Thursday, June 30, 2011

emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011

images wallpaper emma watson vogue emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. Emma Watson covers the July
  • Emma Watson covers the July


  • alien2006
    05-24 10:05 AM
    He is just using this to play illegals vs legals. If you watch his lousy program, he is constantly ranting that this CIR bill will increase immigration by 100 million plus in the next few years. Some time back he also said that the CIR is a covert operation to increase H1Bs and legal immigration, not just about illegal immigrants. You can tune out what Lou says, he's doing what he can to improve his ratings.




    wallpaper Emma Watson covers the July emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. Emma Watson Vogue US July 2011
  • Emma Watson Vogue US July 2011


  • dtekkedil
    10-02 10:46 PM
    I have always been a supporter of Democrats. Because I believe in their philosophy. If I were a citizen, I probably would have even joined the Democratic party.

    However, the past two years have opened my eyes - There is one major difference between the Republicans and Democrats. Republicans are bullies and manage to get away with anything because they stand together. Where as Democrats can't even collectively make a decision on what color shoes to wear - every Democrat has a personal agenda that is more important to them than the good of the country or even the party.

    I truly believe that George W Bush did not win the first election and he did not win the second one either... the Democrats lost it!

    The Republicans may put the wealthy and big corporations ahead of us common folks but they can achieve more than the Democrats and perhaps some of that may trickle down to the rest of us. The Democrats on the other hand will be busy squabbling and nothing will get done.

    So, even if Obama wants to fix immigration or be sympathetic to our cause, there will definitely be others like Sen. Durbin who will attempt to stop him. In the end, four years down the line, we will be hoping for the next President to help our cause.

    I have been in this country for over 10 years and I am still waiting for a Green Card. I love this country and there is no other place on Earth that I want to settle down. However, there comes a point when I have to ask myself if this wait in limbo is worth it.

    Is all this really worth it? Not being able to settle down; not being able to make plans for the future. Worrying everyday if the company that I work for will have a bad quarter and have to let me go? Worrying about when I will have to pack up my things from this country and start fresh in some other place? Will I have to live with all this stress for another five or six years only to be told that my Green Card cannot be approved? Where will I go? Can I go back to India? Will I be able to cope with the culture there anymore? Can it be my HOME anymore?

    I am sure the same thoughts have gone through many of your minds.

    I have always believed that I should be more than what I am. How can I do that when I can't even be what I am. There are so many things I want to do. I am a man of science and I have ideas that could probably change the world tomorrow. But I can't even do my PhD. It is not because I am not smart enough, it is because I have started my Green card process and I cant go back to being a full time student because I need an F-1 visa... which I am not eligible for because I have started my Green card process!

    What I am trying to say is that we are paying too high a price for a Green Card, there is only one life, it is short and you don't get second chances. So, for those who have just started this Green Card process, my advice to you is; Don't let the Green Card carrot steal your life away from you. You still haven't invested many years of your lives, cut your losses and run!

    The last time I came back from India, the first and overwhelming thought I had when I stepped out of the airplane was "I'm Home!". That is when I realized that I am not an Indian anymore, I am an American; at least in my mind! But I cannot let my life pass me by while I wait for a Green Card; not anymore! I am in the process of applying for an Australian PR and will also be applying for a Canadian PR. It is not that I do not want to live in the US anymore - it is just that I cant afford to live here much longer in this situation. The emotional and physical cost is far too high. America has become my home but living here is costing me my life.

    Sorry for rambling on... but my point is that while my heart wants Obama to win (I truly believe he will make a GREAT president) my head tells me that McCain should win. Because, the chances of our issues being solved or even for the good of this country, it is better to have a Republican President and a Republican congress!



    On a side note -

    The point of getting a Green Card is so that I can settle here and raise my family here. But really, is there a future here anymore? Social Security will be non-existent by the time I retire, medical insurance is probably the biggest scam ever, and all jobs will be outsourced to other countries soon. So, will the US remain such a great country 40 years down the line?

    A country can remain great only if men with vision guide it. Over 50 years ago President Eisenhower and his colleagues had the vision to implement the Interstate system. They saw what things will be like 40 - 50 years down the line and prepared for it. Today, the politicians in Washington just think about the next election and that is where the downfall of America begins. It is not Bin Laden who can destroy America, it is leaders without vision or love for the country; Leaders who worry more about elections than making the tough but correct decisions.

