Yes my wife came to visit me during the process and I went to visit her. Mostly me visiting her because I could drive there. It was 19 hours but I made the trip several times. I flew some also.

It just seems crazy to me that if USC is married and their spouse can receive immigration benefits why not allow them to stay in the US during the process? They are more likely to complete the immigration process than someone who has no ability to immigrate but wants to travel here. The law allows a spouse to immigrate so why not allow them to visit during the process? They seems to be the least likely to become an illegal alien.

Believe me 5 million isn't that much these days, can you stretch it until you are say 80 years old and maintain a good standard of living?

I wasn't comparing the end results to the lotto, I was comparing peoples resentment to a lotto winner.

I think you missed my point. Your comparison with winning a lottery isn't a good one, because that person didn't break the law. Compare it to a bank robbery, that way both factors (end result being the same and illegality of what has been done) match.

I'm not saying people who did visa frauds are terrible, need to go to jail, dangerous or anything.. but I can't say that what they did was right. Let's just be objective here and accept that breaking the law isn't the right thing to do.

to simply put it.. I just want my wife now..

I really hope you get your visa soon... You have been waiting for too long..

I was supposed to be in my boyfriends arms on December 20th, but by the time I got the money to buy the ticket (a week) there were no flights from Europe to America on December 19th, 20th or 21st so I had to take the 22nd..

It is not visa fraud to visit the US and then decide to get married. You could argue that anyone coming here to visit a boy or girlfriend has in the their mind the possibility of getting married so therefore the intent was there when they entered. Why should law be left to an individual to make an judgement if intent was there? The law allows it and it is up to the interviewer to decide.
I say take that away completely and allow the spouse to visit during the process and no longer do they have to determine if intend was there.

What isn't fair is that this guy gogo petitioned 4 months after me and my wife has been here over a year already and he doesn't even have an approval yet. Should my processing time have been extended to match his? I think allowing spouses to visit would be the most humane thing USCIS could do.
People will still complain about the processing times but at least they would be together.

I know. We've been through that. It's not even illegal to enter with the intention to marry, just to enter on a non-immigrant visa with the intention to marry and stay, and therefore become an immigrant.
Spouses are allowed to visit during the process from what I understood. I might be wrong though..

I like your idea with changing the laws [*], but I think we're missing each other here. You keep saying how the laws should be changed, and I am just saying that your post seemed like you approved of visa frauds, and that's why the girls reacted.

[*] I realize that if the law let people enter the US before the visa was issued it would be a big problem in case of a denial because it would be difficult to track everybody down and force them to leave the country. It's easier if you keep them out in the first place, and only let them enter if all is clear.

No, it's not fair. The thing should work faster. Of course not. Why would anyone wanna prolong it? It's long enough as it is!Are you talking about visits or USCIS letting people move to the USA while they wait for their visa application to be processed?

true, I wouldn't mind if we are together (they can take a couple of years), but it is just not being able to see each other.. that is the hardest.. I know I said I do the webcam / phone thing everyday, but it is still not the same as in person... whenever something comes up that is funny, we can both have a good laugh.. something like that..

I think he was taking about a "temporary visa" for her to come over while we wait for the visa to get approved.. maybe even a one-time 6-month tourist visa would be nice.. =)

I think that intentionally using the visitor visa to circumvent the immigrant visa process is wrong.

I think they should allow those going through the process to obtain visitor visas during the process. I also think those who have gone before us abused the system and that is the reason it is so difficult sometimes.

Jamaica is notorious for not allowing visitor visas for almost any reason. It's extremely difficult to get one. I find that wrong in every sense. But, then again, I think those before abused the system.

I think blaming anyone in a govermental capacity is wrong because they are just following rules that were set because of those who have abused the system in the past.

I guess my point is that getting married, staying together, and getting a green card in about 6 months is not the same end result as waiting apart for years, dealing with unreasonable government officers who are not required to have any accountability to US citizens or even to Senators and Representatives, and eventually getting a visa, then having to apply for a green card, which is another several months long wait. I guess if all you count is the green card it's the same, but we're comparing months and years of uncertainty and unhappiness to a few months for a near-certain approval (honestly, how many people have you seen on this board whose AOS from visitor visa or student visa was not approved because some consular officer thought they didn't have a valid relationship?).

In addition, people on the VWP save a lot of money. They didn't have to pay all the visa fees.

I'm happy for the people who have that option that it was so easy for them, and that people who overstay can fall in love and magically become legal residents, but is that really right?

