agrees).

Option 1)
- continue to stay in Europe and apply for 140 (eb1c)+CP
- while waiting for 140 approval, am i eligible for: EAD and AC21 (after 180 days)

Option 2)
-move to US on L1 visa and apply for 140 (eb1c) + 485

Option 3)
- wait for PD for eb3 application to be current

Hope the above makes sense.

Can you pls suggest the best option & approx 'how much time' it will take for option 1 & 2. (understand option 3 is unpredictable).

Thanks

---

hair [pics] Park Jung Min Model For

tattoo Park Jungmin who will

YesWeWillGet

03-20 09:42 PM

Hi,
1. I am planning to work with a new employer on EAD. As i have heard in order to file AC21 the employer letter should present same job description as previous. I would like to know what are the other things we need to consider in order to be safe while filing AC21.

2. I requested my current employer to provide the copy of Labor certification that was filed for me. I received the following response from XYZ Company Inc., DOES NOT RELEASE COPIES OF THE LC, AS IT IS OUR APPLICATION WITH THE DOL FOR A POSITION NOT AN EMPLOYEE AND IT IS CONSIDERED PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL.
How should I have to obtain the Job Code etc.,?


Thank you

---

more...

Park Jung Min will release his

ItIsNotFunny

04-13 02:05 PM

By clicking the below link please send emails to your senators, all you need is to give your contact info and the email will be sent to the corresponding senators in your area.

http://capwiz.com/aila2/issues/alert/?alertid=9615496

I called NJ senators. Their staff just listened, didn't give any remarks from them ;)

---

hot SS501#39;s cool guy Park Jung Min

park jung min

srinivasj

07-07 12:11 PM

I took the HDFC receipt prior to June 28th..and I am planning to go for interview in August..should I take a new HDFC receipt for the difference..?

---

more...

house Park Jung Min Wallpaper by

[2011.03.29] Park Jung Min

Macaca

08-15 09:25 PM

Bush, Congress Struggle in Public Eye (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/15/AR2007081501271.html) By DAVID ESPO | The Associated Press, August 15, 2007

WASHINGTON -- The Democratic-controlled Congress and President Bush seem locked in a perverse competition for public unfavorability, according to a new Associated Press-Ipsos poll.

The survey shows Bush's approval ratings at 35 percent, and Congress' even lower, 25 percent. Only 27 percent of those polled said the country is headed in the right direction, and 39 percent said they support the Iraq war, with 58 percent opposed.

While Bush's favorability ratings have remained relatively unchanged for months, Congress' support declined markedly between May and July, a dip confirmed in a poll of 1,003 people taken last week.

Asked whether they approve or disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job after seven months of divided government, those surveyed were then prompted to volunteer a reason.

Of the 74 percent of those expressing congressional disapproval, 22 percent said lawmakers generally aren't doing their jobs. Another 20 percent cited a specific issue for their unhappiness. Twelve percent said they disapprove of Congress because lawmakers care only about themselves and their party, while 10 percent cited backstabbing and infighting.

Among those who cited an issue, the war in Iraq was mentioned most often. It was cited by 7 percent of those disapproving of Congress' performance, followed by health care, 5 percent; immigration, 2 percent and employment and wage issues, 2 percent.

The survey was taken as Congress was beginning its August recess, providing a respite from months of unsuccessfully trying to force Bush to change course in Iraq.

Democratic leaders have vowed to renew their challenge to Bush when they return to the Capitol after Labor Day. An autumn clash also looms over federal spending, and Bush has posted veto threats against bills dealing with farm programs, expansion of children's health care and energy.

"I don't think this war is going the way it should be. We're over there for nothing," said Richard Reda, 64, of Nashua, N.H., a Vietenam War veteran and self-described political independent.

In an interview, he said, "I think Congress should go over Bush's head and get these troops back here. There's got to be a way where they can override Bush to get the troops back here."

Maria Guyan, a 28-year-old school secretary from Struthers, Ohio, agreed. Guyan described her politics as "lean Democrat" and said, "I just don't think they're doing enough to keep President Bush from basically going forward on whatever he wants."

She said Congress should focus most on withdrawing from Iraq and improving the nation's education system.

"We definitely need to get out of the war, and we need to basically just realize we cannot run another country in addition to our own," she said.

But Peggy Grandinetti, 69, a Republican from Florence, Ala., criticized Congress for not standing by Bush on the war.

"I just completely disagree of pulling out of Iraq. I think we ought to stay there and finish the job," said the retired medical assistant.

Richard Henson, 58, of Atlanta, Ga., was among the Democrats who said Congress has failed to address a problem with illegal immigration.

"The immigrants are running bills up," said the post office manager, citing health care and school taxes as examples. "We have to pay extra taxes to support illegal immigrants. I don't think they should benefit from our services that we're paying taxes on."

Wes Kangas, 65, a Republican and retired banker in Vancouver, Wash., expressed weariness. "They don't seem to get anything done. All they do is bicker back and forth. After a while it gets kind of old," he said.