    Be it Obama or McCain, this country is unfortunately in a situation where the next President will make or break America. I hope it is the former from the bottom of my heart.

    I came to this country because it meant life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. But today, I realize that I have given up my life, liberty and happiness in pursuit of a Green Card.




    emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. Emma Watson Vogue July 2011
  • Emma Watson Vogue July 2011


  • gimme_GC2006
    03-23 12:31 PM
    You/lawyer/employer may have forgotten to shred the extra/unwanted documents. Someone may have got hold of them.

    Google 'identity theft' and you will be surprised.

    Do not answer anyone unless to check. Ask for a call back number. Find the name , badge number. ask them to send you an email with a legit id and you will call back.

    You should anyways never talk alone to such people even if they are real. Ask them to talk to your lawyer. If they ask you his number, tell them to find from the application.

    Basically never give any information on the phone.

    well..I guess..I will take Infopass and checkout whats going on..
    I know my file is at local office..not sure if they transferred it back to NBC or TSC..(atleast there are no LUDs)..

    and I hope whoever called me can see it in their system that this case is pending at local office..so dont know why they wanted all the detailsfrom me rather than taking from the file..may be thats how they work..


    but I am heading to Infopass have enough doubts now :cool:




    2011 Emma Watson Vogue US July 2011 emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. hairstyles Emma Watson – Vogue
  • hairstyles Emma Watson – Vogue


  • Rolling_Flood
    08-05 09:03 AM
    If you don't like my stand, fair enough.
    Neither you nor anyone else can stop me from taking legal counsel on this issue and going to the courts if i feel this porting thing is illegal in a sense.

    Please refrain from making cheap remarks like the ones you made towards the end of the post. They serve to highlight your issues more than mine. I am content with the EB2 folks who have already PM-ed me and we will, for sure, take this forward.

    Rolling Flood,

    Clearly, you are a NumberUSA person trying to provoke deep rifts amongst a highly skilled workforce that succeeded in getting HR 5882 out there. Your game is up. Look, no one is claiming porting / interfiling is due to 'length of time'. Each application, under each category, is for a DIFFERENT job. Now, obviously, when you gain experience in one job, you become MORE ELIGIBLE for another job, typically at a more senior level. With that, comes a higher income and higher TAXES back to the USA.

    Your perverted logic that people are using interfiling on the premise of 'waiting time in EB3 queues' is a fallacy without legal merit. EB3's that interfile to EB2's have to, LIKE ANYONE ELSE, show the merits of the EB2 application BY ITSELF.

    Now, if you think you can snake in a controversy through a law suit, only to protect your inflated sense of protectionism, keep in mind, that your target is EB2. I presume that you are in EB2 yourself. Be prepared for unintended consequences because USCIS could very well freeze ALL EB2's INCLUDING YOURS! Might seem a far stretch, but realistically, anytime a court sees 'merit' in challenging an established system / process, ALL come under purview. How can your case be assumed to be 'innocent' while everyone else that you are against be 'guilty'?

    There are numerous cases of people going to court seeking 'justice' only to find themselves very quickly standing 'on the other side'... trying to get out of a self inflicted mess.

    Obviously, you have issues that run deeper than discontentment with US legal immigration process. Get yourself some help. Seriously.



    more...

    emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. emma watson vogue shoot 2011.
  • emma watson vogue shoot 2011.


  • mariner5555
    04-09 10:51 PM
    we've found that the more compelling arguments tend to be those related to US competitiveness. If I was to use the housing argument in a meeting, I would use it in a light hearted way while making a serious point.
    For most, common sense of justice is an issue, in which case housing can be brought up, but again, not an issue to focus on too much, more in the context of 'it is ironic that many of us want to buy houses but GC wait is what prohibits that, not the credit crunch'. Can be mentioned in passing, but not worth focusing on.
    Mentioning it in light hearted way would help too when you have predictions like this (latest report) from International Monetary Fund.
    ------
    House prices have already fallen by around 10% in the US by some measures, and the IMF says that they may be over-valued by more than 20% in the UK, Ireland and Spain.
    It is forecasting further falls in US house prices of 14% to 20% this year.
    ---------
    GC is definitely the main issue for atleast 10 of my friends (and I guess it is an issue for many others). our view is why invest in immovable assets while we are at the mercy of a govt agency.
    ofcourse - I would guess that many of the govt advisors must have suggested the link between immigration and housing to the policy makers. in the end it is supply and demand.
    there are other ways too ..US laws are influenced by lobbyists and I am sure there is a huge builders, realtors lobby ..maybe IV could explain the issue to them ..and in turn expect them to explain this issue to lawmakers ..