Edited to add: I know plenty of people (mostly friends of my husband) who get married to someone just to get their green card after they've overstayed a tourist visa. They live together amicably for a few years, then split up, and voila, the person who was an illegal immigrant becomes a resident and then eventually a citizen. I'm sure nobody here agrees with this, but the current system makes this kind of arrangement extremely easy to get away with.

Exactly! And at the same time we have people here who applied for K-1 and are waiting for months and years, going through AR and second interviews sometimes scheduled months away from the first one, and going through all that kind of stuff because the CO questioned the validity of their relationship, and in some cases the CO has even refused to look at the evidence or documents that were submitted in the first place! That is exactly what I'm talking about, it is sooo upsetting!

I agree that people shouldn't have to spend so much time apart and the laws should change so people can be together during the process.

Has anyone seen statistics on how many visas are issued for spouses conpared to all the rest? I am curious what percent are for spouses and fiances?

I haven't posted in awhile.. but I thought I'd jump in on this.

As for changing the law so that people can wait in the US while they are AOS... That would be great if we were all good people but unfortunately the world isn't full of nice people. From the government's perspective this is the giant worm hole you open up:

A says that he is going to marry B (US Citizen) or is married to B. A is allowed into the country to wait for his paperwork. The US government then realizes A has ulterior motives coming to the US and isn't actually here for the marriage. The US goverment orders A deported. A says: That's nice. But now you have to come get me because I'm not leaving! A then disappears....

Think of the time, money and resources it would take the chase these people down rather than just not having allowed them into the country in the first place.
Unforunately these people spoil it for everyone else.

Great point. I had a Vice Consul once tell me that in the country he was in, and many others, there are standing instructions to turn down visitor/tourist visas for any applicant under 35 years old. Exceptions are made for people leaving behind children, spouses, successful businesses, or valuable property. The assumption out of the box is that there is some other motive than a visit because 80% (his figure) of the persons under 30 with those kinds of visas don't come back on time. He also said that Homeland Security (INS then) doesn't have the manpower to track down people who overstay - and they are more concerned with undocumented aliens. I can't speak to the accuracy of his statistics, but I believe that there is a problem with overstaying.

I hate that my fiance' is from a country where getting a visa to America is near impossible. It would make our lives easier if I could fly her here periodically too. At least the people who arrive on some other kind of visa and then get married are documented and examined to some extent before we let them in. I am much more worried about the thousands who walk/wade in, or ride in cargo ships. It makes me angry that people who arrived here illegally think they have the right to sneak in without security checks and stay forever. It makes me furious that many of our dumb-### elected officials believe that if an illegal manages to hide here long enough, they can have amnesty. When our 80's era amnesty program wrapped up it was like putting up a sign that says "hide out long enough and you can stay". Although I am as frustrated as anybody at the long process, I salute all persons who at least get a visa of some kind before coming here. Every immigrant should. Just my opinion.

Just want to add a couple of quick comments......

First, I don't condone breaking the law or knowingly doing anything illegal or fraudulent. And I am truly sorry for those of you who have to wait alone until your loved one can join you here in the US. I pray that everyone will be united ASAP!

1) there is a big difference between "intent" and "possibility". Intent, to me, means that one or both of the parties specifically and knowingly decided to use an alternate and fraudulent way to enter and stay in the US via marriage. Possibility, on the other hand, is just that: it is "possible" that you might meet someone on your visit, and it is "possible" that you may fall in love and get married. "Possibilities" surround us every day in our lives..... is it "possible" that I might look for a new job one day? Sure! So if I admit to that possibility now, and then three months down the road I happen to be offered a new job, does that constitute "intent"? Of course not! Hence, regarding marriage, this is what is left to the USCIS to determine.

2) there are advantages and drawbacks to both situations (ie: applying out of the country, or adjusting status while within). When you wait out of the country for the visa, I can only imagine how hard it is to be away from your partner, and the wait must seem endless. But you are also able to transition from your old life to your new one over time. For those who enter legally as a visitor, with every plan to return to their home country, it creates quite the dilema when you unexpectly "abandon" everything back home. Your family, your home, your business, your belongings, your bank accounts, your medical benefits, etc etc etc. You are literally stuck here, with the *clothes on your back* until you are granted PR. Yes, I got to stay with my husband, but trying to conduct/coclude my old life from this side of the border has been no picnic in the park. Hiring attorneys on both sides of the border to deal with real estate sales, taxes, etc I could handle...... what I could not handle was my mother (not in the US) being diagnosed with terminal cancer, and I not even being able to go and see her without jeopardizing my AOS case. Our attorney said it would take about 6 months..... it took 11. Every night I prayed that God would not take her yet.... .just give us enough time for us to finish this process so that I could take her new son-in-law home before it was too late.

