Dr. Obvious

I understand your feelings. As U.S. citizens, if we break the law we are punished and can rarely have a life again. If you are black and break the law you can hang it up on having a life again. The illegal aliens break the law and they are punished with a road to citizenship. Sometimes I wish my husband could cross the boarder but in my heartI know we are doing things right.

Hello everyone,
I just wanted to introduce myself and my fiance and tell a little about our story. I'm an American citizen and my fiance Ramy is Egyptian. We met when I was working in Egypt for a few months in the summer as an au pair. If any of you are familiar with Egypt, the family I worked for lives in El Gouna on the Red Sea during the summer. That place is amazing!
Anyhow, we first attempted to have Ramy come visit via tourist visa, but that didn't work. It's notoriously difficult for young single Arab men to get visas to the U.S. So we began the fiance visa and it was recieved by the USCIS on December 19th, 2012. We just got our reciept a few days ago! We began planning our 2-country wedding for August 2nd, 2013 in America and the following weekend in Egypt. We hope that will give us more than enough time for visa approval.
Gathering all the materials was way more involved than I thought it would be. Boy is it quite a project! With the stakes so high, I was afraid every second that I was missing something or reading one of the directions wrong... I began to doubt my own English abilities! So I am really excited to find this forum and I suspect it is easier to navigate the intricacies of American immigration regulations with all this support. Looking forward to getting to know all of you and hearing about your experiences along the way!
Heather & Ramy

[Night before citizenship-oath ceremony. T-B. hears crashing and banging downstairs. T-B. goes downstairs.]
T-B.: What are you doing?
Mrs. T-B. [wielding high-tech Ecuadorian broom (rag on a stick)]: I'm cleaning up.
T-B.: For the last time. You're almost a gringa. Gringas don't do that.
Mrs. T-B. [giggles]: Tomorrow, I will have a maid. I know wives who get their ciudadania [citizenship] and leave their husbands.
T-B.: If you're thinking about it, decide as soon as you can -- I want to call the rubias [imaginary harem of 6 blondes].
[T-B. ducks as high-tech Ecuadorian broom flies at his head.]

Welcome to Compton ! It's a land grab - get some whilst yer able !

Though, you have a point. CE should just rename this forum Extreme Partisan Circlejerk and get it over with.

I'm an expat thats lived throughout the Caribbean for 18 years. Advice? Go live there for 6 months before you sell off everything you have in the states. I cannot tell you how many people that I see pack up and move to the Caribbean to "Live the Dream".. Only to find out that it's not that easy, and changing ones ideas and fitting into an entirely different culture is not as easy as it sounds. Most don't make it past 6 months before heading back to the states disillusioned. There is also a site for expats including expats living in China. www.internations.org. Apply for free membership, and ask those expats living in China.
Hope this helps,
JstaRebel

And those are exactly the kind of men being targeted by this thread. Men who are looking for a submissive, baby popping, barefoot housewife that they can easily manipulate and control. Not every man who marries a woman from Russia or the Far East is a knuckledragger by any means, but those countries undeniably attract the interest of that kind of man, bitter at Western women for whatever reason. Like I said, I've been here for years and know very well that the ultra-submissive stereotypes given to Eastern women very often are not true and I think the wailing disappointment that comes from men expecting a certain type of woman by virtue of her simply being non-Western is amusing.

You are in a relationship with a beta Western male who is too emasculated by feminism to fight the gender role reversal and reclaim his rightful alpha place as undisputed head of the family.

You are all a disgrace. No gun-toting American hunk of a male will want you. You may as well be homosexual. You have a CHOICE.

You are in a relationship with a beta Western male who is too emasculated by feminism to fight the gender role reversal and reclaim his rightful alpha place as undisputed head of the family.

You are in a relationship with a beta Western male who is too emasculated by feminism to fight the gender role reversal and reclaim his rightful alpha place as undisputed head of the family.

You are in a relationship with a beta Western male who is too emasculated by feminism to fight the gender role reversal and reclaim his rightful alpha place as undisputed head of the family.

"A Republican lawmaker. .." That pretty much sums it up!

And those are exactly the kind of men being targeted by this thread. Men who are looking for a submissive, baby popping, barefoot housewife that they can easily manipulate and control. Not every man who marries a woman from Russia or the Far East is a knuckledragger by any means, but those countries undeniably attract the interest of that kind of man, bitter at Western women for whatever reason. Like I said, I've been here for years and know very well that the ultra-submissive stereotypes given to Eastern women very often are not true and I think the wailing disappointment that comes from men expecting a certain type of woman by virtue of her simply being non-Western is amusing.