    a quick note - I am not saying that if a person gets a GC then he will run and buy a house. but for many GC is the first thing that has to happen before he/she even starts to look around.




    emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. wallpaper Emma Watson Vogue-02
  • wallpaper Emma Watson Vogue-02


  • Macaca
    12-27 07:15 PM
    In �Daily Show� Role on 9/11 Bill, Echoes of Murrow (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/27/business/media/27stewart.html) By BILL CARTER and BRIAN STELTER | New York Times

    Did the bill pledging federal funds for the health care of 9/11 responders become law in the waning hours of the 111th Congress only because a comedian took it up as a personal cause?

    And does that make that comedian, Jon Stewart � despite all his protestations that what he does has nothing to do with journalism � the modern-day equivalent of Edward R. Murrow?

    Certainly many supporters, including New York�s two senators, as well as Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, played critical roles in turning around what looked like a hopeless situation after a filibuster by Republican senators on Dec. 10 seemed to derail the bill.

    But some of those who stand to benefit from the bill have no doubt about what � and who � turned the momentum around.

    �I don�t even know if there was a deal, to be honest with you, before his show,� said Kenny Specht, the founder of the New York City Firefighter Brotherhood Foundation, who was interviewed by Mr. Stewart on Dec. 16.

    That show was devoted to the bill and the comedian�s effort to right what he called �an outrageous abdication of our responsibility to those who were most heroic on 9/11.�

    Mr. Specht said in an interview, �I�ll forever be indebted to Jon because of what he did.�

    Mr. Bloomberg, a frequent guest on �The Daily Show,� also recognized Mr. Stewart�s role.

    �Success always has a thousand fathers,� the mayor said in an e-mail. �But Jon shining such a big, bright spotlight on Washington�s potentially tragic failure to put aside differences and get this done for America was, without a doubt, one of the biggest factors that led to the final agreement.�

    Though he might prefer a description like �advocacy satire,� what Mr. Stewart engaged in that night � and on earlier occasions when he campaigned openly for passage of the bill � usually goes by the name �advocacy journalism.�

    There have been other instances when an advocate on a television show turned around public policy almost immediately by concerted focus on an issue � but not recently, and in much different circumstances.

    �The two that come instantly to mind are Murrow and Cronkite,� said Robert J. Thompson, a professor of television at Syracuse University.

    Edward R. Murrow turned public opinion against the excesses of Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s. Mr. Thompson noted that Mr. Murrow had an even more direct effect when he reported on the case of Milo Radulovich, an Air Force lieutenant who was stripped of his commission after he was charged with associating with communists. Mr. Murrow�s broadcast resulted in Mr. Radulovich�s reinstatement.

    Walter Cronkite�s editorial about the stalemate in the war in Vietnam after the Tet Offensive in 1968 convinced President Lyndon B. Johnson that he had lost public support and influenced his decision a month later to decline to run for re-election.

    Though the scale of the impact of Mr. Stewart�s telecast on public policy may not measure up to the roles that Mr. Murrow and Mr. Cronkite played, Mr. Thompson said, the comparison is legitimate because the law almost surely would not have moved forward without him. �He so pithily articulated the argument that once it was made, it was really hard to do anything else,� Mr. Thompson said.

    The Dec. 16 show focused on two targets. One was the Republicans who were blocking the bill; Mr. Stewart, in a clear effort to shame them for hypocrisy, accused them of belonging to �the party that turned 9/11 into a catchphrase.� The other was the broadcast networks (one of them being CBS, the former home of Mr. Murrow and Mr. Cronkite), which, he charged, had not reported on the bill for more than two months.

    �Though, to be fair,� Mr. Stewart said, �it�s not every day that Beatles songs come to iTunes.� (Each of the network newscasts had covered the story of the deal between the Beatles and Apple for their music catalog.) Each network subsequently covered the progress of the bill, sometimes citing Mr. Stewart by name. The White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, credited Mr. Stewart with raising awareness of the Republican blockade.

