PhiLandShiR
-
Posts
1,728 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Partners
Immigration Wiki
Guides
Immigration Forms
Times
Gallery
Store
Blogs
Posts posted by PhiLandShiR
-
-
Hello Everyone,
My wife is just finishing with her Removal of Conditions. I expect she will get her new 10 year Green Card in a few months. We just completed her bio-metrics.
She wants to apply for USC ASAP after she gets her new GC.
On the N-400, Part 2, it states she can apply for USC after she hits her 3 year mark as a Legal Permanent Resident.
SO...
Question ONE, what date is used to start the count on the 3 year time period?
After she gets her US Citzenship, she wants to bring her mother over here.
Question TWO, how long does it take for a petition to bring her mother to complete?
After her mother arrives, her mother wants to bring her child here. Her child is my wife's younger sister.
Question THREE, how long does it take for her mothers, child petition to complete?
The reason for these questions is that my wife's younger sister just turned 18 years old, she is not married. If she turns 21 years old or gets married, she can no longer be petitioned by her mother.
SO...
Question FOUR, can all of these steps be completed in the next 3 years? Or are we just wishfull thinking??
Thanks!!
Phil
-
Greetings,
My wife will be filing for removal of conditions this June. After that she will apply for citizenship as soon as she can.
I understand that she can not file any sooner, for citizenship, than 3 years after she removes conditions.
That being said... when does the 3 year clock start ticking?
From the date on her new 10 year card or from the date of approval to remove conditions??
Why do I ask you might question???
Well...
She has a younger sister who could come over with her parents if the timing is right. Her sister is going to be approaching 21 years old about the time my wife could become a citizen.
If we file to bring her parents over, after my wife is a citizen, this should include all younger children as I understand things. Yes? No??
This would include her younger sister...
But....
If this sister turns 21 after we file, is she still included on the parents application??
Grandfathered in so to speak...
Thanks for any info on this.
-Phil
-
you're three months early phil.
But... we already have the decorations up in all the stores here....
-
Dear Children,
It has come to my attention that many of you are upset that folks are taking My
name out of the season.
How I personally feel about this celebration can probably be most easily
understood by those of you who have been blessed with children of your own. I
don't care what you call the day. If you want to celebrate My birth, just GET
ALONG AND LOVE ONE ANOTHER.
Now, having said that, let Me go on. If it bothers you that the town in which
you live doesn't allow a scene depicting My birth, then just put in a small
Nativity scene on your own front lawn. If all My followers did that there
wouldn't be any need for such a scene on the town square because there would be
many of them all around town.
Stop worrying about the fact that people are calling the tree a holiday tree,
instead of a Christmas tree. It was I who made all trees. You can remember Me
anytime you see any tree. Decorate a grape vine if you wish: I actually spoke of
that one in a teaching, explaining who I am in relation to you and what each of
our tasks are. If you have forgotten that one, look up John 15: 1 - 8.
If you want to give Me a present in remembrance of My birth here is my wish
list. Choose something from it:
1. Instead of writing protest letters objecting to the way My birthday is being
celebrated, write letters of love and hope to soldiers away from home. They are
terribly afraid and lonely this time of year. I know, they tell Me all the time.
2. Visit someone in a nursing home. Not just during Christmas time, but all
through the year. You don't have to know them personally. They just need to know
that someone cares about them.
3. Instead of writing the President complaining about the wording on the cards
his staff sends out this year, why don't you write and tell him that you'll be
praying for him and his family? Then follow up. It will be nice hearing from
you again.
4. Instead of giving your children a lot of gifts you can't afford and they
don't need, spend time with them. Tell them the story of My birth, and why I
came to live with you down here. Hold them in your arms and remind them that I
love them.
5. Pick someone who has hurt you in the past and forgive him or her.
6. Did you know that someone in your town will attempt to take their own life
this season because they feel so alone and hopeless? Since you don't know who
that person is, try giving everyone you meet a warm smile; it could make the
difference.
7. Instead of nit picking about what the retailer in your town calls the
holiday, be patient with the people who work there. Give them a warm smile and a
kind word. Even if they aren't allowed to wish you a "Merry Christmas" that
doesn't keep you from wishing them one. Then stop shopping there on Sunday. If
the store didn't make so much money on that day they'd close and let their
employees spend the day at home with their families.