A lot of things in life are not "fair". Sometimes we are put in situations that we would rather avoid; but we have to make a choice, and then live with the consequences. I had two LEGAL choices: leave the US after my marriage, tie up my old life at home, and await a spousal visa; or remain in the US with my husband, wait who knows how long for AoS, deal the best I can with a life on both sides of a border until I am able to go home and officially "move". I chose the latter, and even though it has not always been easy, I accepted the consequences of my decision.

Please use caution when crying "it's not fair!". We are (I assume) adults, and we CHOSE to marry someone from outside of our own country. We did this knowing full well that there would be an immigration process to endure, one way or the other. I'm sure that for some people - maybe those who do commit fraud - it is a walk in the park, but not for all of us who come as visitors and stay for love. But God is good..... I received my greencard today, Mom is hanging in there, and next week she will meet her new son-in-law for the first time, as I can finally go home

Just a comment on this last paragraph, hoping I will not hurt anyone's feelings... In the countries that are part of the European Union and have signed the Schengen Treaty, there is next to no immigration process to be endured for the spouses of citizens. Moreover, if my fiancé had been a citizen of, say, France or Germany (which are still different countries than my native Italy), none of this would have happened. All the 'immigration process' is about is applying for a special residence permit, valid for 5 years. No separations, interviews, lots of money to be spent, fear of deportation, and such.... And none of our countries are overrun with criminals, or by people marrying just in order to get residency.

And on a similar note, people who have UK partners who decide to immigrate the other way are required to get a fiance visa to marry find they get said visa in a matter of days as opposed to months. I bet this whole "tourist adjusting" debate we are having would be mute if that was the case here.

I think they should modify it so they can marry while here but must exit at the end of the b2 visa and wait out the k3/cr1 process. If they did intend on staying in the first place that it should be no problem.

Just wanted to clarify that I'm not saying is not fair that we have to go through an immigration process. I was more than aware of what we were getting into. I never said it was unfair we had to apply for a K-1.

I'm saying is not fair that those who break the law using a B-2 to immigrate (fully aware of that when they entered the country as tourist their real purpose was to marry AND stay permanently) pass their interviews without being questioned at all, about their intent or about the validity of their relationship. While many others who do it the right way, go through hell during their interviews, go through endless reviews, are scheduled a second or third interviw! That, in my opinion is UNFAIR.

If you had no intent to immigrate using a B-2, good for you, you did not break the law. I'm not talking about people who did not have intent prior to enter the country.

One last comment about, the negative side of staying permanently after entering with a B-2 and the things you had to go through for doing so. YOU decided to stay. (as you said, as an adult, you were aware of what you were doing). So whatever you had to leave behind, it was because you decided to do so. If there were things or family issues that were too important could not be left unsolved, you also had the choice to go back home solve all your things and apply for a K-1, BUT you decided to stay. You made a choice, and you had to deal with the consequences of making that decision.

I know someone right now who intends to do this very thing.

I have voiced my opinion on how I feel about it.

Exactly. Glad you understood my point!

And not quoting any poster specifically, but it's a bit simplified to assume and generalize that those who adjusted status from within the US had an "easier" time, or faster processing, than those who wait in their home coutries for a visa, thus a reason to "hate" them. I have read dozens and dozens of stories on this website of couples who got the runaround, unfair and moody officers, RFEs, interviews, missing files, background checks, etc etc...... regardless of how they applied for PR, where they were, or from which country they had come. Obviously, there are going to criteria that make it more difficult for certain couples (ie: applicant's homeland), with intensified scrutinty and longer processing times. If it hard to get a visitor visa from your country, then it's not unreasonable to allow that it will also be harder to complete the immigration process. But that's because of global politics, not of legal visitors marrying, staying, "jumping the line", and getting a greencard in 3 months!!

I don't think it would make a bit of difference if the law changed so that NO ONE could marry and stay while adjusting status.... that is not going to stop people from breaking the law. If anything, it will just encourage more people to stay here illegally, which is sad but true. But this goes far beyong the AOS via marriage domain...... think about the "guest worker program" that never happend. Sort of like "OK, whoever is here illegally, raise your hand, and we might let you stay for 3 years, but then you have to leave." Ummmmm..... how many of them have already been here for 5, 10, 20 years? Who will actually raise their hand?? Same with gun control - those who want 'em, will get 'em one way or another! Making it HARDER to adjust status from within the country won't change anything.... making the process more FAIR for those outside the country might.