    Eric Ortner, a former ABC News senior producer who worked as a medic at the World Trade Center site on 9/11, expressed dismay that Mr. Stewart had been virtually alone in expressing outrage early on.

    �In just nine months� time, my skilled colleagues will be jockeying to outdo one another on 10th anniversary coverage� of the attacks, Mr. Ortner wrote in an e-mail. �It�s when the press was needed most, when sunlight truly could disinfect,� he said, that the news networks were not there.

    Brian Williams, the anchor of �NBC Nightly News� and another frequent Stewart guest, did not comment on his network�s news judgment in how it covered the bill, but he did offer a comment about Mr. Stewart�s role.

    �Jon gets to decide the rules governing his own activism and the causes he supports,� Mr. Williams said, �and how often he does it � and his audience gets to decide if they like the serious Jon as much as they do the satirical Jon.�

    Mr. Stewart is usually extremely careful about taking serious positions for which he might be accused of trying to exert influence. He went to great lengths to avoid commenting about the intentions of his Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear in Washington in October, and the rally itself emphasized such less-than-impassioned virtues as open-minded debate and moderation.

    In this case, Mr. Stewart, who is on vacation, declined to comment at all on the passage of the bill. He also ordered his staff not to comment or even offer any details on how the show was put together.

    But Mr. Specht, the show guest, described how personally involved Mr. Stewart was in constructing the segment.

    After the news of the Republican filibuster broke, �The Daily Show� contacted John Feal, an advocate for 9/11 victims, who then referred the show producers to Mr. Specht and the other guests.

    Mr. Stewart met with the show�s panel of first responders in advance and briefed them on how the conversation would go. He even decided which seat each of the four men should sit in for the broadcast.

    For Mr. Stewart, the topic of the 9/11 attacks has long been intensely personal. He lives in the TriBeCa area and has noted that in the past, he was able to see the World Trade Center from his apartment. Like other late-night comedians, he returned to the air shaken by the events and found performing comedy difficult for some time.

    But comedy on television, more than journalism on television, may be the most effective outlet for stirring debate and effecting change in public policy, Mr. Thompson of Syracuse said. �Comedy has the potential to have an important role in framing the way we think about civic life,� he said.

    And Mr. Stewart has thrust himself into the middle of that potential, he said.

    �I have to think about how many kids are watching Jon Stewart right now and dreaming of growing up and doing what Jon Stewart does,� Mr. Thompson said. �Just like kids two generations ago watched Murrow or Cronkite and dreamed of doing that. Some of these ambitious appetites and callings that have brought people into journalism in the past may now manifest themselves in these other arenas, like comedy.�



    more...

    emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. emma watson vogue shoot 2011
  • emma watson vogue shoot 2011


  • SunnySurya
    08-05 10:45 AM
    And may I please ask how do you know that?
    May be 1% of EB2. Good to know that.




    2010 Emma Watson Vogue July 2011 emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. wallpaper emma watson vogue
  • wallpaper emma watson vogue


  • Macaca
    05-13 05:47 PM
    Free Ai Weiwei protests are 'condescending'? No, they are about the fear of where China is heading (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peterfoster/100087793/free-ai-weiwei-protests-are-condescending-no-they-are-about-the-fear-of-where-china-is-heading/) By Peter Foster | Telegraph Blog

    China is smarting over the negative publicity that has accompanied its arrest of Ai Weiwei. The Deputy Foreign Minister, Mme Fu Ying, who is the former Chinese Ambassador to Britain, said in Hungary yesterday that Europe and America were being �condescending� towards China by their refusal to just shut up about the arrested artist.

    Earlier a hurt-sounding foreign ministry spokesman said China was �unhappy� and �baffled� that some countries were trying to treat a �crime suspect as a hero�.

    Both of these highly disingenuous remarks are designed to touch a key nationalist button in China in which all criticisms of China are framed as part of a plot by the waning Old Imperial powers to constrain the :Dglorious rise of the new China:D. It is a seductive narrative, but also a fallacious one that needs to be squashed.

    In a globalised economy the US and the EU have a �common interest� in China�s peaceful rise, and on the evidence of the last few months (you might say years, going back to the crushing of the pre-Olympic Tibetan crackdowns of 2008) they have legitimate cause to be worried about the direction China is taking.

    Ai is merely a lightning rod for that concern.