8. If you really want to make a difference, support a missionary-- especially
one who takes My love and Good News to those who have never heard My name.
9. Here's a good one. There are individuals and whole families in your town who
not only will have no "Christmas" tree, but neither will they have any presents
to give or receive. If you don't know them, buy some food and a few gifts and
give them to the Salvation Army or some other charity which believes in Me and
they will make the delivery for you.
10. Finally, if you want to make a statement about your belief in and loyalty to
Me, then behave like a Christian. Don't do things in secret that you wouldn't do
in My presence.. Let people know by your actions and words that you are one of
mine.Don't forget; I am God and can take care of Myself. Just love Me and do
what I have told you to do. I'll take care of all the rest.
Check out the list above and get to work; time is short. I'll help you, but the
ball is now in your court. And do have a most blessed Christmas with all those
whom you love and remember...I LOVE YOU.
JESUS
-
Lets see.... 2010 - 1871 = 139
So... after 139 years, and how many Popes(?), the church still can't seem to figure it out....
-----------------------------------------------
Pope Benedict XVI has for months been battered by criticism over his history of dealing quietly with sex abuse by clergy, but in October he could make his most eloquent response yet when he canonizes a 19th-century Australian nun who was once excommunicated in part because she complained about priests who molested children.
Mother Mary MacKillop, co-founder of the Sisters of Saint Joseph of the Sacred Heart, an order dedicated to the religious instruction of children and care for the poor, will be Australia's first native-born saint when Benedict canonizes her at a Mass at St. Peter's in Rome.
But MacKillop was always an unlikely candidate for sainthood because she had a reputation for "insubordination" and she was excommunicated for several months by her bishop for reasons that were never clear.
Now a new documentary set to air on Australia's ABC television reveals that a major reason MacKillop was banished in 1871 by Bishop Laurence Sheil of Brisbane -- she was 29 at the time -- was because she denounced the abuse of children by priests.
"The story of the excommunication amounts to this: that some priests had been uncovered for being involved in the sexual abuse of children," Father Paul Gardiner, the official advocate for MacKillop's canonization, says in the documentary.
Gardiner said that when MacKillop's complaints led at least one priest to be disciplined, one of his fellow priests "was so angry with this that he swore vengeance." The priest, Father Charles Horan, used his influence with Bishop Sheil to have MacKillop excommunicated.
"Priests being annoyed that somebody had uncovered it -- that would probably be the way of describing it -- and being so angry that the destruction of the Josephites [MacKillop's order] was decided on," Father Gardiner told ABC.
In February 1872, five months after the excommunication and as he lay on his deathbed, Bishop Sheil rescinded the edict and MacKillop, a strong-willed woman who labored in the Australian outback, continued her life of service and energetic advocacy until her death in 1909.
A statement from MacKillop's order, the Sisters of St. Joseph, confirmed that the documentary's reports are "consistent with" the facts of her life.
"If the facts support that account, then she should be looked to for her intercession by all who seek justice in the sex abuse crisis," Father James Martin, a Jesuit priest in New York and author of a popular book, "My Life With the Saints," told Religion News Service.
"The timing of this revelation seems providential," Martin added, referring to the current round of revelations of the sexual abuse of children by clergy. "Maybe there is a reason that Mary MacKillop is walking back onto the international stage at this time."
Some are already calling MacKillop the church's "Patron Saint of Whistleblowers," but it doesn't seem that church authorities are eager to make her an icon of the era of abuse.
Portraying MacKillop as the protector of abuse victims would "reduce the extraordinary richness of her work to a very marginal episode in her life," Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi told RNS.
"The merits of Mother Mary MacKillop, her commitment to children, to the poor, to indigenous peoples, to the dignity of all human persons, were much more extensive than the fact that she denounced an abuser," Lombardi said.
And Father Gardiner, the champion of her cause for sainthood, preferred to characterize the episode as "a nasty footnote to a heroic story, and I don't think media people should take it as though it's the main story, particularly since they've got a lot of closer, modern scandals occurring in the Catholic Church to concentrate on."
"Why tarnish the occasion of Mary's canonization with this miserable bit of scandal?" he said.
