Hello

My husband is threatening and intimidating me to leave the country but
didn't discuss a "D" though. Why should I?

I have a conditional PR card and will remove conditions on March 2005.
We always fight because of financial matters because he doesn't
support me financially but instead he support his ex-wife. My husband
and I don't have children yet. Recently i found out that he gave her
10,000dollars bec he said she asked favor. He got that money by
refinancing his house. Stupid, right? This woman has children on her
own. They don't have children during their marriage. I know he is
being duped. But i think he still loves her, or else he won't keep
giving money. But when i ask money, he gaves 20.00 or 50.00 or 100.00
not in a nice way but with matching ugly expressions both facial and
verbal. This is all unfair to me. He hurts me verbally many times
already. I can't take it anymore. I got to do something here. He
doesn't want me to get involve in his finances and that is why we
don't have a joint account. The car am driving is under both our
names, though "or". The car he is driving is under his name and his
exwife still. He doesn't want to remove the name of his exwife.
Spooky right? But he paid her all the divorce settlement a long time
already. Why is he still giving her much.

Maybe he wants me to leave the country to spare him from the affidavit
of support he signs. Can you sue your spouse/sponsor for not
supporting you?
He is earning 6000.00 per month, net.

Will i just shut up my mouth and wait for March 2005. What if he
doesn't signs my removal of conditions.

I got a very big problem, hope someone can advice me what is the right
way to do. Thanks a lot for supporting and replying.

Sincerely
faniah

Faniahcc wrote:
Hello My husband is threatening and intimidating me to leave the country but didn't discuss a "D" though. Why should I?

Get a divorce, get a job. If you are divorced you can file I-751
immediately. If you can prove abuse, you can file it even if you are
married.
I have a conditional PR card and will remove conditions on March 2005. We always fight because of financial matters because he doesn't support me financially but instead he support his ex-wife. My husband and I don't have children yet. Recently i found out that he gave her 10,000dollars bec he said she asked favor. He got that money by refinancing his house. Stupid, right? This woman has children on her own. They don't have children during their marriage. I know he is being duped. But i think he still loves her, or else he won't keep giving money. But when i ask money, he gaves 20.00 or 50.00 or 100.00 not in a nice way but with matching ugly expressions both facial and verbal. This is all unfair to me. He hurts me verbally many times already. I can't take it anymore.

If you can't take it, then you should leave. Do you have job skills?
You might be able to get alimony (spousal support). In the I-864 form he
signed, he agreed to support you at least at 125 percent of poverty level.


I got to do something here. He doesn't want me to get involve in his finances and that is why we don't have a joint account. The car am driving is under both our names, though "or".

Are both the title AND registration under both names?
The title says who owns the car. In my case it also lists the finance
company :)

The car he is driving is under his name and his exwife still. He doesn't want to remove the name of his exwife. Spooky right? But he paid her all the divorce settlement a long time already. Why is he still giving her much.

How long were they married? How old are the children?
Maybe he wants me to leave the country to spare him from the affidavit of support he signs. Can you sue your spouse/sponsor for not supporting you? He is earning 6000.00 per month, net.

Find out the law in your state regarding joint assets.
But, at a minimum, you should look for a job to become self supporting
Do not rely on him for anything.

Will i just shut up my mouth and wait for March 2005. What if he doesn't signs my removal of conditions.

Gather all of the proof you can about your marriage.
Someone here might want to point out groups that can help you if you can
actually prove the mental abuse. Document the abuse. Write down
dates/times/witnesses.

I got a very big problem, hope someone can advice me what is the right way to do. Thanks a lot for supporting and replying.

Faniahcc wrote:
Hello My husband is threatening and intimidating me to leave the country but didn't discuss a "D" though. Why should I?

Read your story. Didn't see any threats nor, necessarily, intimidations.
Perhaps some selfish, foolish or controlling behavior but that depends
largely on his side of the story, which you do not give much information
about. Perhaps you don't know. Perhaps you should ask, talk and
communicate with your husband about such matters.
I have a conditional PR card and will remove conditions on March 2005. We always fight because of financial matters because he doesn't support me financially but instead he support his ex-wife.

Really? He doesn't support you at all? He does not put (or contribute
toward) putting a roof over your head? He does not pay or contribute
toward food expenses, utilities, etc? I don't think he's putting a roof
over his ex wife's head nor purchasing her groceries and paying her
utilities, etc (at least not directly)
My husband and I don't have children yet. Recently i found out that he gave her 10,000dollars bec he said she asked favor.

