HKG

"I like Tai Chi...it's like standing still...only faster!" good one.

harmony is not just a concept , correct ? meditation is not just a speed , this is maybe a misconception held. Balance cannont be brought to you by practice of movement but from you to movement no matter the speed of actions and from spirit/mind first. Why the quote? I'm not selling books. btw Taiji (tai chi)or as the Chinese call it "The Great Chaos" is a treasure of China culture.

I practice taiji (tai chi) its philosophical base is Dao, many of the ideals of living in harmony with your fellow man are good concepts. doing the form in tai chi slows you down, one reason because the form is done slow, 20 minutes or more, maybe this is why it is called meditation in motion or also as it is known as "the Great Ultimate". From nothingness, Wu Chi, to motion tai chi brings Yin/Yang.

Newark to Hong Kong definite non-stop, fly over the North Pole, watch it melt, about 15 hours fly time.. Shanghai should be about the same fly time.

I have asked this question, about fraud possibly this is not the place to ask this question, but here goes, I gave my girlfriend an exact copy of our 124F and my income tax statements that contained my social security number, if someone is involved in a fraud ring did they give, "whoever" this information, did any of you who got denials give your future partner this information. My point being with ID theft the way it is, doesn't this show something that points to bonafide relation. it would seem to me as being as valid as pictures, emails, etc.

I've been everywhere, man I've been everywhere, man Crossed the deserts bare, man I've breatherd the mountain air, man Travel - I've had my share, man I've been everywhere I've been to: Reno Chicago Fargo Minnesota Buffalo Toronto Winslow Sarasota Whichta Tulsa Ottowa Oklahoma Tampa Panama Mattua LaPaloma Bangor Baltimore Salvador Amarillo Tocapillo Pocotello Amperdllo I'm a Killer I've been everywhere, man I've been everywhere, man Crossed the deserts bare, man I've breatherd the mountain air, man Travel - I've had my share, man I've been everywhere I've been to: Boston Charleston Dayton Lousiana Washington Houston Kingston Texas (County) Monterey Fairaday Santa Fe Tollaperson Glen Rock Black Rock Little Rock Oskaloussa Tennessee Tinnesay Chickapee Spirit Lake Grand Lake Devil's Lake Crater Lake For Pete's Sake I've been everywhere, man I've been everywhere, man Crossed the deserts bare, man I've breatherd the mountain air, man Travel - I've had my share, man I've been everywhere I've been to: Louisville Nashville Knoxville Omerback Shereville Jacksonville Waterville Costa Rock Richfield Springfield Bakersfield Shreveport Hakensack Cadallic Fond du Lac Davenport Idaho Jellico Argentina Diamondtina Pasadena Catalina See What I Mean I've been everywhere, man I've been everywhere, man Crossed the deserts bare, man I've breatherd the mountain air, man Travel - I've had my share, man I've been everywhere I've been to: Pittsburgh Parkersburg Gravelburg Colorado Ellisburg Rexburg Vicksburg Eldorado Larimore Adimore Habastock Chadanocka Shasta Nebraska Alaska Opalacka Baraboo Waterloo Kalamazoo Kansas City Souix City Cedar City Dodge City What A Pity I've been everywhere, man I've been everywhere, man Crossed the deserts bare, man I've breatherd the mountain air, man Travel - I've had my share, man I've been everywhere Courtsey: Johnny Cash

Disclamer I started my post as a sense of humor and it turned into a "flame" I did not intend.

Lao Tzu once observed that their are three different kinds of people. 1. Their are those who learn by themselves, he remarked these are very good for society. 2. Those who learn from others and themselves, they also are good for society 3. But the third kind neither learn by themselves or from others, and they are not good for society. Prisons are mostly for this type.

More pinks, less whites..!

file a freedom of information request with DOS and USCIS, let them tell you why it is a nonbonafide, the Obama administration is on your side, the President has issued an executive order, telling all agencies to complie with FOIA request. ask for the consular notes and the DS 156 exhibit 3. http://www.boingboing.net/2009/01/21/obama...instration.html one of many web stories on this executive order.

A movie named "Raise the Red Lantern" won a BAFA award and Oscar nominated is available for one's video enjoyment.

I second what 'ShadoGray' says here - just plan on staying 15 days in HKG - the first day to FILE for the marriage certificate, the 15th day to actually marry. Then - do a I-130 with adjucation listed as 'GUZ', and a followup I-129F for K-3, with adjudication listed as 'HKG'. Then, if for some reason, yer are denied at HKG, for the K-3 - you can still go to GUZ for the I-130. Good Luck ! A back flip in a helicopter sounds easier. Why so cynical? The K-3 in Hong Kong has worked well for many and the wait time is usually much less than GUZ. Aha, ol', Fisher, lighten up man not being 'cycnical' just an expression..