    China is absolutely correct that the US and EU have no �right� to interfere in its judicial affairs, and nor do they seek to. But that doesn�t mean that democratic governments and their citizens don�t have a duty (to themselves, as much as anything else) to speak out about Ai Weiwei, and what his detention might portend.

    China talks about Ai being a �crime suspect�, but the fact that hardly anyone outside China (and a fair number inside China) have any confidence in the due process of the Chinese law should in itself give Beijing serious pause for thought.

    Popular concerns about Ai are not, as Mme Fu would have it, some silly political point-scoring game. His detention is an expression of naked State power that Europeans and Americans, who lived through totalitarianism not so long ago, find both worrying and revolting.

    So when someone asks, as the Chinese do, �what�s it to us?�, the immediate answer should be �absolutely everything�.

    China is going to shake the world over the next 50 years � for good or ill � and the shape of the Chinese state is therefore of concern to us all. China can bluster all it likes, it can posture and ignore the criticisms, but modern China does not exist in isolation.

    It has emerged as a rising power precisely because it has engaged with the world, signing up to a host of international agreements on trade and politics that imply certain norms of behaviour. The benefits of rejoining the world community can�t come, as Chinese foreign policy mandarins say, with �no strings attached�.

    This is why the democratic world feels that Ai�s detention is worth shouting about. It signals a deeply worrying trend in China and while Mme Fu tries to spin these protests as mere �condescension� they are nothing of the kind.

    They are about the real fear of where China is heading.


    Ai Weiwei and China�s assault on truth (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/12/ai-weiwei-and-chinas-assault-on-truth/) By Phelim Kine | The Washington Times
    CHINA'S MEDIA:
    A STRUGGLE FOR INDEPENDENCE (http://www.themontrealreview.com/2009/China-Media-a-Struggle-for-Independence.php)
    By James F. Scotton | The Montr�al Review
    A founding document for a new China (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-founding-document-for-a-new-china/2011/05/12/AFT5CV1G_story.html) By Michael Gerson | The Washington Post



    more...

    emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. emma watson vogue 2011 shoot
  • emma watson vogue 2011 shoot


  • obviously
    08-05 09:48 AM
    ... and dont forget that you drink from it too.

    Take the $500 or $1000 and contribute to IV so that we can get a solid resolution.

    No wonder illegals are so strong. United they stand. Pity 'highly educated' workers use their 'intelligence' for matters nefarious and counter-productive. No wonder we are in this situation to start with.

    If there were a collective voice with strong bargaining power, we would have not been in this situation.

    Law breakers are feared. Law abiding folks are derided.

    Go on, feed Loo Dogs for yet another sensational story on why ALL immigrants need to go back.

    Dont forget, for the average Joe anyone that does not 'look like them' can be a target for hate crime and resentment. PR about a case like this can only make the entire community weaker. If you happen to be Indian, what is to stop someone that is upset about immigrants not targeting you or your family? They wont know that YOU are their protector in chief, with the lawsuit stuck in your backpocket. You are but a symbol of the problem that you make out to be.

    Seriously. I have been involved in very key discussions with very senior public figures. Their number one pet peeve: You guys are so divided, even if we wanted to help, we are unable to.

    You just go on to prove their point.

    It is understandable that you are upset about what you see as being 'unfair'... just extrapolate that to the Ron Hiras of the world and NumberUSAs of the world ... you are feeding the larger cause of hatred towards highly skilled workers ... by creating a false impression that highly skilled workers abuse the system...

    Dont make your pillow peeves an issue that comes back to hurt ALL, including you. On many dimensions. This is serious stuff. Think about it.




    hair hairstyles Emma Watson – Vogue emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. emma watson vogue 2011 shoot.
  • emma watson vogue 2011 shoot.


  • StuckInTheMuck
    08-05 02:10 PM
    A man goes skydiving. After a fantastic free fall he pulls the rip cord to open his parachute but nothing happens. He tries everything but can't get it open.