The answer to that question may be provided by the pope himself when he canonizes her on Oct. 17.
When he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and an influential official at the Vatican before his election as pope, Benedict was revolted by reports of sexual abuse of clergy but always tried to deal with it quietly, and he denounced media reports about abuse as willfully exaggerated.
Since becoming pope in 2005, Benedict has taken a much more assertive stance against clergy abusers, denouncing their crimes and meeting privately with victims, as he did again during his visit to Great Britain in September. But he does not like to highlight or discuss the issue in any detail, and seems unlikely to make MacKillop's excommunication a focus of her canonization.
Then again, as Father Martin noted, even canonization and formal elevation to sainthood cannot obscure the fact that many saints were rebels within the church, and many of them were women -- from Joan of Arc to Dorothy Day, the American-born founder of the Catholic Worker movement who is now up for sainthood. ("Don't call me a saint. I don't want to be dismissed so easily," Day once said.)
In the end, MacKillop's canonization could do more for a scandal-weary church than anything else, and at the same time prove again Flannery O'Connor's adage that "you suffer as much from the church as for it."
-
So much for the "birther" defense. An Army judge turned down a request for President Obama to testify in the court martial of an Army doctor, Terrence Lakin, who refused to serve in Afghanistan because he first wanted proof that the president was born in the United States and therefore has authority to order his deployment.
Army Col. Denise Lind, presiding over a pretrial hearing, ruled that any evidence or witnesses involving Obama's citizenship was irrelevant to the charges against Lt. Col. Lakin, which include disobeying a lawful order and dereliction of duty, CNN said. Prosecutors have argued that -- apart from any question about the president -- Lakin, a surgeon, is in trouble because the officers ordering him to deploy were his legitimate superiors in the chain of command.
Lakin's lawyers say all military orders, at their root, come from the commander-in-chief, and "if the president is ineligible you need to know that," CNN said.
Lind's ruling at Fort Meade, Md., came after a report that retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney had filed an affidavit on Lakin's behalf. McInerney argued that Lakin's demand for Obama's birth record was legitimate and "essential to determining not merely his guilt or innocence" but whether Obama's "service as commander-in-chief is constitutionally proper."
McInerney, a Fox News contributor, thus joined the birther argument, which maintains that Obama was not born in the U.S. -- which would make him ineligible to be president -- despite evidence to the contrary and repeated statements by Hawaiian authorities that his birth certificate is on file and in order.
If court-martialed, Lakin could face a dishonorable discharge and as many as two years in confinement. He could also forfeit his pay -- nearly $8,000 a month.
-
Darwin Award honorable mention only.
Damn shame the shop teacher resigned.
Oh come on!!! Honorable mention only?!?!
The teen was zapped so severely that he now states he is suffering from permanent brain damage.
He is not going to reproduce. The simple fact he did it to start with showed he has not the brains to reproduce to begin with!
That make for a full fledge award!
It is a real shame the shop teacher quit.
-
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978487651
DOVER, N.H. - A New Hampshire teen who zapped his own nipples during shop class is now suing the his shop teacher, Dover city, and the school district it took place in. The teen who zapped his own nipples with the help of two friends contends that along with other students, he was not properly warned of the severe dangers of the cords he had used to electrocute himself with.
According to Chron.com, the incident occurred on March 11. The New Hampshire teen, Kyle Dubois, 18, attached electrical clamps to his nipples during his high school shop class. Another student helped the teen with his clamp and then yet another plugged the cord in. The teen was zapped so severely that he now states he is suffering from permanent brain damage.
The Post Chronicle states that the teen's heart stopped as a result of him getting zapped. The reason the teen was playing with the electrical clamps was because he'd been dared and in return he was going to have a Mountain Dew bought for him.
The teens parents say in their lawsuit that had the shop teacher, Thomas Kelly properly warned his student of the severe dangers of playing with the electrical clamps then their son would not have zapped his own nipples. Once Kelly discovered the teen was unconscious, he immediately performed CPR. The other students involved in the incident actually filmed the teen as he was zapped. They later posted the footage online. Following the incident, Kelly resigned a month later. The outlets at the school shop class are the traditional 120 volts found everywhere.