And those are exactly the kind of men being targeted by this thread. Men who are looking for a submissive, baby popping, barefoot housewife that they can easily manipulate and control. Not every man who marries a woman from Russia or the Far East is a knuckledragger by any means, but those countries undeniably attract the interest of that kind of man, bitter at Western women for whatever reason. Like I said, I've been here for years and know very well that the ultra-submissive stereotypes given to Eastern women very often are not true and I think the wailing disappointment that comes from men expecting a certain type of woman by virtue of her simply being non-Western is amusing.

And those are exactly the kind of men being targeted by this thread. Men who are looking for a submissive, baby popping, barefoot housewife that they can easily manipulate and control. Not every man who marries a woman from Russia or the Far East is a knuckledragger by any means, but those countries undeniably attract the interest of that kind of man, bitter at Western women for whatever reason. Like I said, I've been here for years and know very well that the ultra-submissive stereotypes given to Eastern women very often are not true and I think the wailing disappointment that comes from men expecting a certain type of woman by virtue of her simply being non-Western is amusing.

And those are exactly the kind of men being targeted by this thread. Men who are looking for a submissive, baby popping, barefoot housewife that they can easily manipulate and control. Not every man who marries a woman from Russia or the Far East is a knuckledragger by any means, but those countries undeniably attract the interest of that kind of man, bitter at Western women for whatever reason. Like I said, I've been here for years and know very well that the ultra-submissive stereotypes given to Eastern women very often are not true and I think the wailing disappointment that comes from men expecting a certain type of woman by virtue of her simply being non-Western is amusing.

No, I think they honestly don't understand what they are getting into with their spouse's culture. All they know is stereotypes and they believe a woman from X culture will be groomed correctly to cater to a man's every need (as it should be). I do agree with you that a lot of them are just morons in general, which is why they are so easily suckered into buying that hook, line, and sinker. Then the country shopping starts full-swing, if they don't write off marrying women completely in favor of call girls and maids.

Think of the people on here going through their 3rd and 4th marriages, think they'd learn by now how to talk to and about there loved ones. J/S.....

Back in old country, I drive 0 km a week, so gas price mean noting. Walk, public transport, other people's cars. No need gas to buy. Here drive I 100 km pro day, no choice, so gas price mean someting.

No.

You have to hand it to the Mexican government, they have more common sense the the inept idiots that run the US.

By J. Michael Waller
May 08, 2006
Mexico has a radical idea for a rational immigration policy that most Americans would love. However, Mexican officials haven’t been sharing that idea with us as they press for our Congress to adopt the McCain-Kennedy immigration reform bill.
That’s too bad, because Mexico, which annually deports more illegal aliens than the United States does, has much to teach us about how it handles the immigration issue. Under Mexican law, it is a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.
At a time when the Supreme Court and many politicians seek to bring American law in line with foreign legal norms, it’s noteworthy that nobody has argued that the U.S. look at how Mexico deals with immigration and what it might teach us about how best to solve our illegal immigration problem.
Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors and immigrants are:
* in the country legally;
* have the means to sustain themselves economically;
* not destined to be burdens on society;
* of economic and social benefit to society;
* of good character and have no criminal records; and
* contributors to the general well-being of the nation.
The law also ensures that:
* immigration authorities have a record of each foreign visitor;
* foreign visitors do not violate their visa status;
* foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country’s internal politics;
* foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported;
* foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported;
* those who aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.
Who could disagree with such a law? It makes perfect sense. The Mexican constitution strictly defines the rights of citizens — and the denial of many fundamental rights to non-citizens, illegal and legal. Under the constitution, the Ley General de Población, or General Law on Population, spells out specifically the country’s immigration policy.
It is an interesting law — and one that should cause us all to ask, Why is our great southern neighbor pushing us to water down our own immigration laws and policies, when its own immigration restrictions are the toughest on the continent? If a felony is a crime punishable by more than one year in prison, then Mexican law makes it a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.
If the United States adopted such statutes, Mexico no doubt would denounce it as a manifestation of American racism and bigotry.
We looked at the immigration provisions of the Mexican constitution. Now let’s look at Mexico’s main immigration law.
Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society:
* Foreigners are admitted into Mexico "according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress." (Article 32)
* Immigration officials must "ensure" that "immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents. (Article 34)
* Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets "the equilibrium of the national demographics," when foreigners are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when "they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy." (Article 37)
* The Secretary of Governance may "suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest." (Article 38)
Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:
* Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)
* A National Population Registry keeps track of "every single individual who comprises the population of the country," and verifies each individual’s identity. (Articles 85 and 86)
* A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).
Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:
* Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116)
* Foreigners who sign government documents "with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses" are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)
Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:
* Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)
* Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)
* Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico — such as working with out a permit — can also be imprisoned.
Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says,
* "A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally." (Article 123)
* Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125)
* Foreigners who "attempt against national sovereignty or security" will be deported. (Article 126)
Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:
* A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)
* Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)
All of the above runs contrary to what Mexican leaders are demanding of the United States. The stark contrast between Mexico’s immigration practices versus its American immigration preachings is telling. It gives a clear picture of the Mexican government’s agenda: to have a one-way immigration relationship with the United States.
Let’s call Mexico’s bluff on its unwarranted interference in U.S. immigration policy. Let’s propose, just to make a point, that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) member nations standardize their immigration laws by using Mexico’s own law as a model.
Where is the outrage from the people who are now so self-righteous about Arizona’s very sensible and fair law?
Perhaps the US government should issue travel alerts for Americans visiting Mexico.
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/mexicos-tough-anti-immigration-laws