IMO, the reason that so many people are waiting so long for immigration is because the entire system is grossly messed up. No one seems to know what they are doing..... this dept is not communicating with that dept, this officer had different prejudices from that officer, your file ends up on someone's desk who once knew someone with a last name that sounds like yours who's grandfather was an alledged communist, so they stick your file at the bottom of the pile. It goes on and on. How is it that one person named John Smith has zero harrassment at POE, and the next John Smith is sent to secondary because his suitcase is blue instead of black? Or that the immigration officer smiles and approves the pretty blonde in jeans, but gives an unusally hard time to the lovely woman in her native dress? And all the while, families are hurting and missing out on precious time together.... time that they will never get back. THESE are the things that are "unfair". EVERY legitimate couple should be treated with respect and urgency, no matter where they are from or how they came to find their loved one, so that they can get on with building their lives together.

Nuff said.

QUOTE(pegbert64 @ Jul 7 2008, 01:55 PM)

And not quoting any poster specifically, but it's a bit simplified to assume and generalize that those who adjusted status from within the US had an "easier" time, or faster processing, than those who wait in their home coutries for a visa, thus a reason to "hate" them. I have read dozens and dozens of stories on this website of couples who got the runaround, unfair and moody officers, RFEs, interviews, missing files, background checks, etc etc...... regardless of how they applied for PR, where they were, or from which country they had come. Obviously, there are going to criteria that make it more difficult for certain couples (ie: applicant's homeland), with intensified scrutinty and longer processing times. If it hard to get a visitor visa from your country, then it's not unreasonable to allow that it will also be harder to complete the immigration process. But that's because of global politics, not of legal visitors marrying, staying, "jumping the line", and getting a greencard in 3 months!!

Its good that you are not quoting any poster, I honestly, don't think any of the posters on this thread has made that generalization. The intention of this thread was not to generalize about those had adjusted their status while in the U.S.



The title of thread is "VISA FRAUD: Using B-2 with intention to immigrate and getting away with it easily" My purpose was to talk about people who commit visa fraud specifically. When I said "getting away with it easily" I meant getting away with the visa fraud. Not getting their green card easily. I was talking about people who break the law because they disagree with it or the immigration rules do not fit their personal agenda. These people would never go through the "downside" you had to go through when you left your family and personal matters unattended. The people I'm talking about planned on immigrating through a B-2, and handled all their business before coming to the U.S. and lied at the POE. For what you wrote you don't fall into this category, so when we talk about couples who used B-2 a short cut to immigrate you should not take it personally, as you did not have intent prior to entry the U.S. Like you, MANY who have adjusted their status in the U.S. have done it legally; those cases are NOT the subject of this discussion. The law breakers are.



I really don't know if their AOS process goes faster or slower than the AOS process of a K-1 or K-3 holder. I'd have to check the VJ timelines to make such statement. BUT there is one thing you can not deny, they sure save themselves from 6 months to 1 year of waiting abroad, by not having to apply for a K-1 or K-3, and applying directly to AOS.





I'd appreciate, if you could point me out those dozens of threads of people who adjusted from a B-2 going through so many difficulties when applying for AOS, because I have missed them all. I've been here for a while and haven't read a single thread about a B-2 holder going through lots of trouble when adjusting their status or being asked about their intent during their interview.



I agree, every legitimate couple should be treated EQUALLY with respect. That's why I'm against of those who break the law and cut into line. AGAIN, I'm talking about those who willingly and consciously decided to commit visa fraud.



One last thing, I have to disagree about what you said that if getting a visitor visa from a certain country is difficult, then ANY other immigration process will be difficult as well for a person from that country. MANY people who had been denied tourist visas several times, have no problem getting a K-1 or K-3 and adjusting their status. The requirements for getting a B-2 are completely different of the requirements for getting another type of visa or applying for AOS. So I don't think that is necesarily true.

They will never be able to stop overstays of any type of visa until they have a method of tracking them down. I have read that people that have been detained and then released have been fitted with a tracking device. What would be wrong with putting a tracking device on everyone entering the US on a non immigrant visa? They already have approved making everyone "check out of the US" by collecting biometrics at exit so why not go one step further and do it right by being able to track someone when they don't exit before their I-94 expires? If they refuse to wear it then don't allow them to enter?