Although this incident was unfortunate, the blame should be placed on the teen who zapped himself and not on the teacher nor the school and certainly not on the entire Dover city of New Hampshire. At the age of 18, several people would even contend that Kyle Dubois is no longer a teen but a man. Dubois should have known better then to zap himself for Mountain Dew.
Kyle Dubois parents seem to be desperate in their search to place blame on someone or something else when the blame falls on their teen and his friends. They acted irresponsibly and thus their teen was zapped severely. Their actions also cost a man a job. This story is enough to make one wonder if Dubois ever got that Mountain Dew he was promised.
-
Yeah this isn't spam but VJ mods frequently can't tell the difference.
I posted a deal from Etrade a few months ago, to get a certain number of commish free trades with a new account and promo code.
The thread was removed and soon after I got a stern PM from Otto demanding I "explain myself".
I agree, Otto tends to allow his personal opinions to run rampant in his selection of items to object to....
-
Most of the people complaining, are complaining because of one simple fact... Obama is not Republican...
If he were a Republican, there would be little, to no noise heard from them...
-
Murfreesboro, Tenn. -- Muslims trying to build houses of worship in the nation's heartland, far from the heated fight in New York over plans for a mosque near ground zero, are running into opponents even more hostile and aggressive.
Foes of proposed mosques have deployed dogs to intimidate Muslims holding prayer services and spray-painted "Not Welcome" on a construction sign, then later ripped it apart.
The 13-story, $100 million Islamic center that could soon rise two blocks from the site of the Sept. 11 attacks would dwarf the proposals elsewhere, yet the smaller projects in local communities are stoking a sharper kind of fear and anger than has showed up in New York.
In the Nashville suburb of Murfreesboro, opponents of a new Islamic center say they believe the mosque will be more than a place of prayer. They are afraid the 15-acre site will be turned into a terrorist training ground for Muslim militants bent on overthrowing the U.S. government.
"They are not a religion. They are a political, militaristic group," said Bob Shelton, a 76-year-old area retiree.
In Temecula, Calif., opponents took dogs to protest a proposed 25,000-square-foot mosque that would sit on 4 acres next to a Baptist church. Opponents fear it will turn the town into haven for Islamic extremists, but mosque leaders say they are peaceful and just need more room to serve members.
Islam is a growing faith in the United States, though Muslims represent less than 1 percent of the country's population. Ten years ago, there were about 1,200 mosques nationwide. Now there are roughly 1,900, said Ihsan Bagby, professor of Islamic Studies at the University of Kentucky and a researcher on surveys of American mosques.
The growth involves Islamic centers expanding to accommodate more Muslims -- as is the case in New York, California and Tennessee -- as well as mosques cropping up in smaller, more isolated communities, Bagby said.
Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, a nonprofit that advocates for reform and modernization of Islam, said opposing mosques is no way to prevent terrorism.
-
http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/808171-mans-#######-freed-from-metal-pipe-with-industrial-grinder
Medics at Southampton General Hospital struggled to get the man's ####### out of the stainless steel pipe, because the restricted blood flow had caused it to become erect.
Instead, they resorted called in Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service.
The fire crew turned up with a special equipment unit from St Mary's station in Southampton and seven firefighters to help, in what a spokesman understatedly described as a 'delicate operation'.
The firefighters used the four-and-a-half-inch industrial metal grinder to cut the pipe from around the anaesthetised man's #######.
The ####### was left bruised and swollen, but otherwise unharmed by its traumatic day.
The man, thought to be aged around 40, did not explain to hospital staff how exactly the pipe got stuck around his #######, after he presented himself at the hospital's Accident & Emergency department on Tuesday morning. He was said to be 'quite concerned and anxious'.
A Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service spokesman said: 'It was a very delicate operation that required a very steady hand and the crew was worried about things getting too hot during the cutting.
'It's certainly an unusual call-out, and I'm sure the man won't be getting into that situation again.'
Watch manager Greg Garrett from the Redbridge fire station told the Southampton daily Echo: 'I’ve only come across this type of thing three or four times in my 17 years as a firefighter. It’s not a daily occurrence.'
-
what a great analogy.... do you have children???
Yes I do but so what??