Sounds like a mighty big favor. What might that favor be? Perhaps he is
helping his ex out because he has kids with her and that favor benefits
his kids mostly.
He got that money by refinancing his house. Stupid, right?

Not necessarily. It depends largely on what this favor is, whether it is
primarily for the benefit of his children or if his ex wife is just
taking him for a ride.
This woman has children on her own. They don't have children during their marriage.

This is not clear. It seems clear that children were born outside of the
marriage. It's apparent that she's the mom. What is not clear is whether
or not he's the dad. If he is the dad then he is responsible for his
offspring regardless if they were married when she had them. If these
were her kids by another man and say your husband took them under his
wing he may still feel responsible for them and want to be their father.
You should commend and support such men! If they're not his kids and he
did not "father" them (be a dad to them) and she's really taking him for
a ride then I'd be concerned.
I know he is being duped. But i think he still loves her, or else he won't keep giving money.

Again, not necessarily so. He could be giving her money to support his
kids, biological or not, or perhaps he's repaying a debt. We really
can't say because you did not tell us what is the reason he gave for
giving his ex money.
But when i ask money, he gaves 20.00 or 50.00 or 100.00 not in a nice way but with matching ugly expressions both facial and verbal.

Well, again, depending on the reasons for him giving money to his ex,
some of which might be legitimate and encouraged, he may be all tapped
out now and that might explain why he's reluctant.
This is all unfair to me.

This sounds like you are selfish. Do you work? Do you contribute to
household income?
He hurts me verbally many times already.

What exactly does this mean? Examples?
I can't take it anymore. I got to do something here. He doesn't want me to get involve in his finances and that is why we don't have a joint account.

Perhaps if you approach it as somebody who wishes to understand your
joint situation and to help out, perhaps help him to manage the money or
that you wish to contribute, would be a better way to handle this. Is he
aware that not having a joint account may effect what the USCIS thinks?
The car am driving is under both our names, though "or".

Yeah and so what? Why does that both you? Because statements like this
make you seem like your just looking to get, get, get and not willing to
give, give, give into the marriage. That might be making your husband
resentful.
The car he is driving is under his name and his exwife still. He doesn't want to remove the name of his exwife. Spooky right?

Not sure. Have you looked over his divorce settlement? It might be that
they have agreed to share the car in some way (maybe not physically
share the car but have joint ownership).

My ex wife retained a drivers license with my last name on it. It
bothered her new husband. She explained it to him that since my daughter
also uses my last name she had no way of proving that she was the mother
so she used the drivers license for that. Her intentions were not cruel,
mean or vindictive, just practical.
But he paid her all the divorce settlement a long time already. Why is he still giving her much.

That question would be best asked of him, not us.
Maybe he wants me to leave the country to spare him from the affidavit of support he signs. Can you sue your spouse/sponsor for not supporting you? He is earning 6000.00 per month, net.

Well I don't think that you can sue him for it because I don't see where
it was stated that the man must support the woman. If that were the case
then why couldn't it be the other way around - the woman supports the
man? Are you supporting him?

Truth is, the arrangement within the family as far as for who "supports"
who is up to the individuals involved. Sometimes the man works and the
woman stays home. Other times they both work. And yes, sometimes the
woman works and supports the man. If the people in the marriage are
unhappy enough with the arrangement then either of them can "sue"
(really petition) to dissolve the marriage.

However it's telling that you seem to want him to give to you
financially, put everything under joint names and seem to be demanding
that he "support" you. What I see missing is what you are contributing
to the relationship/family or whatever. Some men are OK with that but
many men are looking more for a partner then a parasite.
Will i just shut up my mouth and wait for March 2005. What if he doesn't signs my removal of conditions.

I don't believe he signs for your removal of conditions. The USCIS
either grants them or not.
I got a very big problem, hope someone can advice me what is the right way to do. Thanks a lot for supporting and replying.

I'd be much more concerned with the apparent lack of fairness, equity
and most of all communication between you two as far as for how the
marriage is supposed to work between you two. It seems like you both
have different expectations (which is usually a sign of disaster)
coupled with a great lack of honest and open communication and
cooperation, instead replaced with suspicion, jealously and a false
sense of entitlement. If I were you I would sit down with him and have a
big conversation about what you expected married life to be, what he
expected, what you have, what you don't have and how you might be able
to come to some compromises so that both of you feel happy and satisfied
with each other.

