Monday, July 11, 2011

anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance

images share Anne+hathaway+oscars anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. Anne Hathaway: Fame, scandal
  • Anne Hathaway: Fame, scandal

  • pthoko
    07-11 10:48 AM
    Your last action dictates the status you are in. As the last I-94 has H1 Status, you have 30 days to start working with new employer (or apply for CoS to stay on L1). It is usually a good idea to file H1 without Change of Status if you don't know the start date. In that case you have to re-enter US on that visa to get into that status.

    I would always suggest the real dates on any form. Section 245(k) covers out-of-status issues. Why lie and caught for fraud when we have protection under law.

    If caught for fraud, it can cause some very serious issues. I-485 can be denied just on this basis.

    1. Re-entry erases out-of-status and puts one in valid status. As per section 245(k), one is required to be instatus (or out of status < 180 days) since last entry into US.
    2. You were out-of-status, not unlawful presence (i.e. staying past due I-94 date). So visa can not denied on the basis of out-of-status.
    3. Not sure about getting visa from Canada. Is it your first time for getting H1 visa stamp?

    Not a legal advice.

    Yes H1B is NOT Stamped yet.

    wallpaper Anne Hathaway: Fame, scandal anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. Anne Hathaway, wow.
  • Anne Hathaway, wow.

  • nogc_noproblem
    08-22 02:55 PM
    A woman and her little girl were visiting the grave of the little girl's grandmother.
    On their way through the cemetery back to the car, the little girl asked, "Mommy, do they ever bury two people in the same grave?"

    "Of course not, dear." replied the mother, "Why would you think that?"

    "The tombstone back there said 'Here lies a lawyer and an honest man."

    anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. Anne even joked to Oprah the
  • Anne even joked to Oprah the

  • abcdgc
    12-27 01:55 AM
    I also think the media could have acted more responsibly than it did. I was somewhat disappointed by Pakistani media. I think there was too much bias and not so much objectivity in the coverage. I am afraid the Indian media would have acted in a similar manner too....

    You haven't yet denounced the Bombay attacks but you are quick to attack Indian media. Good job, you have been trained well. Indian media is at fault in showing the carnage but the terrorist who carried out the carnage are saints???

    Its funny to see your assertion that its ok if 200 die in a bomb blast. It maybe ok for Pakistanis, but it is not ok for Indians. Stop calling Indian media as "bias". There was no ambiguity in the coverage. It was direct telecast. Why blame the media to educate the larger population that what's going on. Let me guess, terrorist do not like freedom of speech. You need to stop watching that garbage in Pakistani TV channels.

    2011 Anne Hathaway, wow. anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. anne hathaway red dress oscars
  • anne hathaway red dress oscars

  • Macaca
    05-15 06:05 PM
    Why Worry? It�s Good for You ( By ROBERT H. FRANK | New York Times

    THE late Amos Tversky, a Stanford psychologist and a founding father of behavioral economics, used to say, �My colleagues, they study artificial intelligence; me, I study natural stupidity.�

    In recent decades, behavioral economics has been the economics profession�s runaway growth area. Scholars in this field work largely at the intersection of economics and psychology, and much of their attention has focused on systematic biases in people�s judgments and decisions.

    They point out, for example, that people are particularly inept at predicting how changes in their life circumstances will affect their happiness. Even when the changes are huge � positive or negative � most people adapt much more quickly and completely than they expected.

    Such prediction errors, behavioral economists argue, often lead to faulty decisions. A celebrated example describes an assistant professor at a distinguished university who agonizes for years about whether he will be promoted. Ultimately, his department turns him down. As anticipated, he�s abjectly miserable � but only for a few months. The next year, he�s settled in a new position at a less selective university, and by all available measures is as happy as he�s ever been.

    The ostensible lesson is that if this professor had been acquainted with the relevant evidence, he�d have known that it didn�t make sense to fret about his promotion in the first place � that he would have been happier if he hadn�t. But that�s almost surely the wrong lesson, because failing to fret probably would have made him even less likely to get the promotion. And promotions often matter in ways that have little impact on day-to-day levels of happiness.

