Charlotte Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 The following is letter sent via L D's secretary's email a few minutes ago: United States Consulate General#1 Sha Mian South StreetGuangzhou, P.R.C. 510133e-mail:GuangzhouCongress@state.govPHONE: (86-20)8121-8000FAX: (86-20) 8121-8428 January 6, 2003 REF: EMAIL DATED DECEMBER 24, 2002 FROM DR. AND MRS. KLEIN TO: DR.& MRS. RUDOLF AND CHARLOTTE KLEIN Dear Dr. & Mrs. Klein: This is in further response to your concerns about the processing of the immigrant visa case of your daughter, Ms. Jiang, Lily. I am replying to your email dated December 24, 2002. As you are already aware from previous correspondence, her application was approved at the time of her formal immigrant visa interview with a Consular Officer on August 29, 2002. We have since resubmitted her name to the Department of State for completion of administrative visa clearance procedures introduced after and made necessary by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The State Department recognizes that visa processing through the U.S. Consulate General in Guangzhou has been delayed as new procedures intended to strengthen U.S. homeland security were introduced. The Department is committed to clearing this backlog in an expeditious process and has already taken many steps, including providing additional staff to Guangzhou, to help process these visa cases as quickly as possible. We are confident that many visa applicants will receive their visas in the coming weeks as a result of the many new measures we are introducing to speed the visa process. We ask for the understanding and cooperation of everyone involved as we simultaneously work to strengthen U.S. homeland security and process visa cases. The new information contained in this letter may be a source of encouragement. I hope it is. Yet at the same time I fully understand that the patience you have thus far displayed is not an infinite resource. Please bear with us a while longer. Sincerely, Linda L. DonahueChief, Consular Section This e-mail is unclassified based on the definitions provided in E.O. 12958. Link to comment
kkimm Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 Only one question: how much longer? Link to comment
Eric&Yuhui Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 Only one question: how much longer? nice reply... but sounds like a nice-reply form letter to me.... Link to comment
owenkrout Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 this is a form reply letter, including cut and paste from other DOS replies that we have seen. Paragraphs three and four. If they are really trying to be cooperative and if he had really looked at that case, why did he dodge the issue of when the case was re-submitted? Also, just what "new information" was contained in that reply? It is interesting that she carefully refers to E.O. 12958. That is a consular instruction. "this is a reminder to posts regarding the problem of unauthorized contractual commitments" ...... "STOP WORK. upon learning of an unauthorized commitment" Now, having read it, I don't see that the cable actually applies to our circumstance, but why else is it cited? Link to comment
Mick Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 Sounds like a nice way of not saying much. And yes, I have seen those paragraphs Owen refers to in other places as well. However, I am confused about the EO 12958 business I saw your post Owen, but what does this actually mean? Is it pertinent to our situation in any way, or does it just mean that what she said is not confidential information? B) Link to comment
kkimm Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 It's a much nicer way of saying " I am not just B.S.ing" Link to comment
owenkrout Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 It is an executive order (E.O.). It basically says, "Stop making non-contractual commitments, you morons!" and tells them what to do about it when such commitments are discovered to have been made or someone claims they were made. I still don't see that it applies to us, as the discussion is mostly about payments. Maybe she cited the wrong number and meant to be saying that nothing was confidential information. Link to comment
tonado Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 The reply was very polite but no substance. Link to comment
markimwaiting Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 All form and fluff letter Link to comment
markimwaiting Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 I believe it was positive and showed that Linda was aware of your case and had cecked to make sure it was on line. "Yet at the same time I fully understand that the patience you have thus far displayed is not an infinite resource. Please bear with us a while longer." After reading this letter again, I agree with you James.I really like the part I just pasted above. Link to comment
owenkrout Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 Maybe you are right. Maybe I have been shafted so many times by the bureauacracy involved in this that I just can't trust them anymore. I am planning to give CA a call to see if my wife's case has had any change. I really dread even making the calls anymore, but they have promised action so many times and then done nothing that I have to bother them and ask. The thing is that if there is no change at this point I might as well cancal all plans for her to make it State side during the holiday. No change now would put her into February at the earliest for a visa. Link to comment
wgraffiks Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 Hey, I live in CA, so that's probably a local call for me, right? Seriously though, what does CA stand for, what is their function, what can they do for me (what new info can they tell me) and what is the phone number? Still waiting for those name-check results...Any more acronyms I should be aware of? Link to comment
dayfood Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 Hey, I live in CA, so that's probably a local call for me, right? Seriously though, what does CA stand for, what is their function, what can they do for me (what new info can they tell me) and what is the phone number? Still waiting for those name-check results...Any more acronyms I should be aware of?CA is Consulate Affairs in this board, not California! CA is located in Washington DC. Link to comment
PJ Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 CA = Consulate Affairs. They are responsible for the U.S. Consulates and Embassays abroad. Link to comment
wgraffiks Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 Thanks---and the answers to my other questions are...? Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now