    Just then another man flies by him, going UP. The skydiver yells, "Hey, you know anything about parachutes?" The man replies, "No, you know anything about gas stoves?"



    more...

    emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. Emma Watson for US Vogue July
  • Emma Watson for US Vogue July


  • nk2006
    06-01 04:49 PM
    All these cable channels are after "ratings". Now that Bush administration has low popular support (based on surveys), these guys saw an opportunity to rouse people emotions and get some better ratings (different kind of vultures). Immigration is always a touchy subject at any time and at any place. Its easy to blame "aliens" for all the current problems. Many people can fall prey to this if they are not well informed. Its very unfortunate and sad that even major media houses are hosting these opportunistic journos. Sure immigration has to be discussed with different view points and should be analyzed to see how it impact's the country but these self-appointed crusaders give blatant misinformation. Even more sad is giving absurd figures/data and claim that its from "independent research".

    Low Dobbs was never a known journalist until he started this rant. The most hilarous part of his show is that question of the day part. He "conveniently" frames the questions to get a desired answer (everyone know who watch and also vote those questions) and then even quotes the result as a support of what he is saying (its obvious he didnt take stats101). As someone else mentioned on another thread its best to just ignore what he says - he dont add any value to any serious discussion.

    Its also MSNBC. Just look at Tucker Carlson and Joe Scarborough.

    If you hear Tucker Carlson on MSNBC, he sounds like the protege of Jeff Sessions.

    However, one difference between Tucker Carlson and Lou Dobbs. Tucker supports(or atleast pretends to support) the legal variety.

    Lou Dobbs openly opposes all immigration.




    hot emma watson vogue shoot 2011. emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. 2010 2011 hair emma watson
  • 2010 2011 hair emma watson


  • amsgc
    08-08 11:44 PM
    .



    more...

    house Emma Watson: Vogue UK December emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. emma watson vogue photo shoot
  • emma watson vogue photo shoot


  • vghc
    01-07 01:49 PM
    All Muslims are NOT terrorists, but 99.9% terrorists ARE muslims.




    tattoo wallpaper Emma Watson Vogue-02 emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. makeup Emma Watson for Vogue
  • makeup Emma Watson for Vogue


  • ZeroComplexity
    09-30 03:36 PM
    All these proposals came into this picture under a republican president and a republican majority congress. How is McCain going to change anything? In fact, he was a strong propenent and sponsor of CIR measures.


    For the past 8 years it has been status qou for us, do you really want this stalemate to continue?



    He had proposed a very harsh H1b revamp and a total revamp of the L1 visa system.
    for example companies hiring H1 would have had to certify and attest that multiple american candidates were interviewed for the poisition. The prevailing wage had to be the highest of three measures (i forget which 3). Transfers were limited or restricted. On the other hand the Dream act simply gave citizenship to any illegal attending high school. The Senator talks about humane immigration and i agree to a certain extent but it should be humane for legals too.



    more...

    pictures emma watson vogue shoot 2011 emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. Emma Watson Vogue Shoot
  • Emma Watson Vogue Shoot


  • Macaca
    05-01 05:40 PM
    Why China�s Crackdown is Selective (http://the-diplomat.com/2011/04/28/why-china%E2%80%99s-crackdown-is-selective/) By Minxin Pei | The Diplomat

    For a one-party state that tolerates practically no open defiance of its authority, Beijing�s gentle handling of hundreds of striking truckers in Shanghai who had paralyzed operations at one of China�s largest container ports seems an anomaly. Instead of sending in riot police to break up the blockade last week, the authorities in Shanghai agreed to reduce fees levied on the truckers, who were angry over the charges and rising fuel prices.

    The outcome of this incident couldn�t be more different from another recent event: the arrest of Ai Weiwei, one of China�s most prominent political activists. Ai has repeatedly defied the ruling Communist Party and, despite his international stature, Beijing decided to put him behind bars, ignoring widespread international condemnation.

    The contrast between these two incidents raises an intriguing question: why does Beijing tolerate certain forms of protest, but represses others?

    One obvious reason is that it depends on the nature of the protest. As a rule, a frontal challenge to the authority of the Chinese Communist Party, as Ai�s activities embodied, practically guarantees a harsh response from the government. But protest inspired by specific economic grievances, such as truckers� ire over excessive fees, seems to fare better. In the eyes of the ruling party, the former constitutes an existential threat and so no concessions are seen as able to appease political activists rejecting the very legitimacy of the regime.

    In contrast, the discontent generated by well-defined economic grievances can be treated with specific concessions. One quote, allegedly from a sitting senior Politburo member, says it all: �What are the contradictions among the people?� the Politburo member supposedly asked. �(These contradictions) can all be solved by using renminbi.�

    But things are a little more complicated than this. The reality is that even when dealing with protests or riots fuelled by specific socioeconomic grievances, the behavior of the Chinese authorities isn�t always consistent. Sometimes, government officials pacify protesters through the use of the renminbi, while other times they mercilessly crush such protest.