Republicans were more likely to say Congress wasn't doing its job, 26 percent, while Democrats tended to cite a specific issue, 24 percent. Among independents, 22 percent said generally that lawmakers weren't doing their job, and 20 percent pointed to a specific issue, a list topped by the war in Iraq.

When it came to judging Bush, 70 percent of Republicans approved of his performance, with 27 percent disapproving. Democrats split 89-9 in disapproval, and 68 percent of independents disapproved.

Congress, by contrast, was held in disregard without regard to party.

Among independents, 73 percent said they disapproved of the way Congress was handling its job, with 23 percent expressing approval. Among Democrats, a striking 70 percent disapproved and 26 percent approved, while Republicans split, 74-23, in disapproval.

The poll's margin of error was plus or minus three percentage points.

---

tattoo So like Jung Min.

SS501 Park Jung Min 1st Single

solaris27

11-04 02:18 PM

if you are out of country then why don't open account in ICICI or reliance to do trading .

you can do US stock trading using them ... Confirm with them also.

---

more...

pictures Jungmin Will be Back.

Joon and Park Jung Min at

needhelp!

02-04 07:10 PM

We have a law firm that helps us with IV: thawerlaw.com
The immigration attorney is Kimberly Kinser. She did a live Q&A session for our members. I don't have case experience from them, but I know they are good people. :)

---

dresses park jung min

~*Park Jung Min*~ »

HV000

11-22 03:17 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/21/AR2007112102419.html

This issue has gotten media attention not due "new born sympathy" towards immigrants but due to Hispanic politics played by Democrats since hispanics happen to be the majority in the citizenship waitlist!!!

Suddenly, they raise this issue while there are thousands of applications rotting for years. They always see only one side of the coin!!

---

more...

makeup Prev: [Pics] Park Jung Min#39;s

Park Jung Min Wallpaper by

stevensjd

06-22 04:38 PM

she will be on EOD once she quit the Job. You may not have to file COS to H4.

My wife quit the job last year she was on H1. and we didn't get any RFE till date..

She also went to India and came back on AP this year...

---

girlfriend SS501 Park Jung Min 1st Single

Park Jung Min wants to

Blog Feeds

08-12 09:50 AM

It's not unusual for immigrant sports figures in the US to have big followings in their home countries. When Omri Casspi don's a Sacramento Kings NBA jersey this coming season, it will be extra special for millions of his fellow Israelis who are looking forward to seeing the first one of their countrymen to play in the NBA. Casspi was a star player in Israel and is a first round draft choice this year.

More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/08/immigrant-of-the-day-omri-casspi-basketball-player.html)

---

hairstyles Park Jung Min will release his

SS501′s Park Jung-min to

easygoer

08-05 08:34 PM

My daughter is on F1 visa since she turned 22 years. She has her AOS (employment based dependent on me) pending. I-140 cleared and I -485 filed before she turned 22 years. She has also received her EAD and AP based on pending AOS.

We are planning to go to Canada and she want to use AP for reentering USA. My question is:

1) Once she enter USA using AP what happens to her F-1 status? Can she continue her F-1 status?

Appreciate guidance from Gurus/ Lawyers.

---

raysaikat

07-24 08:23 PM

Hi,
My current employer filed my labor and 140 in 2007 under EB3 and are also approved. Now I am planning to move to a different who is willing to start my GC under EB2. Now can i use 2007 as my priority date?

Thank you,
manjith

Yes.

---

Macaca

10-27 10:14 AM

America has a persuadable center, but neither party appeals to it (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/25/AR2007102502774.html) By Jonathan Yardley (yardleyj@washpost.com) | Washington Post, October 28, 2007

THE SECOND CIVIL WAR: How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America By Ronald Brownstein, Penguin. 484 pp. $27.95

These are difficult times for American politics at just about all levels, but especially in presidential politics, which has been poisoned -- the word is scarcely too strong -- by a variety of influences, none more poisonous than what Ronald Brownstein calls "an unrelenting polarization . . . that has divided Washington and the country into hostile, even irreconcilable camps." There is nothing new about this, he quickly acknowledges, and "partisan rivalry most often has been a source of energy, innovation, and inspiration," but what is particularly worrisome now "is that the political system is more polarized than the country. Rather than reducing the level of conflict, Washington increases it. That tendency, not the breadth of the underlying divisions itself, is the defining characteristic of our era and the principal cause of our impasse on so many problems."

Most people who pay reasonably close attention to American politics will not find much to surprise them in The Second Civil War, but Brownstein -- who recently left the Los Angeles Times to become political correspondent for Atlantic Media and who is a familiar figure on television talk shows -- has done a thorough job of amassing all the pertinent material and analyzing it with no apparent political or ideological axe to grind. He isn't an especially graceful prose stylist, and he's given to glib, one-word portraits -- on a single page he gives us "the burly Joseph T. Robinson," "the bullet-headed Sam Rayburn," "the mystical Henry A. Wallace" and "the flinty Harold Ickes" -- but stylistic elegance is a rare quality in political journalism in the best of times, and in these worst of times it can be forgiven. What matters is that Brownstein knows what he's talking about.