Clarence B. Jones - Scholar in Residence, Martin Luther King, Jr. Institute at Stanford University
April 27, 2010 02:47 PM
Somebody Close the Door: Reactions to Arizona Immigration Law Misses the Big Picture
A good doctor knows to treat the disease, not the symptoms.
In the discussion about the new law passed in Arizona directed at addressing that state's problems associated with illegal immigrants from Mexico, the protests concerning the legislation are directed at the wrong parties, in the wrong direction. The pro-immigration community, some church groups and many Civil Rights leaders are all calling for a boycott of the State of Arizona based on their belief that the new Arizona law is focused on "racial profiling" as the method for identifying possible illegal Mexican immigrants.
As an African-American who lived through and before the Civil Rights Movement, I'm no fan of assessing people based on their skin color. But holding a struggling State's feet to the fire on tactics is missing the point . Why are protests not being directed to our national government and the government of Mexico? Why aren't these groups demanding that our porous border with Mexico be closed, once and for all? It's not impossible. We have the most sophisticated surveillance and monitoring technology in history, the most formidable military in the world, yet we are unable to stop the daily intrusion of illegal immigrants from Mexico into the United States? This is a failure of policy, not one of capability.
Congress has been unwilling to pass an immigration bill, the first priority of which is closing the border. Why does "immigration reform" now demand a higher national priority than the crippling unemployment that is devastating the economic base and precipitating wide spread home foreclosures in our communities? President Obama said the health reform was the first priority of his first term. Now, he is turning his attention to financial reform of the banking system. Meanwhile, cities like Phoenix and many cities in the State of California and elsewhere are drowning in red ink with an ever-growing population demanding ever-more city services.
Arizona is now being depicted as the official state of "racial profiling," with anti-Hispanic and anti-immigration swirling around it like scarlet letters. But the passage of its bill to prevent the continued influx and presence of illegal immigrants in the State appears more like an act of desperation than racially motivated legislation.
The pro-illegal immigration amnesty movement shuns the classification "illegal" immigrant; preferring instead the term "undocumented immigrant." This is, of course, framing the debate. The "undocumented" immigrants entered into the United States illegally. When apprehended, deportation back to their country of origin is the customary legal procedure. Now, however, an intermediary process is advocated in lieu of deportation: an undocumented immigrant who, after following certain prescribed procedures, including the payment of taxes, will be permitted to remain in the United States. This constitutes de facto amnesty for the "undocumented immigrant." As such, it relieves the government of Mexico from any financial responsibility for the economic consequences associated with the cost of medical care, public education, public housing, welfare, police, and social services provided by the cities, counties and states in which such initially illegal immigrants choose to reside.
Well-intentioned people are quick to denounce Arizona and call for a boycott of business transactions or travel involving the state. Why are they not calling for a boycott of Mexico? The truth is that Mexico is exporting, or at the very least facilitating the export, of its poverty in the form of illegal immigrants to the United States.
Any version of amnesty for illegal immigrants and efforts to organize a boycott of Arizona will detract from the number one priority affecting substantial segment of the American people: unemployment. Moreover, it will blow a hole in the projected operating costs and budget deficit projections in the new health care bill.
Why don't the pro-amnesty undocumented immigrant leaders join forces with the "anti-illegal immigration" leaders and bring the Government of Mexico to the table? The annual cost of maintaining and providing services to illegal or "undocumented" citizens should be tabulated, assumed and paid by the Government of Mexico or credited against the annual cost of oil we import from them until such time as immigrants from their country become U.S. citizens.
Let's face it: right or wrong, the Arizona legislation is treating the symptoms of an international disease that needs much stronger medicine.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/clarence-b-jones/somebody-close-the-door-r_b_553937.html

Idiots.
Nanny State government trying to intervene into people's lives anymore.
It's the PARENTS stupid, not the restaurants...