Hiding your true feelings, just shut up you mouth, hide your head in the
sand and hope to last until you get your conditions removed is not gonna
help and it gives about the impression that your main concern is getting
that green card and who cares about the marriage. Stated differently,
suppose you do make it to get your conditions removed. What next? What
is the state of your marriage? Will it still be there 5 years later? You
were "putting up with him, keeping your mouth shut" for quite some time.
Now you have your green card. Why would you continue to put up with him?
If you plan on simply leaving him after you get your green card then, to
me, you are no better than the immigrant who fraudulently enters into a
marriage just to get a green card. In fact you are worse because you've
given the impression that you were genuine, then trick your husband, get
the green card, then dump him. Result is that he can be incredibly hurt
by that. And don't tell me that he deserves it - revenge is never good.
If you don't love him and don't plan on staying with him then tell him
so and leave now. Immigrate again later with somebody you truly love. If
you do love him then work it out now.

Good luck.
--
Support Cannibalism - Eat me!

if you moved here for love/marriage,.. the immigration status/$$ would not
be an issue,..
it is ok,.. you are not the first,..
maybe,.. this is one example why everyone here has so many rules/long waits
for marriage-based visas,..?

Hi there ….

You guys need to go to marriage counseling …. Not to tell
him about how you feel is a bad idea coz that will kill you internally
and u won’t be able to solve it in future…. As day passes it will be
harder for u to solve this one…. You are being jealous here coz of his
actions and u feel insecure ….same way he needs to realize certain
things in order to work on this marriage too … so go to marriage
counselor …
Sit with him and explain him nicely how you feel about the
conditions …. Other thing get a job to become self-dependent, so in case
if ur marriage doesn’t work out … u can still survive ….
Not to tell him
about whats going on in your mind is a fraud … so talk to him and try to
solve the matter before it gets too late…Good luck…Pasha


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria Faniahcc wrote:
Maybe he wants me to leave the country to spare him from the
affidavit of support he signs. Can you sue your
spouse/sponsor for not supporting you? He is earning
6000.00 per month, net. Well I don't think that you can sue
him for it because I don't see where it was stated that the man must
support the woman. If that were the case then why couldn't it be the
other way around - the woman supports the man? Are you supporting him?
Truth is, the arrangement within the family as far as for who
"supports" who is up to the individuals involved. Sometimes the man
works and the woman stays home. Other times they both work. And yes,
sometimes the woman works and supports the man. If the people in the
marriage are unhappy enough with the arrangement then either of them can
"sue" (really petition) to dissolve the marriage. However it's
telling that you seem to want him to give to you financially, put
everything under joint names and seem to be demanding that he "support"
you. What I see missing is what you are contributing to the
relationship/family or whatever. Some men are OK with that but many men
are looking more for a partner then a parasite.

Jesus
Christ, Andrew. Could you possible be more biased and jump to more
conclusions?

The question she asked was if she (the K visa holder)
could sue if the spouse/sponsor refused to support her. As the sponsor
of a K visa holder, I think this is an interesting question. It doesn't
have squat to do with the man supporting the woman thing so get off your
soapbox. He (like me) made a promise to the U.S. government to support
his foreign spouse/fiance when he (like me) signed the Affidavit of
Support. She is asking if she has legal recourse if he stops doing
that. Regardless of whether the USC found a parasite (as you inferred)
instead of a partner, he still has an obligation his country to support
her, because HE sponsored her. Obviously, her question is about how she
can legally hold him to his obligation.


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Faniahcc, where did you immigrate from?


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Leslie66 wrote:
Jesus Christ, Andrew. Could you possible be more biased and jump to more conclusions?

Would you like me to be? ;-)
The question she asked was if she (the K visa holder) could sue if the spouse/sponsor refused to support her. As the sponsor of a K visa holder, I think this is an interesting question. It doesn't have squat to do with the man supporting the woman thing so get off your soapbox. He (like me) made a promise to the U.S. government to support his foreign spouse/fiance when he (like me) signed the Affidavit of Support. She is asking if she has legal recourse if he stops doing that. Regardless of whether the USC found a parasite (as you inferred) instead of a partner, he still has an obligation his country to support her, because HE sponsored her. Obviously, her question is about how she can legally hold him to his obligation.

My understanding of the Affidavit of Support is that if the sponsored
person applies for and receives public, means tested assistance then the
sponserer might be required to reimburse the agency providing that
assistance. I don't think that it means that you have to give the
sponsored person 125% of the poverty level in cash per year.

Also, as has been stated before, she could get a job!

--
How much deeper would oceans be if sponges didn't live there?