    Paradoxically, our prediction errors often lead us to choices that are wisest in hindsight. In such cases, evolutionary biology often provides a clearer guide than cognitive psychology for thinking about why people behave as they do.

    According to Charles Darwin, the motivational structures within the human brain were forged by natural selection over millions of years. In his framework, the brain has evolved not to make us happy, but to motivate actions that help push our DNA into the next round. Much of the time, in fact, the brain accomplishes that by making us unhappy. Anxiety, hunger, fatigue, loneliness, thirst, anger and fear spur action to meet the competitive challenges we face.

    As the late economist Tibor Scitovsky said in �The Joyless Economy,� pleasure is an inherently fleeting emotion, one we experience while escaping from emotionally aversive states. In other words, pleasure is the carrot that provokes us to extricate ourselves from such states, but it almost always fades quickly.

    The human brain was formed by relentless competition in the natural world, so it should be no surprise that we adapt quickly to changes in circumstances. Much of life, after all, is graded on the curve. Someone who remained permanently elated about her first promotion, for example, might find it hard to muster the drive to compete for her next one.

    Emotional pain is fleeting, too. Behavioral economists often note that while people who become physically paralyzed experience the expected emotional devastation immediately after their accidents, they generally bounce back surprisingly quickly. Within six months, many have a daily mix of moods similar to their pre-accident experience.

    This finding is often interpreted to mean that becoming physically disabled isn�t as bad as most people imagine it to be. The evidence, however, strongly argues otherwise. Many paraplegics, for instance, say they�d submit to a mobility-restoring operation even if its mortality risk were 50 percent.

    The point is that when misfortune befalls us, it�s not helpful to mope around endlessly. It�s far better, of course, to adapt as quickly as possible and to make the best of the new circumstances. And that�s roughly what a brain forged by the ruthless pressures of natural selection urges us to do.

    All of this brings us back to our decisions about how hard we should work � choices that have important implications for the lives we are able to lead.

    Most people would love to have a job with interesting, capable colleagues, a high level of autonomy and ample opportunities for creative expression. But only a limited number of such jobs are available � and it�s our fretting that can motivate us to get them.

    Within limits, worry about success causes students to study harder to gain admission to better universities. It makes assistant professors work harder to earn tenure. It leads film makers to strive harder to create the perfect scene, and songwriters to dig deeper for the most pleasing melody. In every domain, people who work harder are more likely to succeed professionally, more likely to make a difference.

    THE anxiety we feel about whether we�ll succeed is evolution�s way of motivating us. And the evidence is clear that most of us don�t look back on our efforts with regret, even if our daily mix of emotions ultimately doesn�t change.

    But evolutionary theory also counsels humility about personal good fortune. As Darwin saw clearly, individual and collective interests don�t always coincide. A good job is an inherently relative concept, and while the person who lands one benefits enormously, her lucky break means that some other equally deserving person didn�t get that job.

    When people work harder, income grows. But much of the spending that comes from extra income just raises the bar that defines adequate. So, from society�s perspective, some of the anxiety over who gets what jobs may be excessive after all. But that�s very different from saying that people shouldn�t worry about succeeding.

    Robert H. Frank is an economics professor at the Johnson Graduate School of Management at Cornell University

    Your So-Called Education ( By RICHARD ARUM and JOSIPA ROKSA | New York Times
    Major Delusions ( By TALI SHAROT | New York Times
    Personal finance tips for graduates ( By Michelle Singletary | The Washington Post
    Outlook's Third Annual Spring Cleaning List ( The Washington Post
    Five myths about internships ( By Ross Perlin | The Washington Post
    When Fear Stifles Initiative ( By ROBERT W. GOLDFARB | New York Times


    anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. anne hathaway oscars 2010
  • anne hathaway oscars 2010

  • Amma
    12-26 10:24 PM
    to clean our bottom. I agree. We have to do it ourselves.However, attacking terror camps in Pak by India is not going to solve the problem.

    We are dealing with mad , fanatic , fundemantalistic army with weak democratic government.I think majority of Pak citizens are like us.They don't want war. The ideal way is squeeze that country by economic sanctions, international seperation etc.