I think that would be pretty expensive!!! And a little bit dehumanizing, no? How would you feel if every time you went to Europe you had to wear an ankle bracelet? I guess it might solve the problem, but it might also harm our substantial tourist industry!

You're kidding right? You're not actually suggesting that all people wanting to visit US be treated as if what they were doing was a crime? I mean, why not lock them all up, just in case they decide to take the bracelet off or steal something?

What would be wrong in pissing all over their human rights and all those constitutions in the world that say a person isn't guilty until proven otherwise?! Here you're presuming all the tourists are guilty and basically saying: "Let's make sure we can track them down when they break the law (and they surely will)"!!!


I would never ever visit or want to live in a country where they would treat people as criminals simply for wishing to visit the country and spend some of their hard earned money there. My boyfriend could move to my country where people are still treated as humans regardless if they're citizens of the country or not. I honestly hope you realize how degrading and wrong your idea is.

I know what you mean. It is indeed very frustrating to have to go through all the pain and hassle of applying for K1 visa when everyone else is having it much easier via the B2. I have a B2 myself and I am very much afraid of risking it. I guess it really depends if one is willing to take the risk. For me, the bottom line is I want to be able to enter the US legally and be able to sleep soundly at night. It takes a lot of patience and I just am not willing to risk not being able to enter the US again ever and being with the man I love. If one thing is meant for you, Fate will find a way to give it to you... Keep the faith everyone!!!

There will always be bad apples in the bunch who ruin a good thing for the honest decent folks who's "real" intent is to have a genuine
marriage.

Folks who are truly in love have to pay the price for the opportunists"Taking advantage of the system"...
I totally despise hoax sham marriages for the sole purpose of gaining a GC.Marriage is a serious commitment
and should never be taken lightly.Nor should real feelings,emotions.Having someone's heart played with like a tonka toy is just not kosher.

Sadly marriage fraud a.k.a marriage of convenience is growing rampant. *smh*

Don't be so sure they wont start using microchips some time in the future. There are people with certain jobs that already require implanted microchips.
They are already proposing microchipping everyone's ID in the US which includes GPS tracking.

It could possibly improve tourism because more people could be allowed to get visas if there was a way to track them.

Everyone conplaints about the government not enforcing the current immigration laws so why not give them a tool to be able to enforce it? The cost won't be any more expensive than everything else they are doing to try to enforce it currently.

i dont know if i was told by another country that i had to get a micro chip to visit it i dont think i would do it.......first our government has too much information about us already that is private so to allow another country that kind of access im pretty sure it would not be something i would do

If it was the only way to travel to other countries then what choice would anyone have? If you have a new cell phone then most likely you can be tracked by it. If you have onstar you can be tracked by your vehicle, if you buy anything with something other than cash you can be tracked by it. I think the American public would be willing to require all non immigrant visa holders to be tracked if it meant immigration laws could be enforced. It would also eliminate fake documents if they didn't match your microchip. It could solve the issues with false work documents.

Do you have any idea how much something like that would cost, the constitutional challenges that would be mounted etc? Ever hear of something called "function creep"? What starts off as an aid to "effective management of immigration" could very easily be expanded to include credit reports, medical data etc etc. You're looking at the ultimate "Big Brother", uber-intrusive nanny-state. If you think that what you're describing would stop at non-immigrants, you're sadly mistaken.

You do not want something like that in operation. Ever. Because an organisation holding or with access to all of your data etc in the depth you're proposing could - if they chose - make you "cease to exist" in an instant. Think about how much control over yourself you're handing over - and to who? What does any organisation need that for? What are they proposing to do with that data?

If that were the deal for non-immigrants, M would move here. No question. Because it would mean America wasn't America anymore.

I read something about this "tracking" a few years ago...... We're advised to "microchip" our pets so that if they get lost, they can be reunited with us. I've also heard about microchips in kids' sneakers, again with the promise that your kid could be found if kidnapped. However, all these "wonderful achievements" are just test programs in which EVERYONE could be tracked. Can you imagine an entire generation of children who were microchipped at birth "for their own good"? I don't think it is our personal safety and peace of mind that is the driving force behind all of this microchipping

as i said in my earlier post our government has way to much private information about us already......getting a chip no thanks........is too much big brother for me

It will happen eventually i can promise you that. The real ID Act already is going to require biometrics on everyone. You will soon be required to give fingerprints for all USC to be able to drive. USCIS already requires this. This and all your information is being put into a database. Soon databases will be linked. You people don't think eventually future generations won't say ok? Most people are using debit cards instead of cash now and you don't think future generations aren't going to say "why should I have to carry a debit card when I can just scan my thumb print to pay?" They already have GPS in all new cell phones and you can track your children or spouse on the internet by them. We are slowly being pulled into acceptance.