She can get spousal support / alimony if he divorces her and if judge
decides … other than that she cant just force USC to give money just
coz he signed affidavit of support unless there are public charges
involved …


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

I think you are a selfish person who should probably be put on the next
plane home and I'm quite serious.
You are the classic example of what I
referred to when I said "people without good faith or intention".

He
probably feels like a meal-card and thus his expression when you ask him
for money.


Originally posted by Faniahcc Hello
My husband is threatening and intimidating me to leave the country but
didn't discuss a "D" though. Why should I? ........................
Sincerely
faniah


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by immatchua I think you are a
selfish person who should probably be put on the next plane home and I'm
quite serious. You are the classic example of what I referred to when
I said "people without good faith or intention". He probably feels
like a meal-card and thus his expression when you ask him for money.


Faniah,


PLEASE IGNORE THE TROLL.

Kindest regards,


Victoria. :)


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by Wayne if you moved here for
love/marriage,.. the immigration status/$$ would not be an issue,..
it is ok,.. you are not the first,.. maybe,.. this is one example
why everyone here has so many rules/long waits for marriage-based
visas,..?

I disagree.

I married my husband in good faith
with honest intentions.


I sacrificed profession, home, the works to
move here to be with HIM. I did not have any intentions of emmigrating
to the US before meeting him.


I uprooted myself and my daughter and
we have now settled here and completely rebuilt our lives from
scratch.


My life and my daughter's life are here now. I have
friends, a home, a job etc and have worked damm hard to make the
transition.

Besides, I've sort of gotten to like it here as it turns
out, I consider this to be my HOME.

I don't want to have to return if
my marriage fails, just because someone wishes to remain does not mean
that they conspired for dishonest reasons to come here in the first
place IMHO.

*gets down off soapbox*


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Re-read her story for heavenssakes and approach it from his point of
view.
He gives her money. Complaint - it's only 20, 50 or 100 rather
than thousands!
She drives a car. Complaint - it's in both their names!

She can't take it anymore but wants to "shut up until he removes the
condition on her PR" so she can SHOW THE BASTID!

Would you like
somebody to treat you like that????

I didnt say everybody was like
this....I am merely pointing out an example of a person who makes
everyone suspicious of immigrant spouses!


Originally posted
by lairdside Faniah, PLEASE IGNORE THE TROLL.
Kindest regards,
Victoria. :)


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria My understanding of
the Affidavit of Support is that if the sponsored person applies for
and receives public, means tested assistance then the sponserer might
be required to reimburse the agency providing that assistance. I
don't think that it means that you have to give the sponsored person
125% of the poverty level in cash per year. Also, as has been
stated before, she could get a job!

I completely agree with
Andrew. From the wording of the original post, it sounds like she thinks
she is entitled to whatever bits of his $6000 a month pay she asks him
for.

In her post, she said that he gives his ex money no question but
when she asks for money, he gives her money but doesn't seem happy about
it (although I don't know how happy my husband would be if I asked him
for $100 either). She then says that it is unfair to her. Why is it
unfair to her? Because he doesn't give her every penny she asks for?

As
for the not supporting her thing: it doesn't sound like he isn't
supporting her. From the original post, it doesn't sound like he is
threatening her with homelessness or denying her food or any other basic
necessities. Can the OP sue him for not providing her with every whim?


I think the legality of the Affadavit of Support would stop short of
allowing her to feel she deserves anything above and beyond basics.

But
that's JMO.


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by immatchua Re-read her story for
heavenssakes and approach it from his point of view. He gives her
money. Complaint - it's only 20, 50 or 100 rather than thousands! She
drives a car. Complaint - it's in both their names! She can't take it
anymore but wants to "shut up until he removes the condition on her PR"
so she can SHOW THE BASTID! Would you like somebody to treat you
like that???? I didnt say everybody was like this....I am merely
pointing out an example of a person who makes everyone suspicious of
immigrant spouses!

I read the post.

It was your
presumptiousness I took issue with.

No-one here - including in all
likelyhood the OP - knows what is really going on.


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Pasha Patel wrote:
She can get spousal support / alimony if he divorces her and if judge decides … other than that she cant just force USC to give money just coz he signed affidavit of support unless there are public charges involved …

If you read the I-864, it is not limited to "public charges".
It clearly says (near the signature section, i think) that the person is
liable for support at 125 percent of the poverty level.