    If we attack even the so called terror camps, the Laskar e Toiba people will be gone long time ago. May be we have to satisfy by killing the some innocent Pak citizens by those surgical attacks.

    World policeman America did the similar cleaning business by arming the fanatics in Afganistan to oust Soviet army from Afganistan. The devil nourished by America with support of Saitan ISI is biting back US now.

    Israel is not sleeping peacefully. OK they won the six days war by preemptive strike of Egypt. What happened now ? Stupid palestinan Hamas fire two rockets killing two isralies inturn killing of twenty innocent paletinaian by brutal isral army. Is the middle east problem solved by preemptive attack or postemptive attack? It will be solved by mutual giving and taking not by war.

    You don't want to get tore away your front and back by fighting with lunatic Pak military. You may destroy the Pakistan, but you will be without front to
    --- and back to ----.You means not you. Our brave Indian soldiers.You will be sitting in your airconditioned room , watching the live relay in CNN of Indo-Pak war and happy with mutual assured destruction the war will bring on both poor countries.

    So, let US army to attack the so called camps .They are already doing in the Afgan-Pak border. Let them tilt their gun little bit more so that the camps on POK also get hit.

    It is foolish to get killed.Let the other man do the job for you.Let the world policeman do what it preaches. " War on terror ".

    anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. of Anne Hathaway and James
  • of Anne Hathaway and James

  • Macaca
    12-21 10:53 AM
    Bush boxed in his congressional foes (,1,2311328.story) Democrats took the Hill but were stymied by a steadfast president By Janet Hook | LA Times, Dec 21, 2007

    WASHINGTON � Just over a year ago, a chastened President Bush acknowledged that his party had taken a "thumping" in the congressional elections, and he greeted the new Democratic majority at the weakest point of his presidency.

    But since then, Democrats in Congress have taken a thumping of their own as Bush has curbed their budget demands, blocked a cherished children's health initiative, stalled the drive to withdraw troops from Iraq and stymied all efforts to raise taxes.

    Rather than turn tail for his last two years in the White House, Bush has used every remaining weapon in his depleted arsenal -- the veto, executive orders, the loyalty of Republicans in Congress -- to keep Democrats from getting their way.He has struck a combative pose, dashing hopes that he would be more accommodating in the wake of his party's drubbing in the 2006 midterm voting.

    Bush's own second-term domestic agenda is a shambles: His ambitions to overhaul Social Security and immigration law are dead; plans to update his signature education program have foundered; few other initiatives are waiting in the wings.

    But on a host of foreign and domestic policy issues, backed by a remarkably disciplined Republican Party in the House and Senate, Bush has been able to confound Democrats. It has been a source of great frustration to the party that came to power with sky-high expectations and the belief it had a mandate for change. And it is a vivid reminder of how much clout even a weakened president can have -- especially one as single-minded as Bush.

    "We have custody of Congress, but we don't have control," said Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Valley Village). "Bush has shown, time and again, that he's a very stubborn guy. November 2006 didn't change that."

    Many Republicans have been surprised and impressed with Bush's continuing power -- even when he has used it to ends they disagreed with.

    "At the beginning of the year, most of us viewed the president as having less control over the process than ever," said Rep. Michael N. Castle (R-Del.), a moderate who voted against Bush on healthcare, the budget and other issues. "But this year, he realized more goals than in a lot of the years when he had Republicans controlling Congress."

    At a news conference Thursday after Congress adjourned for the year, Bush had kind words for much of Congress' work and did not gloat over his success in keeping Democrats' ambitions in check.

    "What ended up happening was good for the country," he said.

    Democrats blamed this year's congressional gridlock on Bush, but his inflexibility on key issues was just one factor.

    Republican lawmakers showed scant interest in compromise. Democrats were riven by internal divisions. And Bush did little to unite rather than divide the factions on Capitol Hill. He did not much resemble the kind of politician he was as governor of Texas, when he forged a strong relationship with the Democratic lieutenant governor.

