drirshad
08-13 03:31 AM
He is gone .............
wallpaper Re: Tic Tock-Kesha - official
AfghanPremi
12-08 12:24 AM
Yes!
You will be fine, i am on H1 and doing my MS part time!!
You will be fine, i am on H1 and doing my MS part time!!
vindas
06-14 02:05 PM
Don't worry. I had received a call 3 years back from Department of Homeland security. They asked me that someone was taking picture from my car on the highway. someone had complained that we were taking pictures of "George Washington Bridge sign board" from our car. We had not even gone on that highway that day.
We told him that it is a wrong car. Why would we go on the highway and takie picture of the sign board. Somone have given wrong information.
After that we never got that kind of call. No issue at all.
We told him that it is a wrong car. Why would we go on the highway and takie picture of the sign board. Somone have given wrong information.
After that we never got that kind of call. No issue at all.
2011 Send keshakesha tick tock,
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
more...
gcpain
06-25 03:09 PM
You guys are great. Guys like you are making this world better place to live. I wish you both good luck.
I decided to apply I485 as future employment. My attorney charged complete GC fees when I got I140 approval. So now I have to pay only application fees but not any attorney charges. Do you guys know info about following?
I485 applicatio fee:
I-131 applicatio fee:
I765 applicatio fee:
Once again thanks for your advice.
I decided to apply I485 as future employment. My attorney charged complete GC fees when I got I140 approval. So now I have to pay only application fees but not any attorney charges. Do you guys know info about following?
I485 applicatio fee:
I-131 applicatio fee:
I765 applicatio fee:
Once again thanks for your advice.
sameer2730
05-15 10:06 AM
If you have worked on location other than what's mentioned in the certified LCA, it will be considered as an unauthorized employment, eventually application for adjustment of status will be denied on the basis of you engaged in unauthorized employment.
Thank you for this comment. I wanted to respond with something similar but held back thinking that if even by small chance this guy is real I do not want to upset him. But the fact that he simply did not respond to you speaks volumes of his real intentions.
Thank you for this comment. I wanted to respond with something similar but held back thinking that if even by small chance this guy is real I do not want to upset him. But the fact that he simply did not respond to you speaks volumes of his real intentions.
more...
franklin
06-21 12:27 AM
I think if PD remains current and continues to be current after october, then the I-485s are processed and approved as per the receipt date(RD). So your RD matters if everything continues to be current. If they retrogress, then I-485s are still processed as per I-485 RD, regardless of PD, but if the that PD is not current, then it it will be "placed in suspense" until such PD will become current.
I'm assuming that will happen. PDs will be retrogressed back sometime in sep/oct. And they will process all the current flood of applications. Not sure when they will get to June and beyond RDs(as per processing times they r still processing late 2006 RDs now). And after few months(say 6 months) they will move forward the PDs few months at a time.
The above is just my theory. I could be totally off, so don't come to any conclusions.
This is my understanding too
I'm assuming that will happen. PDs will be retrogressed back sometime in sep/oct. And they will process all the current flood of applications. Not sure when they will get to June and beyond RDs(as per processing times they r still processing late 2006 RDs now). And after few months(say 6 months) they will move forward the PDs few months at a time.
The above is just my theory. I could be totally off, so don't come to any conclusions.
This is my understanding too
2010 Tic Toc Kesha Mp3
mbartosik
11-08 03:33 PM
It looks like this including dependents -- good news.
According to:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/AILAQandASept2007.pdf
there were about 320K applications (likely primary applications). Remember that July fiasco only affected EB (not family based).
quote: "While we continue to receipt the work we recently received, we project that we received over 320,000 adjustment applications due to the July visa bulletin."
So that's only 5 years to clear the backlog, assuming minimal lost GC, and no new applications by ROW (thus reducing or stopping spill over). Of course ROW will continue to create new applications.
According to:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/AILAQandASept2007.pdf
there were about 320K applications (likely primary applications). Remember that July fiasco only affected EB (not family based).
quote: "While we continue to receipt the work we recently received, we project that we received over 320,000 adjustment applications due to the July visa bulletin."
So that's only 5 years to clear the backlog, assuming minimal lost GC, and no new applications by ROW (thus reducing or stopping spill over). Of course ROW will continue to create new applications.
more...
coolest_me
07-13 03:40 PM
Hi,
I m in the process of renewing AP for my family and have this question. When you renew for the family do you send all the application in one FedEx Envelope or one envelope for each application ?