I never claimed she could automatically get him to volunteer it, but
that is something any divorce attorney should be smart enough to show a
judge.

lairdside wrote:
Originally posted by immatchua I think you are a selfish person who should probably be put on the next plane home and I'm quite serious. You are the classic example of what I referred to when I said "people without good faith or intention". He probably feels like a meal-card and thus his expression when you ask him for money. Faniah, PLEASE IGNORE THE TROLL. Kindest regards, Victoria. :)

I fail to see why you think that he was a troll. IMHO he seems to have a
point.

--
What has four legs and an arm? A happy pit bull.

lairdside wrote:
Originally posted by Wayne if you moved here for love/marriage,.. the immigration status/$$ would not be an issue,.. it is ok,.. you are not the first,.. maybe,.. this is one example why everyone here has so many rules/long waits for marriage-based visas,..? I disagree. I married my husband in good faith with honest intentions.

IOW you married because of love.
I sacrificed profession, home, the works to move here to be with HIM. I did not have any intentions of emmigrating to the US before meeting him.

IOW you married because of love.
I uprooted myself and my daughter and we have now settled here and completely rebuilt our lives from scratch.

IOW you decided that you love this person enough to uproot your live and
your daughter's live to move here.
My life and my daughter's life are here now. I have friends, a home, a job etc and have worked damm hard to make the transition. Besides, I've sort of gotten to like it here as it turns out, I consider this to be my HOME. I don't want to have to return if my marriage fails, just because someone wishes to remain does not mean that they conspired for dishonest reasons to come here in the first place IMHO.

I agree. However the OP's posting did not necessarily indicate that she
immigrated here for the same reasons that you did.
--
Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria lairdside wrote:
it is ok,.. you are not the first,.. maybe,..
this is one example why everyone here has so many
rules/long waits for marriage-based
visas,..? I disagree. I married my husband in
good faith with honest intentions. IOW you married because of
love. I sacrificed profession, home, the works to move here
to be with HIM. I did not have any intentions of
emmigrating to the US before meeting him. IOW
you married because of love. I uprooted myself and my
daughter and we have now settled here and completely
rebuilt our lives from scratch. IOW you decided
that you love this person enough to uproot your live and your
daughter's live to move here. My life and my daughter's life
are here now. I have friends, a home, a job etc and have
worked damm hard to make the transition. Besides, I've sort
of gotten to like it here as it turns out, I consider this
to be my HOME. I don't want to have to return if my
marriage fails, just because someone wishes to remain does
not mean that they conspired for dishonest reasons to come
here in the first place IMHO. I agree. However
the OP's posting did not necessarily indicate > Originally posted by
Wayne if you moved here for love/marriage,..
the immigration status/$$ would not be an issue,..
that she immigrated here for the same reasons that you did. --
Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic

YES ANDREW.

....
and I wsn't taking the post personally - as being directed at myself
silly.

I was using myself as an illustration that even though people
marry for love that immigration CAN be an issue.

The poster generalised
- not me.

Please read:> Originally posted by Wayne if
you moved here for love/marriage,.. the immigration status/$$
would not be an issue,..

The poster did not specify
that the OP moved here for the same reasons as myself.

They also did
not contradict that notion.

Be more vague :p


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria lairdside wrote:
Originally posted by immatchua I think you are
a selfish person who should probably be put on the next
plane home and I'm quite serious. You are the
classic example of what I referred to when I said "people
without good faith or intention". He probably feels like a meal-card and thus his expression when you ask him for
money. Faniah, PLEASE IGNORE THE TROLL. Kindest regards, Victoria. :) I fail to see
why you think that he was a troll. IMHO he seems to have a point.
-- What has four legs and an arm? A happy pit bull.

He
has a point - under the correct circumstances.

He does not however have
enough information IMHO to have reached the conclusions at which he has
arrived.

That is why I posted the message to the OP.

She truly may be
in a very difficult circumstance, many here have been quick to judge
based on what may be a misconstrual of the situation.

Instead he abused
this woman based on his perception of her motivations.

Be it on his
head if she is innocent and he causes her further distress as a result
of his harsh words when she came seeking help.


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Agreed Mtravelkay,

I guess I didn’t oppose/offend your view at all….
Sorry if my post caused misunderstanding for you….

One thing I wonder
about any board, how people easily judge others just by one single post?
That’s how they do in real life too??? The original poster is frustrated
and in confused / depress / helpless mental status …. That’s why she
came to ask help on this board …. Sometimes when we are angry / tired /
frustrated …we tell lot of things that we simply don’t mean …. We don’t
even know the real condition / whole case … but people easily give their
decision …

Anyone comes to ask help here with little bit of hope.
About car and money …. Coz she is his wife and most wives want to
express their rights over husbands … this is plain jealousy but nothing
else I can see here … she is feeling insecure coz of given attention to
Ex. Wife which is completely ok …. Rest of the post is just out of anger
/ frustration and failure trials to fix the problem ….