He devotes the book's first 175 pages -- more, really, than are necessary -- to laying the groundwork for the present situation. Since the election of 1896, he argues, "the two parties have moved through four distinct phases": the first, from 1896 to 1938, when they pursued "highly partisan strategies," the "period in modern American life most like our own"; the second, from the late New Deal through the assassination of John F. Kennedy, "the longest sustained period of bipartisan negotiation in American history," an "ideal of cooperation across party lines"; the third, from the mid-1960s to the mid-1990s, "a period of transition" in which "the pressures for more partisan confrontation intensified"; and the fourth, "our own period of hyperpartisanship, an era that may be said to have fully arrived when the Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted on a virtually party-line vote to impeach Bill Clinton in December 1998."

As is well known, the lately departed (but scarcely forgotten) Karl Rove likes to celebrate the presidency of William McKinley, which serious historians generally dismiss out of hand but in which Rove claims to find strength and mastery. Perhaps, as Brownstein and others have suggested, this is because Rove would like to be placed alongside Mark Hanna, the immensely skilled (and immensely cynical) boss who was the power behind McKinley's throne. But the comparison is, indeed, valid in the sense that the McKinley era was the precursor of the Bush II era, which "harkened back to the intensely partisan strategies of McKinley and his successors." Bush's strategies are now widely regarded as failures, not merely among his enemies but also among his erstwhile allies on Capitol Hill, who grouse about "White House incompetence or arrogance." But Brownstein places these complaints in proper context:

"Yet many conservatives recognized in Bush a kindred soul, not only in ideology, but more importantly in temperament. Because their goals were transformative rather than incremental, conservative activists could not be entirely satisfied with the give and take, the half a loaf deal making, of politics in ordinary times. . . . In Bush they found a leader who shared that conviction and who demonstrated, over and again, that in service of his goals he was willing to sharply divide the Congress and the country."

This, as Brownstein notes, came from the man who pledged to govern as "a uniter, not a divider." Bush's service as governor of Texas had been marked by what one Democrat there called a "collaborative spirit," but "he is not the centrist as president that he was as governor." This cannot be explained solely by the influence of Rove, who appeared to be far more interested in placating the GOP's hard-right "base" than in enacting effective legislation. Other influences probably included a Democratic congressional leadership that grew ever more hostile and ideological, the frenzied climate whipped up by screamers on radio and television, and Bush's own determination not to repeat his father's second-term electoral defeat. But whatever the precise causes, the Bush Administration's "forceful, even belligerent style" assured nothing except deadlock on the Hill, even on issues as important to Bush as immigration and Social Security "reform."

Brownstein's analysis of the American mood is far different from Bush/Rove's. He believes, and I think he's right, that there is "still a persuadable center in American politics -- and that no matter how effectively a party mobilized its base, it could not prevail if those swing voters moved sharply and cohesively against it," viz., the 2006 midterm elections. He also believes, and again I think he's right, that coalition politics is the wisest and most effective way to govern: "The party that seeks to encompass and harmonize the widest range of interests and perspectives is the one most likely to thrive. The overriding lesson for both parties from the Bush attempt to profit from polarization is that there remains no way to achieve lasting political power in a nation as diverse as America without assembling a broad coalition that locks arms to produce meaningful progress against the country's problems." As Lyndon Johnson used to say to those on the other side of the fence, "Come now, let us reason together."

Yet there's not much evidence that many in either party have learned this rather obvious lesson. Several of the (remarkably uninspired) presidential candidates have made oratorical gestures toward the politics of inclusion, but from Hillary Clinton to Rudolph Giuliani they're practicing interest-group politics of exclusion as delineated in the Gospel According to Karl Rove. Things have not been helped a bit by the Democratic leadership on the Hill, which took office early this year with great promises of unity but quickly lapsed into an ineffective mixture of partisan rhetoric and internal bickering. Brownstein writes:

"Our modern system of hyperpartisanship has unnecessarily inflamed our differences and impeded progress against our most pressing challenges. . . . In Washington the political debate too often careens between dysfunctional poles: either polarization, when one party imposes its will over the bitter resistance of the other, or immobilization, when the parties fight to stalemate. . . . Our political system has virtually lost its capacity to formulate the principled compromises indispensable for progress in any diverse society. By any measure, the costs of hyperpartisanship vastly exceed the benefits."

Brownstein has plenty of suggestions for changing things, from "allowing independents to participate in primaries" to "changing the rules for drawing districts in the House of Representatives." Most of these are sensible and a few are first-rate, but they have about as much chance of being adopted as I do of being president. The current rush by the states to be fustest with the mostest in primary season suggests how difficult it would be to achieve reform in that area, and the radical gerrymandering of Texas congressional districts engineered by Tom DeLay makes plain that reform in that one won't be easy, either. Probably what would do more good than anything else would be an attractive, well-organized, articulate presidential candidate willing, in Adlai Stevenson's words, "to talk sense to the American people." Realistically, though, what we can look for is more meanness, divisiveness and cynicism. It's the order of the day, and it's not going away any time soon.

---