    Immediately after the 2006 election, it looked as if Bush might offer Democrats an olive branch and set a more bipartisan tone. He let go controversial Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. He called incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) at home on Christmas. After years of ignoring congressional Democrats, he began inviting them by the dozen to the White House to hear them out.

    But the honeymoon did not last long. Democrats were furious when, after an election they believed was a mandate to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq, Bush in January announced a buildup. A few weeks later, he went around Congress and issued an executive order giving the White House greater control over the rules and policies issued by regulatory agencies. White House meetings with Democrats turned partisan -- and then petered out. Bush repeatedly reached for the bluntest of presidential tools -- the veto.

    His first veto this year nixed a war spending bill that included a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq. Democrats' promise to press the issue all year lost steam after testimony in September from the top commander in Iraq, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, instilled confidence in Republicans whose commitment to the war had grown shaky. Without more GOP defections, Democrats in the Senate were powerless to undercut Bush's war policy.

    Bush also wielded his veto power to great effect on domestic issues.

    He blocked Democratic efforts to expand stem cell research, a popular bill that had broad bipartisan support. The failed effort to override that veto provided a window onto a dynamic that was key to Bush's source of strength throughout the year: Many moderate Republicans parted ways with the president on the stem cell override vote -- as they later did on his veto of the children's health bill -- but there were enough conservatives who agreed with him to sustain his vetoes.

    Bush issued a barrage of veto threats to curb Democrats' domestic spending plans -- an effort that helped him regain some favor among fiscal conservatives who had lambasted him for allowing the Republican-controlled Congress to jack up spending to record levels.

    "Fiscal conservatives can see the president getting stronger on spending this year than in the previous six years," said Brian Riedl, a budget expert at the Heritage Foundation.

    Democrats had wanted to add $22 billion to Bush's funding request. But he drew a line in the sand and guarded it for months. He vetoed a bill packed with spending for education, health and other popular programs. The final budget approved this week adhered to his overall spending limit -- and dropped riders on abortion and other issues he objected to. And it included the money for the Iraq war with no strings attached.

    Bush also held the line against Democrats' efforts to raise taxes, which they proposed to offset the costs of new health spending, energy programs and a middle-class tax break. Faced with Bush's veto, Democrats could not enact taxes on such inviting targets as cigarettes, wealthy hedge-fund managers and big oil companies.

    Bush's Republican allies were almost giddy with their unexpected success.

    "Who would have thought a year ago that Democrats would have come down to the president's budget number, that we would be ending the year by funding the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that we could complete the year without raising taxes on the American people?" said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). "And all despite having a Democrat majority in Congress."

    Heading into the 2008 elections, Democrats will have to keep their supporters from becoming demoralized over not being able to deliver more with their majority.

    "It's hard for them to understand, and it's even harder for us to live with," said Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.).

    But Democrats are trying to turn their tribulations into a campaign issue by telling voters that the party will not really have a working majority until they expand their Senate caucus from the current 51 to 60 -- the number they need to block GOP filibusters and other stalling tactics.

    The tag line on a fundraising pitch by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee: "51 seats is not enough. Help us turn our country around."

    Acknowledging that GOP victories this year consisted simply of blocking Democrats, some Republicans say they will have to develop a more positive agenda to build a successful political brand. Said Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), "The product we're selling is negative."


    anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. Anne Hathaway and James Franco
  • Anne Hathaway and James Franco

  • Macaca
    05-16 08:04 AM
    Democrats Under Scrutiny As They Shape Lobbying Bill ( By Elizabeth Williamson ( Washington Post Staff Writer, Tuesday, May 15, 2007

    House Democratic leaders yesterday discussed key elements of a long-awaited lobbying reform bill, which has been seen as a signal test of Speaker Nancy Pelosi's pledge to bring unprecedented transparency to the Democratic-led institution.

    While the legislation would open congressional lobbying to greater public scrutiny, its contours hint at a behind-the-scenes battle by the leadership to retain its most sweeping new measures.

    The bill will be unveiled today at a Democratic caucus meeting, where more changes will be discussed. At the meeting last night, party leaders debated the proposal's three most important provisions, which appear headed for varying fates.