Well I should
end up with this here …. Thanks everyone….Pasha


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

it is curious that the OP has not responded back even to the simple
questions.


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

lairdside wrote:
He has a point - under the correct circumstances. He does not however have enough information IMHO to have reached the conclusions at which he has arrived.

Perhaps not, however that makes him no more of a troll than you or
anybody else.
That is why I posted the message to the OP. She truly may be in a very difficult circumstance, many here have been quick to judge based on what may be a misconstrual of the situation.

She is free to clarify any misconceptions.
Instead he abused this woman based on his perception of her motivations.

No abuse was shown so far.
Be it on his head if she is innocent and he causes her further distress as a result of his harsh words when she came seeking help.

I rarely believe that abuse occurs from "harsh words". There is a good
chance that she used as harsh words back. I bet if we ask him he would
tell us of her "abuse" too. I'm not a big believer of "hurt feelings" =
"abuse". I'm more on the side of "sticks and stones may break my bones
but words will never hurt me".

--
What's another word for thesaurus?

Pasha Patel wrote:
One thing I wonder about any board, how people easily judge others just by one single post?

Everybody judges and those who say they don't are lying. Additionally
some people express their opinions, others remain quiet. Many responded
judging based on what was said. Some additionally asked for
clarification. This is the process of communication, no?
That's how they do in real life too???

It is well known that people judge others everyday, be it in pose or in
person. In fact, in person, lots more things come into play. People
judge others based on appearance, race, even the clothes you chose to
wear today. What did you think such judgments were not being made?!?
The original poster is frustrated and in confused / depress / helpless mental status .... That's why she came to ask help on this board .... Sometimes when we are angry / tired / frustrated ...we tell lot of things that we simply don't mean ....

If somebody makes mistakes in their communication then they should own
them and clarify their position, no?
We don't even know the real condition / whole case ... but people easily give their decision ...

Is that not what she was seeking? Sorry if some of our decisions are not
exactly what she wanted to hear.
Anyone comes to ask help here with little bit of hope. About car and money .... Coz she is his wife and most wives want to express their rights over husbands ...

That's the point. She does not have rights *over* her husband. She has
her own rights and nobody's rights trumps anothers.
this is plain jealousy but nothing else I can see here ...

Which is bad.
she is feeling insecure coz of given attention to Ex. Wife which is completely ok ....

Not really. She should be secure in her own life instead of surcuming to
insecurity and jealously. Such things ruin relationships, as is
apparently happening in her case. I would not describe such behavior
and/or feelings as "ok" rather "worrisome".
Rest of the post is just out of anger / frustration and failure trials to fix the problem ....

Sometimes the result of acting out of anger and frustration based on
hurt feelings and things like insecurity and jealously turns out to be
illegal. If not illegal it rarely turns out to be good.

--
Do illiterate people get the full enjoyment out of alphabet soup?

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria lairdside wrote:
He has a point - under the correct circumstances.
He does not however have enough information IMHO to have reached the
conclusions at which he has arrived. Perhaps
not, however that makes him no more of a troll than you or anybody
else. That is why I posted the message to the OP. She truly may be in a very difficult circumstance, many here have
been quick to judge based on what may be a misconstrual of
the situation. She is free to clarify any misconceptions. Instead he abused this woman based on his perception of her
motivations. No abuse was shown so far. Be it on
his head if she is innocent and he causes her further
distress as a result of his harsh words when she came seeking help.
I rarely believe that abuse occurs from "harsh words". There is a
good chance that she used as harsh words back. I bet if we ask him he
would tell us of her "abuse" too. I'm not a big believer of "hurt
feelings" = "abuse". I'm more on the side of "sticks and stones may
break my bones but words will never hurt me". -- What's
another word for thesaurus?

No time to play today Andy.

I
accept that you adhere to the "sticks and stones" theory.

Suffice to
say I disagree with you on that one. I would of course as I'm a
graduate psychology student..lol


Hell, they can do what they want to -
I was trying to mitigate the effect of the post that was all.

Laters -
place wouldn't be the same with out you!


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Andrew …

I really don’t know much about you coz I m a new member on
this board ….but Lets get this one to the end …..