Also, in case of E-Filing do you add all the applications under one login ?
Thanks in advance.
I m in the process of renewing AP for my family and have this question. When you renew for the family do you send all the application in one FedEx Envelope or one envelope for each application ?
Also, in case of E-Filing do you add all the applications under one login ?
Thanks in advance.
hair Kesha+tik+tok+album+art
anantc
09-20 03:28 PM
What is the Website-url for USCIS for tracking the 140? :confused:
more...
conchshell
08-13 02:48 PM
who is vld rao?
He is our cheer leader for monthly visa bulletins. You have posted 116 messages and you don't know Mr Rao?? High time for you to start reading other's posts, other than just writing yours :D
He is our cheer leader for monthly visa bulletins. You have posted 116 messages and you don't know Mr Rao?? High time for you to start reading other's posts, other than just writing yours :D
hot that tick tock Queue kesha
trramesh
11-09 02:03 PM
All,
Please post this information on other sites to get more people to participate in this survey. The survey ends on Dec 15.
Pappu,
Is this survey open to every one beyond donor forum.
Please post this information on other sites to get more people to participate in this survey. The survey ends on Dec 15.
Pappu,
Is this survey open to every one beyond donor forum.
more...
house Ke$ha#39;s debut single, Tik Tok,
myvinbox@gmail.com
08-24 04:30 PM
any updates on status of background processing for your 485 ?
tattoo kesha tic tock kesha,
badluck
06-25 02:47 PM
It looks like my lawyer has already mailed the application to USCIS. The priority dates becomes current only on July 1st.
What are my options here? Does anyone has faced such a situation?
send new again. anyways first one is going to come back.
What are my options here? Does anyone has faced such a situation?
send new again. anyways first one is going to come back.
more...
pictures she flag this Tick tock
sareesh
11-18 05:15 PM
Hello enggr,
I might have the same problem.
where you able to convert to EB3?
Please let me know.
Thanks,
SG
I might have the same problem.
where you able to convert to EB3?
Please let me know.
Thanks,
SG
dresses Her debut single “Tik Tok”
factoryman
02-08 05:31 PM
till Sept 2007. This is as read on another board.
more...
makeup Download Kesha – Tik tok (2009
krishna.ahd
10-15 03:58 PM
Considering the lowered cost of stock I am planning to gets my hands dirty in stock. But I don't have much knwoeldge about it. Also, by the time I find resouces to learn more about stock, the prices might ahve gone up.
So can anyone provide good online tools to know more about investing on stocks and buying stocks online...
Thanks
Start with this - much simpler
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/money101/lesson4/
or this
http://www.fool.com/investing/basics/index.aspx?source=ifltnvpnv0000001
Good Luck
BTW , there are supposed to be lot of police around here , looks like all are set with GC
So can anyone provide good online tools to know more about investing on stocks and buying stocks online...
Thanks
Start with this - much simpler
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/money101/lesson4/
or this
http://www.fool.com/investing/basics/index.aspx?source=ifltnvpnv0000001
Good Luck
BTW , there are supposed to be lot of police around here , looks like all are set with GC
girlfriend “Tik Tok” sold 440000
v2neha
04-25 11:26 AM
hello folks,
I am switching jobs after an approved I140 and over 180 days from 485 receipt.
I am expecting no problems when leaving my current company. but just incase they decide to revoke my 140,
- is it ok to file AC21 after i receive the NOID if some thing happens or is it better to file AC21 now?
one other complication is i will be changing address too. how long does it take for USCIS to update my new address in their records? the reason i am asking is if they send me RFE or NOID, i will totally miss the boat if they send it to the wrong address. i am sure they will send a copy to my attorney, but he works form my current employer and I will assume he is less likely to help. Does it help if i file G28 with my own name and my new address?
I need to join my new job in 10 days and i hev give my crrent company a notice so it is a bit urgent. Please help.
Thank you
Rex
Even if online address change thru AR-11 has not taken effect, post office will forward your mail to your new address for 12 months - make sure you fill out change of address form with postal dept immediately
I am switching jobs after an approved I140 and over 180 days from 485 receipt.