    Watchdog groups and freshman members who rode into Congress on promises of ethics reform see as most critical a section imposing stricter reporting guidelines on the practice of "bundling," in which lobbyists gather and deliver bundles of contribution checks to a member. In an effort to prevent opponents of that measure from killing the entire bill, Democrats may address bundling in a separate bill or amendment, to be introduced in tandem with the main legislation.

    The House bill is likely to drop a second key provision, requiring that lobbyists who orchestrate grass-roots letter-writing and telephoning campaigns disclose their involvement.

    The third new element -- a "revolving door" measure doubling, to two years, the time members must wait after leaving Congress before lobbying former colleagues -- is expected to be included in the final bill.

    Other provisions impose disclosure requirements on lobbyist-paid meetings and parties, contributions to charities, and other sponsored activities. Disclosure records would be posted online, in a searchable format.

    The House Judiciary Committee is expected to formally draft the bill Thursday, with a vote anticipated before the Memorial Day recess.

    "I believe that the voters are going to be watching carefully to see whether we address this issue," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), sponsor of the bundling measure. "We are letting our members know that this is an important issue for the Democratic agenda. . . . We're very focused on getting this done."

    Sponsors and watchdogs had hoped the House lobbying reform bill would go further than the Senate's version, passed with great fanfare in the opening days of the new Congress. Instead, it appears to closely track the Senate bill, which also did not include restrictions on grass-roots lobbying. In recent weeks, according to several people close to the talks, the Senate had been pushing the House to narrow the bundling restrictions in its version, by limiting reporting requirements to clearly defined fundraising agreements between lobbyists and members. The House bill as discussed would do that.

    Passage of a weaker bill -- chiefly, one without bundling rules -- would disappoint watchdogs, who have waged a lobbying campaign of their own for the new law.

    "I am sensing a fading of enthusiasm for lobbying and ethics reform, which is why we have to get this done as soon as we can," said Craig Holman of advocacy group Public Citizen. "The longer we wait, the weaker this bill seems to get." Holman said he is lining up legislators to introduce, as amendments, any major portions of the lobbying bill eliminated in this week's discussions.

    Democrats' promise to end the "culture of corruption" they said developed in Washington under Republican rule helped propel the party into the majority in November elections. They quickly tightened the rules over travel, meals and gifts from lobbyists, and improved disclosure rules for earmarks -- the pet projects that lawmakers tuck into legislation.

    But a task force appointed by Pelosi (D-Calif.) to look into creating an independent entity to investigate ethics charges against lawmakers has missed its May 1 deadline for issuing recommendations, amid foot-dragging by members opposed to the idea.

    House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) said the party's leadership considers ethics reform "an obligation."

    "We as a party successfully talked about a culture of corruption, and one of the pledges we made was to change that," he said. To do so, he added, "you've got to change the laws, and people's attitudes."

    2010 Anne even joked to Oprah the anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. share Anne+hathaway+oscars
  • share Anne+hathaway+oscars

  • immique
    07-14 01:30 AM
    what a fantasy land we are in. Do you know what an Executive order from the President means? if any one on the forum has the influence to get an Executive order from the President then this retrogression would not have existed at all.

    It may be possible to the Sec.of DHS or the President to issue an executive order to allow a "processing grace period" that extends the visa allotment past Sep30th for a given year for those cases where processing had already begun on or before Sep30th.

    This is a small incremental step - but it may help with using up a few 1000 extra numbers.


    anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. Anne Hathaway delights at
  • Anne Hathaway delights at

  • coopheal
    01-07 10:15 AM
    Refugee_New already got the GC. I have read his some previous posts too and after that I doubt his commitment for the IV goals.

    People responding to him please understand, either we can focus on efforts which will help us getting GC faster or we can continue to discuss this topic.

    hair anne hathaway red dress oscars anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. night Anne+hathaway+oscars
  • night Anne+hathaway+oscars

  • Marphad
    03-26 04:44 PM
    Legal base employment candidates never had any representation as far as I know of until Immigration voice was formed. The other groups had some organized activity.