Everybody judges and
those who say they don't are lying. Additionally
some people express
their opinions, others remain quiet. Many responded
judging based on
what was said. Some additionally asked for
clarification. This is the
process of communication, no?

It is well known that people judge others
everyday, be it in pose or in
person. In fact, in person, lots more
things come into play. People
judge others based on appearance, race,
even the clothes you chose to
wear today. What did you think such
judgments were not being made?!?

Ohh really? Well I must say …. U got
to look into situation deeply …before making such judgment … people can
assume about something / someone in routine life but when there is
something serious in life called marriage / more than 12 hrs contact
each day with only one person … u just don’t look at things the same way
u go to coffee shop or some club and meet people… u get my point here?
if not ask me … I shall explain you in details ….

there are other ways
of communication ...that you can nicely ask about more information
rather than just give your prejudices based on one post only ... is that
how you really do in real life? if yes then i really feel sorry....


That's the point. She does not have rights *over* her husband. She has

her own rights and nobody's rights trumps anothers.

Then you really
don’t know much about women’s psychology … I would advise you to look
into this little bit more and then come over this thread to put your
points …. That’s what you think here …. There are lots of immigrants in
USA and you don’t know each and every culture …and how women feel about
it in different cultures …. This is something called cultural shock …who
knows may be her husband belongs to the same ethnicity???? do we really
know about that ? we don’t… so we need to apply our breaks before giving
any judgment right a way …. That’s not a healthy / intelligent thing a
reasonable person would do …. Everyone needs little bit of time to
adjust to new environment ….

Which is bad.

Ohh well read my previous
paragraph … if u can get something out of it …. Its really good ….
Otherwise I shall be happy to explain you this one in details …



Sometimes the result of acting out of anger and frustration based on

hurt feelings and things like insecurity and jealously turns out to be

illegal. If not illegal it rarely turns out to be good.

The way I see
your replies on this board … dear friend … u r not saint and plz don’t
expect others to be saint either … try to look at life with reality …and
then you should understand each and every phases of life …. This is
totally ok … there is nothing wrong … when he got married to her … he
did commit certain vows and respect towards her ….and any single girl
would react like this in this kinda situation …. Ohh well well unless
she is exception ….

And I should leave ur own slogan here for you
…have a great day…. from Pasha

--
Do illiterate people get the full
enjoyment out of alphabet soup?


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

lairdside wrote:
Suffice to say I disagree with you on that one. I would of course as I'm a graduate psychology student..lol

Ah I see. So then psychology grads are just naturally disagreeable. I
understand now! ;-)

--
I won't rise to the occasion, but I'll slide over to it.

Pasha Patel wrote:
Andrew ... I really don't know much about you coz I m a new member on this board ....but Lets get this one to the end .....

I find your quoting style makes it difficult to tell where you are
responding...
Everybody judges and those who say they don't are lying. Additionally some people express their opinions, others remain quiet. Many responded judging based on what was said. Some additionally asked for clarification. This is the process of communication, no? It is well known that people judge others everyday, be it in pose or in person. In fact, in person, lots more things come into play. People judge others based on appearance, race, even the clothes you chose to wear today. What did you think such judgments were not being made?!? Ohh really? Well I must say .... U got to look into situation deeply ...before making such judgment ... people can assume about something / someone in routine life but when there is something serious in life called marriage / more than 12 hrs contact each day with only one person ... u just don't look at things the same way u go to coffee shop or some club and meet people... u get my point here? if not ask me ... I shall explain you in details ....

I guess that "u" = "you". :-)

I guess that's my point, people can, will and do make judgments before
they know the whole story. In fact I'd say it's really impossible for
people not to. They may refrain from commenting about their judgment but
they already made the judgment nonetheless.
there are other ways of communication ...that you can nicely ask about more information rather than just give your prejudices based on one post only ... is that how you really do in real life? if yes then i really feel sorry....

Yes in really life I do "call 'em as I see 'em". I do not feel bad about
it either. I did ask nicely - I didn't ask meanly. I did also give the
OP my impression of her words. Some people see that as a benefit to know
how they are being perceived. Again, she is free to explain further and
show me where my judgments are wrong - I don't have a problem with that.
That's the point. She does not have rights *over* her husband. She has her own rights and nobody's rights trumps anothers. Then you really don't know much about women's psychology ...

But we weren't talking about women's psychology we were talking about
rights, no?
I would advise you to look into this little bit more and then come over this thread to put your points ...

Thanks for the advise however I don't agree.
That's what you think here .... There are lots of immigrants in USA and you don't know each and every culture ...