    So how do we make sense of such apparent inconsistencies?

    It seems that the type of response to social protest�harsh or soft�depends on a complex mix of factors such as who the protesters are, the resources and organizational capacity at their disposal, the economic sectors in which they are located, and the social repercussions of their protest. Generally speaking, highly organized protesters (such as truck drivers, discharged soldiers and officers of the People�s Liberation Army, and taxi drivers) tend to fare better. They also possess resources that can be easily and effectively deployed. Taxi and truck drivers, for example, can use their vehicles to paralyze traffic and produce instantaneous and widespread social and economic disruptions.

    Former PLA servicemen, meanwhile, have a strong institutional identity and are well-connected with each other through ties forged during their military service. Research conducted by Chinese scholars shows that protests organized by former PLA servicemen tend to get the most attention�and the softest treatment�from the government. In contrast, protests by peasants are handled more harshly as they are less organized, possess few strategic assets, and have little impact beyond their villages.

    Another important factor is the political calculations of local officials. Despite the popular image of the Chinese state as a hierarchical, top-down system, there�s no uniform national manual for handling protests. This leaves a great deal of discretion at the hands of local officials, but it also places them in a political quandary. Whenever a mass protest erupts, local officials have to think and react fast, but deploying riot police and using force against protesters isn�t necessarily the preferred modus operandi since this could prompt an escalation in violence. Local officials who mishandle mass protests risk demotion or even dismissal, so they must calculate how to end such demonstrations peacefully and quickly, while ensuring that their actions won�t also encourage future protests. It�s a difficult balancing act.

    So what influences the political calculations of local officials?

    As I�ve said, it�s in large part the nature of the protest, the strength of the protesters, and the likely effects of the protest�all are critical variables. Local officials usually avoid using violence against protests inspired by economic discontent and organized by workers in strategic sectors (transportation and energy, for example). Another factor at play is simply the amount of renminbi available to local officials for buying off the protesters. In the case of striking truckers, the Shanghai municipal government, the wealthiest local jurisdiction in China, has plenty of money. But in poorer areas, the renminbi option just doesn�t exist.

    Another factor is media glare�the more media coverage (particularly international media coverage), the more constraints on local officials� use of force. Last, the location of the protest is key. When such protests happen in remote villages or towns, they are quickly and ruthlessly crushed. But when they occur in urban centres, the government (usually) responds more cautiously and gently.

    All this means that the happy ending for the striking truckers in Shanghai shouldn�t be taken as an encouraging precedent for workers in other sectors who might think the government will back down in the face of economic demands�however justifiable they might be.

    Minxin Pei is a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College




    dresses 2010 2011 hair emma watson emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. 2011 Emma Watson Italian Vogue
  • 2011 Emma Watson Italian Vogue


  • bfadlia
    01-07 03:22 PM
    Jesus didn't change any commandments. Read bible and comment. He said about the summary for the 10 commnandment. He said 1. love your God 2. Love your neighbour. It contains all commandments. Read the commandments. You will see it contains these 2 meanings only.

    Jesu's birth, life and cruxification are done according to the prophesy in old textment. If you have time read it. Christians didn't changed old testment. But most of the jews not recognise him during the time. Those recognise him convert to christianity. They suffered because of their non belief. But details in the bible for the second coming of jesus and the nation of Israel to prepare for his coming, so the present day jews are supported by God. In the end they all belive the mesiah.
    About trinity, we human cannot understand the complexity of God. We still cannot understand or expalin the nature misteries, how we can understand God in detail??. But God revealed some details to his people through prophet. Malachi is the last prophet. It is the last book in the old testment. After the mesiah was come to the world. God was revealed to human.

    Thank you so much for the information although I think I never asked about the trinity or salvation or the return of the messiah (only said the yearning for that return should not be used to justify one people displacing another and taking their land).. I respect jesus.. all muslims do.. let god deal with us for not accepting jesus as his son and just please stop using him as a scarecrow and leave Mohamed alone too..
    peace.



    more...

    makeup emma watson vogue 2011 shoot emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. Emma Watson: Vogue UK December
  • Emma Watson: Vogue UK December


  • sledge_hammer
    03-24 07:14 PM
    Can you please explain how you conluded that my theory was its okay to copy (exploit loopholes) unless you get caught?