They already have all the information about you whether you like it or not.

It wont cost any more then they are currently spending. And you don't think everyone wouldn't support tracking every person entering our country if it meant they could stop a terrorist attack?

Well I can see a lot of people who would ordinarily want to visit the States, genuinely and completely put off by this sort of nonsense. People will choose not to go there, they are already. Microchipping human beings for heavens sake.

A lot of people here are now going to Europe, or staying closer to home in the South Pacific when they holiday, whatever the attractions the Americas offer. Hardly anyone seems to head there now. That's because it simply isn't worth the aggravation or the stress that are now such a part of travel there. Your border people now view every single person arriving as a criminal. That reception to a holidaymaker sets a certain tone don't you think?

All I've got to say about 'microchips' and 'ankle bracelets' in regards to foreign born persons either visiting or moving here permanently is this....

How in the name of Heaven can anyone here on VJ or any other immigrant web community advocate for MORE restrictions on this process?

I mean - isn't the process bad enough already? All day long all I see on this site is complaining and moaning about how unfair and protracted and painful and expensive this process is. And you want MORE?

Get real.

Well, yes and no. We inquired about this. The tourist/visiting visa requires that you demonstrate an intent to return to the country of origin financially, socially, etc. The Amman embassy said that unless you were someone extremely wealthy, famous, guaranteed by a large public US agency, etc they were not going to issue this visa for a spouse to come visit because they saw the marriage itself as a conflict of interest. So you could apply legally, but they wouldn't give it to you and then they would count the visa refusal as a strike on the applicant's record.

I think it would make it easier to get here because they wouldn't be worried you will overstay. This would allow USCIS to issue visas more freely.

I agree they treat non USC like crap. My wife had to deal with it her whole life. It is so nice now that she has her greencard because CBP is actually nice to her now.



I am not for this but just pointing out where our government is going.

Well said!


USCIS does not issue visas....the Depts of State's Bureau of Consular Affairs does.

-P

I know the DOS issues the visa but USCIS is who allows you to enter or not. A visa is useless without USCIS allowing you to enter. And USCIS is who has to enforce immigration law.

Un...no. USCIS simply approves or not the visa petition. The Consulate(DOS) issues the visa and US Customs and Border Protection (CPB) is the body which allows you to enter or not. US Customs and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that enforces immigration law.
All of them fall under the Department of Homeland Security umbrella, but are different independent bodies.

-P

DOS is not under the department of homeland security. The reason CBP and USCIS is all uner one umbrella is so they are sharing information. ICE, CBP, USCIS all work together but not the DOS. Maybe that is why DHS has the last say on who enters so they are in control.

Thanks for clarifying. I'm not going to split hairs w/ you, but make up your mind. Is it USCIS, or DHS?

or

I was reading through this thread and came across your post...your terminology was wrong and I simply sought to correct that. Your initial statement had a factual error regarding which body issues visas. I corrected it for the sake of posterity. You made yet another factual error in stating that:

So I offered the correct terminology, again for the sake of posterity, nothing more.
But, it seems the last word must be yours....so please go ahead.

-P

Actually, USCIS isn't involved at all in the issuance of a B2 visa. The applicant applies directly to the US consulate, which is run by DOS.

YOU ARE 110% CORRECT! I ENCOURAGE ANYONE NOT HAPPY ABOUT THIS BEHAVIOR TO CONTACT THEIR US CONGRESSMEN AND LET THEM KNOW ABOUT THIS, AND CONTACT USCIS ALONG WITH DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY. RIGHT ON! WHAT YOU SAY I HAVE BEEN SAYING NOW FOR A LONG TIME ON HERE, AND I AM MEETING NEXT MONTH WITH MY CONGRESSMEN AND WITH MUCH DATA COMPILED FROM HERE TO SHOW THEM THE WILLFUL INTENTIONAL LAWBREAKING OF IMMIGRATION LAWS WITH THE TOURIST VISA, IT IS A SERIOUS SECURITY MATTER AND IT IS ALSO BREAKING THE US LAW, JUST SIMPLY IF ENOUGH OF US COMPLAIN THEN THERE WILL BE ENFORCEMENT AND ACTION TAKEN, JUST TAKES TIME, BUT IT WILL BE SHUT DOWN. GREAT POST!