I do not see a connection. Neither I, nor my wife, are involved in prostitution...
If my daughter follows my chosen career path, she would go into Information Technology and that is just fine with me.
-
This is only a bad thing if you believe that prostitution is a bad thing...
-
"If you don't like gay marriage, blame straight people. They're the ones who keep having gay babies." That's the new virtual bumper sticker slapped onto my mother Frances' Facebook page. Frances, a lesbian, is unmarried for three reasons 1) it ain't legal -- yet; 2) she hasn't found an acceptable "mate"; and 3) because who the heck wants to get married nowadays anyway? I'm considering coming up with a commitment-phobe catch phrase of my own -- "Marriage is as marriage does."
In nearly every state save Hawaii (one of the first to question the constitutionality of banning gay marriage in 1993) the rate of marriage has dropped over the last two decades. In good old South Carolina, for example, the marriage rate in 1997 was 15.9 per 1,000 people, and in 2007, it was 7.9. According to the Center for Disease Control, "The majority of men and women will marry at some point: The probability that men and women will marry by age 40 is over 80%." Oh, and half of those marriages will end in divorce. Awesome. There is hope for me yet! I'll more than likely get married, but that contract is pretty much doomed from the outset. With numbers like these, who needs constitutional amendments?
The religious Right, gay marriage opponents, people who hate Rosie O'Donnell, and whomever else would like to hop on the banning bandwagon seem to be fighting the wrong fight. Like Sisyphus, the mythical king forced for all eternity to push a huge boulder up a large hill only to see it roll down again, opponents of same-sex marriage are doing nothing to solve the very real problem of the declining importance of marriage. No one's come knocking on my door asking why I'm single (well, no one but my mom). In order to save the sanctity of marriage, why not just give it to the folks who are actually asking for it? Because the rest of us, the straight people, don't seem to be treating it right. And isn't the first thing you're supposed to do in an abusive relationship is get the heck out?
"Uppity women changed marriage a lot. If they hadn't, why would any gay or lesbian person want a share in it?" wrote Linda Hirshman for Slate earlier this week. Hirshman's take down of the idealized "between a man and a woman" coupling most same-sex marriage opponents allude to is eye popping, to say the very least. The history of the institution involves legalized rape, indentured servitude and sanctioned murder. Hardly the Ozzie and Harriet archetype. But it's Hirshman's assertion that "uppity women" helped save marriage by changing it that I find both true and paradoxical. Because it's these same "uppity women" -- whom I assume are well educated, financially solvent on good days and contributing actively to society -- who are eschewing marriage in the first place.
In "Eat Pray Love," Julia Roberts, playing real-life writer/world traveler/former wife Liz Gilbert, simply decides one day that her marriage is over. Her then-husband is portrayed in the film as something like a 1950s housewife -- cute, supportive and flighty -- and in the end, the traditional gender role reversal in their marriage just doesn't work for Liz, who has the means to go it alone. And so she does.
Up until last month, Gilbert's ex-husband "Stephen" (nee Michael Cooper) was releasing a rebuttal memoir called "Displaced," which he is currently re-shopping to publishers after parting ways with his book's former home, Hyperion. He said his former editors wanted something more "racy," and apparently the idea of borrowing some of the shine from his ex-wife's sparkling name left a bad taste in his mouth. Actress Portia De Rossi, on the other hand, is happy to have her name tied tightly to her better half's. De Rossi, who married comedienne Ellen DeGeneres in 2008, recently petitioned to change her own name to Portia Lee James DeGeneres. See? Some people still value tradition.
-
-
It's a fair point. The market sets wages and if she can't fill her positions at the wages she's offering then clearly the market has spoken and she needs to man-up.
If you pay them, they will come...
-
They built 3000 of them in downtown New York alone....
-
Better be careful the Dihydromonoxide will kill you!!
-
I guess if these people believe they are not subject to the laws of the United States and deny they are citizens, deport them!
Deport them where you might ask...
Put them on a ship, go out beyond US territorial waters and push them over board!!
Wish them good luck, safe journeys and good bye!
-
I dig out a bottle of my home made black berry wine...
-
that's not what the point is - i stated if asked. the above is whether police, in the absence of probable cause, can stop, question, or frisk an individual at all.