I second what 'ShadoGray' says here - just plan on staying 15 days in HKG - the first day to FILE for the marriage certificate, the 15th day to actually marry. Then - do a I-130 with adjucation listed as 'GUZ', and a followup I-129F for K-3, with adjudication listed as 'HKG'. Then, if for some reason, yer are denied at HKG, for the K-3 - you can still go to GUZ for the I-130. Good Luck ! A back flip in a helicopter sounds easier.

Hong Kong marriage is sounding better then going through GUZ again, still all this drama wears on one.

You should be just fine with that. Chawls (chilton747) and his woman just got the visa on the second try. He opted for the CR-1 route after a K-1 denial...and he never heard anything from his service center until she was safely in america. She got the IR-1 (ten year greencard since the married time was over 2 years when she came over. The only thing I could say is the wait for the P-2 takes forever..that's why I'm just gonna hop over to China and marry the lil' rabbit and spend my time with her while we're waiting to file a DCF IR-1. Maybe Chawls or Charles will tell you more about the wait for a P-2 on the second try. Good luck... tsap seui Well if Chilton747 did it every one should have the same luck..give me a break..

You could file a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request to USCIS asking for the Consular notes and DS163 Exhibit 3. With USCIS you will need to mail the request, they will send back a form that the fiance/e will need to sign to release the information. President Obama has signed an executive order to all agencies to honor these FOIA request, so with luck you will learn the reason for your denial. You can also by internet ask DOS for information, same release of information form is required.

no, we did not meet online, communicated about a year, then met , then filed K1 Nov. 2007. I think you are asking me..

Mobil Caller, $10.00, 300 minutes. basic plan.

We were given( blue )simple questions, personal but simple, "travel statement" asking to explain what we did while we were together, I did not make it a hot and heavy novel, just put in facts about my airplane trip, where we visited, ate, , who paid for what, things like that. Then the evolution statement fully explained for the third time how we met, an I also included a statement of intention of marriage within 90 days, I also had to have them notarized. For her she was asked for some pictures, e-mails and telephone receipts which she gave. For our effort "White". When I think about it, I gave a statement that was notarized, an got back and answer that now I would be known as MR. Fraud/Misrepresentation.

Rob/Jin, Splinterman, I appreciate your advice, my end quest is to be with my girl, but I also believe in the rule of law but quite possible this is my fault, these subjective type answers, go to China 15 times have 300 pictures, seems to me to just play into the Consulates subjective scheme of things with a no reason non-bonafide denial, I also posted information on the FOIA, this post had its share of the nay sayers, granted under the Bush Administration this act was severely curtailed, but President Obama has opened this way into government accountability once again, this is a tool one of which I'am using to find out there reason for denial. One needs to keep in mind the USA is a nation of laws, no one is above the law as quite a few citizens and politicians have found out. Good luck to all of you, which ever way you decide to pursue your dreams.

A good restatement of the standards governing petition returns by consulate is found in a February 2004 cable R 251642Z FEB 04, excerpted below, sent to all consulates. ¡­ ¡°6. In adjudicating visa cases involving petitions, posts should bear in mind three important factors: A. the consular officer's role in the petition process is to determine if there is substantial evidence relevant to petition validity not previously considered by DHS, and not to merely readjudicate the petition; B. the memo supporting the petition return must clearly show the factual and concrete reasons for recommending revocation (observations made by the consular officer cannot be conclusive, speculative, equivocal or irrelevant) and; C. consular officers must provide to the applicant in writing as full an explanation as possible of the legal and factual basis for the visa denial and petition return. Post must maintain a copy of the returned petition, other evidence relevant to the case, and a copy of the written notification of the denial. No readjudication of petitions 7. In general, an approved petition will be considered by consular officers as prima facie evidence that the requirements for classification - which are examined in the petition process - have been met. Where Congress has placed responsibility and authority with DHS to determine whether the requirements for status which are examined in the petition process have been met, consular officers do not have the authority to question the approval of petitions without specific evidence, generally unavailable to DHS at the time of petition approval, that the beneficiary may not be entitled to status (see 9 FAM 41.53, Note 2, 41.54 Note 3.2-2, 41.55 Note 8, 41.56 Note 10, 41.57 Note 6, and 42.43 Note 2) due to fraud, changes in circumstances or clear error on the part of DHS in approving the petition. Conoffs should not assume that a petition should be revoked simply because they would have reached a different decision if adjudicating the petition. ¡­¡± Will the person or persons who deleted this post, please message me and give a reason for it's deletion!