    From some of the postings I have seen from IV Core; I believe they know what they are doing. They seem to be getting right advice of when to go on offensive and when to be defensive.

    It is difficult for candidates/people who only have five to six years of history in this country to know how the system works here; ie., what arguments work and what arguments don't and what other side will do in ruining your credibility if they are pushed.

    Everyone wants their greencard and they try to find reasons which they think others will appreciate (whether they have much merit or not).

    Completely agreed.


    anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. anne hathaway oscars 2010
  • anne hathaway oscars 2010

  • gc4me
    12-17 03:57 PM
    Is it 200 not 2000 :D

    People like Antulay are real traitors of India. Who know they may be taking instructions from Pakistan ISI? Such people go unpunish is the main reason India was slave for 2000 years.

    hot anne hathaway oscars 2010 anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. James Franco and Anne Hathaway
  • James Franco and Anne Hathaway

  • my2cents
    04-14 03:24 PM
    Why is tax benefits such an issue:confused:. It is after all tax on interest, not on the principle. It declines every year and probably worth nothing in 10 years? For every 100K you borrow you are charged an interest of 100K for a typical loan. Rents are cheap compared to the owning a home. This is why home prices are falling. Until they reach equilibrium, housing will continue to fall. Assuming the difference is 1000$, if you rent for 7 years you will be saving 80K(approximately)- which means you pay a bigger downpayment and hence saving 80K in interest.
    All these calculations are done assuming that the home price stays flat. If it falls, you gain additionally by how much if falls. Plus there is insurance, property tax.

    Again, it may not be applicable to ur situation.

    in my case, i am paying $400 in equity and $300 in tax deduction so i am paying effectively $1300 .(My mortgage is $2k, includes eveything(Insurace,HOA).In $1300, i can get 1-2 bedroom in DC Metro area depending upon location.
    Yes, over a period of time tax benefits decreases but equity increases. so i stay , and after 10 years i will be paying $800 evey month towards principal.

    now depend upon when i sell , if i sell and price is same as when i bought, only advantage i have i enjoyed 3 bedroom instead of 1-2 which may not be needed depending upon family size/need.

    If i would have bought in 2006 (peak time) calculation is different and i may be loosing $200-300 per month based upon interest rate. (Currenlt i am on 5.25% 30 year fixed) .

    Another big factor is interest rate. if you buy house (when it is has bottom) you may end paying same if interest rate is high. that's why i think it is best time to buy since interest rate is low and housing is slow and good inventory.

    Location..Location.. most important thing.
    worst hit market are ohio,michigan because Big 3 automakers are suffereing.

    more you stay in house ..7 , 10 or 15 years. Your equity build faster.

    Best use i think i was able to do.. took out a equity loan which is now 6% and paid my ICICI loan(house in india) which was averaging 12-13%.

    but again if i have to sell now ..then i am sure i will loose money because it will not sell.

    Some of my frnd bought house in $800K in DC metro. yes they lost 20% big amount ...but there main worry is cash flow. You need dual income all the time to pay mortgage.

    My only advise is always limit ur mortgage to one salary. it may means that you have to commute longer, may be remote area.

    Media is the one who created the hype & and also they are paritally responsible for downturn.


    house Oscars with Anne Hathaway anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. Anne Hathaway: Hostess With
  • Anne Hathaway: Hostess With

  • gapala
    12-19 04:01 PM
    Actually I am not against any religion

    Today science has found out that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. None of the religious book says story about Dinosaurs (Yes all the hippocrats of their religion will intrepret some wordings and make beautiful meanings out of it and will say it has already been quoted.. I have heard enough lectures on that and since you wont know the meaning of the actual word they will play with those words.. )

    I was actually amazed with the way every religious scholor tries to interpret the way they have said about the age of Earth.. How smartly people make use of one year is equal to 1 million year or whatever accordingly and try to bring the result of 4.5 billion years per their Religious versus which says 2000 to 5000 years.. man it is amazing..

    People's vision are covered with a glass called religion.. you need to take that out and see this beautiful world without it.. That will cure lot of problems..

    Dont come and say to me that the more knowledge in science will take you close to religion..