You are correct Charles.
But the point I am making is: There was no probable cause!!
The only info the police officer had was that 'someone' was accused of wearing clothes that were deemed 'not appropriate'.
No one from the staff at the pool pointed MS. Lovett out as that person. The cop assumed...
As far as the hiibel case is concerned...
Justice Kennedy's majority opinion noted, however, "[a]s we understand it, the statute does not require a suspect to give the officer a driver's license or any other document. Provided that the suspect either states his name or communicates it to the office by other means -- a choice, we assume, that the suspect may make -- the statute is satisfied and no violation occurs."
Ms. Lovett did in fact state her name to the officer...
-
In Terry v. Ohio, 392 U. S. 1 (1968), the Court considered whether police, in the absence of probable cause, can stop, question, or frisk an individual at all. The Court recognized that the Fourth Amendment protects the " 'right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person.' " Id., at 9 (quoting Union Pacific R. Co. v. Botsford, 141 U. S. 250, 251 (1891)). At the same time, it recognized that in certain circumstances, public safety might require a limited "seizure," or stop, of an individual against his will. The Court consequently set forth conditions circumscribing when and how the police might conduct a Terry stop. They include what has become known as the "reasonable suspicion" standard. 392 U. S., at 20-22. Justice White, in a separate concurring opinion, set forth further conditions. Justice White wrote: "Of course, the person stopped is not obliged to answer, answers may not be compelled, and refusal to answer furnishes no basis for an arrest, although it may alert the officer to the need for continued observation." Id., at 34.
About 10 years later, the Court, in Brown v. Texas, 443 U. S. 47 (1979), held that police lacked "any reasonable suspicion" to detain the particular petitioner and require him to identify himself. Id., at 53. The Court noted that the trial judge had asked the following: "I'm sure [officers conducting a Terry stop] should ask everything they possibly could find out. What I'm asking is what's the State's interest in putting a man in jail because he doesn't want to answer . . . ." Id., at 54 (Appendix to opinion of the Court) (emphasis in original). The Court referred to Justice White's Terry concurrence. 443 U. S., at 53, n. 3. And it said that it "need not decide" the matter. Ibid.
Then, five years later, the Court wrote that an "officer may ask the [Terry] detainee a moderate number of questions to determine his identity and to try to obtain information confirming or dispelling the officer's suspicions. But the detainee is not obliged to respond." Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U. S. 420, 439 (1984) (emphasis added). See also Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U. S. 352, 365 (1983) (Brennan, J., concurring) (Terry suspect "must be free to . . . decline to answer the questions put to him"); Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U. S. 119, 125 (2000) (stating that allow-
ing officers to stop and question a fleeing person "is quite consistent with the individual's right to go about his business or to stay put and remain silent in the face of police questioning").
-
incorrect - you do have to identify yourself if asked.
Nonsence!
U.S. Supreme Court
Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479 (1951)
Hoffman v. United States
No. 513
Argued April 25, 1951
Decided May 28, 1951
341 U.S. 479
"(a) The privilege against self-incrimination guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment extends not only to answers that would in themselves support a conviction under a federal criminal statute, but also to those which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a federal crime. Blau v. United States, 340 U. S. 159. P. 341 U. S. 486.
(b) To sustain the privilege, it need only be evident from the implications of the question, in the setting in which it is asked, that a responsive answer to the question or an explanation of why it cannot be answered might be dangerous because injurious disclosure could result. Pp. 341 U. S. 486-487."
As this police officer was acting in a threating manner: "[The] police officer confronted her and started essentially quizzing her and demanding information from her, stating that she needed to put Mrs. Lovett's name in a database,"
Ms. Lovett was well within her rights to remain silent.
Wrapping up Removal of Conditions
in Philippines
Posted
This is good news then. It gives us another few months of time.
From what I see, we would have about a year of time remaining after her mother gets here in which to #1: get her mother a GREEN CARD and #2: petition the younger sister.
AS I UNDERSTAND IT... once the petition for the younger sister is filed and accepted, the clock stops ticking for the younger sister. She could turn 21 and it would not matter. If she were to get married of course, she is no longer going to be able to come here under her mothers petition.
Am I correct that the clock stops for the sister??
-Phil