This order should help with finding out reasons of denials for white slips, if you submit a FOIA request http://www.boingboing.net/2009/01/21/obama...instration.html

Hi Steve, "that you do not have a bona fide relationship with your petitioner."..This is a bunch of Horse Sh*t....and I mean that. When you PMed me, I still think one of your reasons is totally unfounded. Because of the reason I gave you, but if the other reason was more of a red flag....that would still be a "pile of manure" for them to explain. Tom and Ling unfortunatly Guz plays by their rules and their rules only we had red flags many do, the key is to address them before the interview, be smart go to ACS + ACH talk get things put into file, met VO's, be like chinese make relationship. for all waiting or with white, take time prepare carefully, address concerns, make many visits to china, remember it is up to you to prove to them bonefide, why take chance its on your life together. i see that many that get blue or white on CFL are in past just silent members until get bad news, so maybe better members ask questions be true as to their past, then we can all help. remember you cannot hide from embassy so why hide here ? Jin with all due respect,my wife recieved the white,in october,we had all our bases covered,i am a non hiding member,some hide after they get the blue or white,because GUZ does monitor this board,and they are angry,rightfully so. I thought also,to prove a bonafide relationship to be important,however,my wife brought a suitcase of evidence,none was asked for. lets see ,evidence of a bonafide relationship,...daily emails,daily phone records,yahoo chats,bank statements,photos,love poems,cds of love songs i wrote to her,3 trips to china,gifts purchased,that she purchased for me,i to her,to be honest,the only thing we did not put in for evidence,was tapes of us having sex...sorry for being blunt.....what is the point of documenting evidence,if fortune tellers,soothsayers, know it all.....and as far as trips,i know of a guy did 8 trips to China,recieved the white.I am not saying not to do these things,on the contrary,absolutely do all these things...but You're right GUZ plays by their rules,and for some the VO says game over,before the wife ...oops i mean the beneficiary sits down to prove a bonafide relationship.If there are red flags,one should be given the decency to prove them red flags false. jimi no offense . but if all bases covered why would you get "white" something was not covered, were you there for interview and ACS +ACH ? well of course obvoiusly a red flag,but my point, was ,my wife did not have an opportunity to address whatever red flag popped up,what i was saying was,what was the point gathering evidence if not looked at?It is like your ready to get your drivers liscense,you study to the bone,you take the car out to practice,driving and parking,you do everything ask of you to do,your excited,you're ready,your prepared,you go the DMV,ready to take your test,and the instructor goes"sorry we can not give you the test" why?we can't tell you !! well, the instructor looks at you and deems,you are unfit to drive on the road,you look like someone who would drink and drive....its absurd,but thats my point,you do everything your suppose to do,gather your heart and soul put into a luggage and head for Guangzhou,a red flag pops up,no, sorry,we arent listening to a word you say,we are not looking at any evidence. of course hindsight, being at ACH (this is not guarenteed,many go to ACH and still get denied),maybe would help,maybe not,couldve waited longer before getting married,i couldve hired a lawyer,I shouldve kissed Mother Theresa,Gotten blessed by the Pope, shouldve been a millionare....,sure many things i couldve done differently,you missed the point,which was addressing the fact "evidence of a bonafide relationship"doesnt always get looked at. if not examined ,what was the point of gathering it all up ? its a question that never gets answered.i will say it again,all the ladies should be given the decency to present their case.Really don't you think so?after all they did carry it all the way to Guz. Jimi I been asking the same question about this, non-bona fide relation, trying to show some legal arguments against it, what do I get cocky, inappropriate answers , selfrighteous reasoning, personal attacks, attacks against Constitutional rights, Supreme Court rulings, postings by Marc Ellis on burden of proof, the naysayers have a field day. Some people on this board say GUZ reads these post and why not there is a large population, some say GUZ doesn't have the time, but one does have to wonder if all these naysayers are who they seem they are. And then when you ask the question how does one answer a NOID or NOIR once it gets back to the USA, can you find a decent answer, I have not..OK, naysayers your turn

A long long time ago. HKG, you are missing the boat. Let me give you a little analogy. You are like in a boat out in the middle of the South China Sea in a typhoon. Now, you are lucky because this boat has a captain and crew who are well versed with storms, weathering many storms and typoons before. It is also filled with a group of people who are more than happy to help you get through to the other end. Now, you find yourself going outside on deck to piss into the wind. You close the door forgetting the life line inside, so now you have no one to help you and you risk being swept overboard, never to be found again. Yes, non-bonafide relationship is a legal term. Yes, it is one GUZ seems to use quite often. You are tackling this like they have burden of proof. Not the case. You have the burden of proof. You must prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that your relationship is a true relationship. The burden of proof is on you and your spouse/fiancee. No one in their right mind would shift the burden of proof. The argument is not if they can use non-bonafide relationship or not, but how much proof do you need, what kind of proof do they need and how much disclosure must they provide. This is the battle we must fight and one we are losing at this time. Marc Ellis, on burden of proof http://www.ilw.com/articles/2006,0323-ellis.shtm