I am expecting no problems when leaving my current company. but just incase they decide to revoke my 140,
- is it ok to file AC21 after i receive the NOID if some thing happens or is it better to file AC21 now?
one other complication is i will be changing address too. how long does it take for USCIS to update my new address in their records? the reason i am asking is if they send me RFE or NOID, i will totally miss the boat if they send it to the wrong address. i am sure they will send a copy to my attorney, but he works form my current employer and I will assume he is less likely to help. Does it help if i file G28 with my own name and my new address?
I need to join my new job in 10 days and i hev give my crrent company a notice so it is a bit urgent. Please help.
Thank you
Rex
Even if online address change thru AR-11 has not taken effect, post office will forward your mail to your new address for 12 months - make sure you fill out change of address form with postal dept immediately
hairstyles about kesha tik tok,
ilikekilo
03-03 09:30 AM
Hello forum gurus
I am planning on moving from Company A to Company B. I have an approved I-140 from Company A which was approved in Sept 2007 and also applied for 485 on July 2nd 2007. It has been almost 1.5 yrs since I applied for 485 and I-140 approval.
Planning to move from Company A to Company B. Company A will not revoke my I-140 that is for sure. I am moving to a good company with 1000+ workforce and in an upcoming industry. It is not a consulting firm. It is a product based company. My wife is currently on EAD and is relying on it to work.
What are the odds that my AC21 may be wrongfully denied. I am having a hard time sleeping while thinking about this. I am on my H1. Can she still use her EAD while we file a petition for Motion to Reopen in the event that the 485 is wrongfully denied or does she have to change to H4 immediatly.
Can some one share your thoughts.
thanks in advance
I hear you...however the probability of success predicting the odds with USCIS are zero to none.. be +ve and move on.. Listen, iam not being philosophical here but I did move on from a so called "secure" and great company using AC21....to a smaller one....
was I concerned when I was planning to move : yes
do i loose sleep over this? no
did i file for ac 21? yes
Am I really worried : heck no
Am i ready for anything that comes my way from USCIS: heck yes and I will deal with it..easy to say..yes..but doesnt mean it will stop my life..
ps: btw Iam not single and yes I do have a family with a kid and ofcourse commitments like most poeple... so relax ..take it easy..
reg your question i am sure somone in teh forum is more knowledgeable than Iam..
I am planning on moving from Company A to Company B. I have an approved I-140 from Company A which was approved in Sept 2007 and also applied for 485 on July 2nd 2007. It has been almost 1.5 yrs since I applied for 485 and I-140 approval.
Planning to move from Company A to Company B. Company A will not revoke my I-140 that is for sure. I am moving to a good company with 1000+ workforce and in an upcoming industry. It is not a consulting firm. It is a product based company. My wife is currently on EAD and is relying on it to work.
What are the odds that my AC21 may be wrongfully denied. I am having a hard time sleeping while thinking about this. I am on my H1. Can she still use her EAD while we file a petition for Motion to Reopen in the event that the 485 is wrongfully denied or does she have to change to H4 immediatly.
Can some one share your thoughts.
thanks in advance
I hear you...however the probability of success predicting the odds with USCIS are zero to none.. be +ve and move on.. Listen, iam not being philosophical here but I did move on from a so called "secure" and great company using AC21....to a smaller one....
was I concerned when I was planning to move : yes
do i loose sleep over this? no
did i file for ac 21? yes
Am I really worried : heck no
Am i ready for anything that comes my way from USCIS: heck yes and I will deal with it..easy to say..yes..but doesnt mean it will stop my life..
ps: btw Iam not single and yes I do have a family with a kid and ofcourse commitments like most poeple... so relax ..take it easy..
reg your question i am sure somone in teh forum is more knowledgeable than Iam..
hebron
01-20 02:42 PM
can name few who became "big" literally (--fat)
LOL...Good one!
LOL...Good one!
GCNirvana007
04-08 05:23 PM
This is unreal !!.
I just asked 2 basic questions AND i get reply completely irrelevant of those questions and i am the one who is being accused.
By the way, Gangutoleogleoddl or whatever - No , absolutely no time to reply to your irrelevant talk. Infact its a waste to read your post.
Reddog, GCPool - hats off to you guys staying sane over here.
Good luck everybody.
I just asked 2 basic questions AND i get reply completely irrelevant of those questions and i am the one who is being accused.
By the way, Gangutoleogleoddl or whatever - No , absolutely no time to reply to your irrelevant talk. Infact its a waste to read your post.
Reddog, GCPool - hats off to you guys staying sane over here.
Good luck everybody.
No comments:
Post a Comment