    Please point to the exact post of mine...

    Again, I am not defending anyone, I am saying that we should point all the consultanting...not just desi consulting ones...just don't descriminate...from your theory, it looks it is ok to copy unless you are caught.....I don't want to argue on this and deviate from the OP .




    girlfriend makeup Emma Watson for Vogue emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. makeup Emma Watson for Vogue
  • makeup Emma Watson for Vogue


  • NKR
    04-14 11:39 AM
    Most of the posts here are not relevant to the original topic of the thread � buying a home when 485 is pending.

    You basically buy a home not to sell it off, but to live in it. Circumstances may lead one to sell a home, but no one can predict if that will happen for sure or when it may happen.

    For selling a home � just like stocks � it does not matter if the real estate market is doing well today or not. It only matters how the seller market is when it is time to sell. And again, no one can predict that in advance. Given this simple logic, it is totally useless to speculate resale values of homes which you may never even sell!

    I see people are so obsessed about resale value that they almost have never gone out to see homes, look at floor plans and see what they want, what the other family members want in a home or any of that. They instead prefer to calculate resale value based on current market conditions.

    Stop seeing a home as an investment and start seeing it as a place where you will live and where your kids will grow up. Obsessing too much about the monetary aspects just takes all the fun away.



    I cannot agree more. I have been trying to drill this into some peoples brain but they are so adamant on renting and has made this thread into a rent vs buy argument. I finally gave up. I am not saying that this is the right time to buy. Fast forward 2 or 2+ years, lets assume the market is good. Then when it comes to rent vs buy I advocate buying a house.

    Let�s say you have a small kid and you are living in an apartment, after 10 years you save enough money to buy a big house and you then eventually you buy it. Then you ask the your kid �do you like the house?�. He will reply �it�s very nice dad, but can you give you give my childhood now?.�. Go figure out guys. If you are not planning on going back for a very long time then at-least get a life in the country you reside and when the housing market is good.




    hairstyles Emma Watson for US Vogue July emma watson vogue photo shoot 2011. images emma watson vogue shoot
  • images emma watson vogue shoot


  • jkays94
    04-18 07:24 PM
    I don't believe votes such as this are scientific. Also only people who like the opinion given by him watches the show, so everyone knows it will be biased.

    Anyway I did vote NO.

    Last week Lou (who is a Harvard Economics graduate) said he was sending one of his poll results to the WH. Very unfortunate for a non-scientific poll. The other thing is that often a lot of people in decision making capacity ie some congressmen and senators watch Lou Dobbs and are often misled which is why it is key that groups like IV tell the true side of the story. Right now Lou has an anti-H1-B agenda and has been trying to lump H1-Bs as a bad thing for America.




    gcgreen
    08-06 01:03 PM
    Excellent point.

    Here is the relevant portion from 8 C.P.R. � 204.5(k)(2). This is the reason, in my opinion, why any lawsuit against BS+5 has not much merit value.

    ...

    (2) Definitions. As used in this section:

    Advanced degree

    means any United States academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above that of baccalaureate. A United States baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree followed by at least five years of progressive experience in the specialty shall be considered the equivalent of a master's degree. If a doctoral degree is customarily required by the specialty, the alien must have a United States doctorate or a foreign equivalent degree.

    ======================================



    ____________________________
    US Permanent Resident since 2002




    rkadayam2
    07-14 02:56 PM
    Maybe I should not say "high" paid but rather above average but once I get my GC I can really start to stretch my legs, think about starting a company or seek a much higher paying job or go freelance.

    But for that day will have to wait until my LC gets approved and then 140 and 485, etc so safe to say I have a long way to go.

    I may be better paid than the average american or even a skilled immigrant neverthless I'm still a slave who will have to stay confined with this one measly job for the last 5 years and put up with the whims of my management.

    I'm not dreaming of settling down in this country forever or becoming a citizen but I just need a valid status that will allow me to pursue a fruitful career. BCIS needs to re-think the H1B programme because there are lot of people who do not want to become citizens but just remain legal residents without a time limit. So long as we are able to stay employed and contributing tax dollars why try to kick us out.



    No comments:

    Post a Comment