    I accept I have very little knowledge in Science but I admire it and I am thankful to it for all of its discoveries and inventions..

    Tell me one good thing about religion.. I can talk thousands of good things about science ..(Dont cite examples that Science creates lot of bad things.. people use it in a wrong way .. )

    Its amazing to see how you are trying to force your views based on limited understanding on others. One good thing about religion? Now, I am not sure what religion means to you. To me, its the way I was brought up and the way people live. Having said that, the very upbringing instills the care for Health, Hygiene, Homes, Human Values, Harmony in Diversity etc. Long story short, help you become a humble and good social being.

    Do you kow that "Science is still evolving. That is why we still discover and learn new things may be not every day, but periodically" Lets look at the core aspect, scientists once believed that Earth is flat, People as late at the time columbus discovered america believed that this is true. Slaves were even planning to kill the Columbus. Luckly for him, next morning they site the land which they thought as India but turned out to be America.

    Scientists also believed that ATOM is the smallest particle. It changed due to development and research and broken down into P N & Electrons. Now it evolved into Quartz. It may change in future due to advancements.

    How do you say that science is perfect and that is the truth? Well truth never changes, you and I wrote in science exams about the smallest particles and got marks but, now that answers are no longer valid.

    Religion is the way we live, that is why there are more religions now. People live and believe in certain way becomes new religion or cult. Way we live influences the way we think and what we learn and believe. But, you know what, Fundamental aspect is Faith... superior to belief. It takes faith to accept somethings that are unknown. This is the core aspect that leads to scientific research and development. Which results in Technological advancement and life science evolve.

    The way we live help us develop that in unknown things which in turn leads to research and facilitate all that related to science mentioned above. You know what I am talking about. Do not trash religion.. again I do not know what it means to you. it could mean different things to different people... Being religious is not bad at all. As you said, Just like science, People may choose to live wrong way :)

    tattoo of Anne Hathaway and James anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. anne hathaway red dress oscars
  • anne hathaway red dress oscars

  • Administrator2
    04-08 07:22 AM
    I might be interesting to check with a lawyer whether:

    H1B extensions based on I-140 (beyond 6 years) are same as normal H1B extensions(without I-140). In other words, if someone has an I-140 approved does this bill still affect his H1B extension petition(assuming he is consulting)?

    We have already checked with an attorney before posting this thread. You are welcome to check with an attorney and post your attorney's opinion here, for other members.


    pictures Anne Hathaway and James Franco anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. anne hathaway oscars dresses.
  • anne hathaway oscars dresses.

  • Dhundhun
    08-06 10:23 PM
    This is joke on myself on my H1B life:

    Creater God was busy in creation; there was very long queue for every species- humans, animals, birds, insets, etc. I was in queue of animals. Being slightly smarter, I jumped the queue and joined the queue of humans. God by mistake made me human. Soon He realized me jumping the line and cursed me as punishment to work on H1 Visa like animals.

    After sometimes He realized His mistake. It was His mistake to make me human, so He blessed – OK, one fine day, when you lived through your animal's life, you will get GC, afterwards you get back again human life.

    Still waiting for that fine day.

    dresses James Franco and Anne Hathaway anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. Anne Hathaway#39;s 8 Oscar
  • Anne Hathaway#39;s 8 Oscar

  • apt29
    08-05 03:24 PM
    Those are not in IT are caught in between the IT folks!


    makeup Anne Hathaway delights at anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. Oscars with Anne Hathaway
  • Oscars with Anne Hathaway

  • gimme_GC2006
    04-13 09:36 PM
    Dear friend - looks like ur sugar levels are going up and down - hang in there. I think you will be fine. Thanks for sharing your experiences with people here.

    hehhehe..yeah my sugar levels and stock market indexes have synchronized themselves very well up/down is always a guess :p

    girlfriend anne hathaway red dress oscars anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. Anne+hathaway+oscars+hair
  • Anne+hathaway+oscars+hair

  • amitjoey
    08-05 02:27 PM
    How about this story:

    One Mr. Sunny Surya, and one Mr. XYZ. both landed in the USA in 1998. Mr. Sunny Surya goes to school, works hard and gets his masters in 2000. works for a good reputed company gathers experience and then in 2003 files for labor. PD 2003. Since he does not have experience in the USA (His present experience with the sponsoring company is not counted). He would have to change his job to be considered for EB2. So files in EB3. Mean time MR. XYZ has changed multiple jobs and is suddenly eligible for EB2 and files in JAN 2004. He is current and about to get his GC. Mr. Sunny Surya is contemplating changing his job and he is definately going to qualify for EB2. Mr XYZ tells Mr. Sunny - NO!. You cannot get in the EB2 with older PD. Get a 2008 PD.

    hairstyles anne hathaway oscars 2010 anne hathaway oscars 2010 performance. Anne Hathaway
  • Anne Hathaway

  • JunRN
    06-05 10:25 PM
    I noticed that the $8k and $10k for California (which began in March 09) stimulus is taken by builders for their benefit. How did they do it?

    When I bought a house in March 09, the builder offered me great discounts (20k off the purchase price, interest buy down to 4.5%) and freebies (fridge, blinds, washer/dyer) so I took it. I bought the house for less than $90 per sq. ft.

    After the $8k Fed. and $10k California stimulus have passed, builders use that as their sales pitch to attract buyers and removed their previously offered discounts (some still offers discount though but offset the stimulus benefits).

    So, I believe that the builders/sellers are the real winner in the stimulus, not the buyers.

    12-27 10:49 PM
    I myself am originally from Mumbai so please dont doubt the deep sense of outrage that I feel. But amid all this talk about going to war, here are a few things to ponder

    1. Think about how long it takes to construct a single runway of an airport. In the developed countries, it takes about 2-3 years, for India safe to say 5-6 years. One of Paki's first responses would be take out entire airports not just runways. Can you imagine how long it would take us to recover

    >>>>>It will be the same if terrorists take out entire airports by their terror actions, which they were about to do in Mumbai that failed on 11/26. So no point worrying about what if.

    2. Why should India kill Pak when it is killing itself every day. At this rate, just imagine how long this country will last. Sitting back and being a spectator could just about be the best option

    >>>>>At this rate they will take another 50 years to kill themselves, but will continue to torment India till they die, they are like a cockroach that keeps wriggling till it dies, and does not matter if you just cut off its legs, etc.

    3. If we are outraged by 200 civilians/police/NSG dying, do we really have the stomach to absorb 1000s, lakhs ........

    >>>>>If we dont destroy the Pakis now, tomorrow their terrorists will take out 1000s, lakhs while we sit and wait.

    4. Talking of "surgical strikes" - surgical strikes on what? Even the dumbest terrorist knows that its probably not a good idea to be in a terror camp right now.

    >>>>>That is a true statement, but who cares, look at Israel that takes out Hamas buildings even though no hamas terrorists are in those buildings.

    5. Do we really want to unite all those crazy Punjabis, Balochis, Taliban and the Paki army

    >>>>>They are already united, it is Indians who are divided.

    6. Ok, what about assassinating Kayani. Wonderful, we have destroyed the last institution in Paki land. Get ready to welcome millions of refugees

    >>>>>No comments.

    I know I know that I am not coming up with any good course of action, just pointing out the flaws in the rest of them. But thats all my layman's strategic vision gives me. Maybe with just 1/100th the cost of war, we can improve our border/maritime security and also our intelligence apparatus

    Personally, I think war is going to happen. I just wish people even remotely understand what it is that they are asking for.

    War is bad but required to quell bad people, some people just dont get it the soft way.

    08-05 09:00 PM
    I enjoyed both the original and follow-up. By the time, the lion gets the GC, he might have forgot he was a lion, and even after getting GC, he will continue to act like monkey.

    the Lion on the monkey visa finding out another Indian (very, very aggravating factor:p) lion in next cage actually on lion visa and not on a monkey visa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! phew! !!!!!!!!!!!! what a heartburn! threatening law suits, opening a new thread in IV. Generally threatening to bring down the zoo::D

    No comments:

    Post a Comment