Did I claim to? No. Do you know each and every culture? No. Does
anybody? Probably not.
and how women feel about it in different cultures ....

Oh I realize that different people (both women and men by the way)
*feel* differently based on their culture. That doesn't necessarily mean
that it's right however.
This is something called cultural shock ...who knows may be her husband belongs to the same ethnicity???? do we really know about that ? we don't...

So she could inform us of what we don't know (however I believe that
what she has already informed us of and it's tone says volumes).
so we need to apply our breaks before giving any judgment right a way ....

I disagree.
That's not a healthy / intelligent thing a reasonable person would do ....

Says who? You? Sorry, again I disagree.
Everyone needs little bit of time to adjust to new environment ....

Her posting was not about having difficulties adjusting it was, as the
subject states, about an accusation by her against him. I do not take
accusations lightly nor do I think anybody should. Additionally she
seems clear that her own interest now are getting conditions removed so
she can stay and it appears as if that was her main motivation for
marrying him. That sir is immoral and borders on illegal and I don't
take lightly to that either. I'm sure her marriage vows did not include
"... and get a green card ...".
Which is bad. Ohh well read my previous paragraph ...

I would if I could find it through the muck...
if u can get something out of it .... Its really good ....

So says you.
Otherwise I shall be happy to explain you this one in details ...

No, but thanks.
Sometimes the result of acting out of anger and frustration based on hurt feelings and things like insecurity and jealously turns out to be illegal. If not illegal it rarely turns out to be good. The way I see your replies on this board ... dear friend ... u r not saint and plz don't expect others to be saint either ...

Huh? Where did I say that others need be saints? Also, I am not acting
out of anger, frustration based on hurt feeling and things like
insecurity and jealous...
try to look at life with reality ...

I am! I welcome you to join me! ;-)
and then you should understand each and every phases of life ....

What makes you think I don't understand this already?
This is totally ok ... there is nothing wrong ... when he got married to her ... he did commit certain vows and respect towards her

And she to him.
....and any single girl would react like this in this kinda situation ...

Well we don't have many single girls on this newsgroup but married ones
have already chimed in agreeing with my interpretation of the situation
so the above statement seems doubtful at best.
. Ohh well well unless she is exception ....

I beg to differ.
And I should leave ur own slogan here for you

Huh?!?
...have a great day.... from Pasha


--
I was trying to daydream, but my mind kept wandering.

I find your quoting style makes it difficult to tell where you are

responding...

how many points did u make and where should i
reply????????

I guess that's my point, people can, will and do make
judgments before
they know the whole story. In fact I'd say it's really
impossible for
people not to. They may refrain from commenting about
their judgment but
they already made the judgment nonetheless.

nobody
gave a right to anyone to judge someone over this board or anywhere ...
leave that thing to her and her husband only...she came to ask help and
solution here...if u can its your kindness...otherwise no need to
increase stress for someone here....


Yes in really life I do "call 'em
as I see 'em". I do not feel bad about
it either.

sorry about that
.... nothing can be done here....

I did ask nicely - I didn't ask
meanly. I did also give the
OP my impression of her words. Some people
see that as a benefit to know
how they are being perceived. Again, she
is free to explain further and
show me where my judgments are wrong - I
don't have a problem with that.

well go over the thread again and see
if i pointed my first reply in this matter to you ?????????? that was
general where some people tried to give their decision without even
asking OP

But we weren't talking about women's psychology we were
talking about
rights, no?

and rights comes over there too .... why one
person wants to fight over his right and another wants to let it go ...
?its related to their nature / mentality / psycology

Thanks for the
advise however I don't agree.

thats your own choice... i dont give my
decision / prejudice here like others do .... u get it here...?

Did I
claim to? No. Do you know each and every culture? No. Does
anybody?
Probably not.

and thats the reason we should think 100 times before
telling something ....

Oh I realize that different people (both women
and men by the way)
*feel* differently based on their culture. That
doesn't necessarily mean
that it's right however.

and u still dont
know about the case in details like anybody else over this board

So she
could inform us of what we don't know (however I believe that
what she
has already informed us of and it's tone says volumes).

who knows
replies over this board caused her great shock / more damage and she
just cant feel secure / comfortable to come again and post over this
board ? do u know that ?

Says who? You? Sorry, again I disagree.

well
of course you would disagree...coz u see it only your way ...but u got
to see it from other ways too.... its not always same unless you walk in
other's shoes...

Her posting was not about having difficulties
adjusting it was, as the
subject states, about an accusation by her
against him. I do not take
accusations lightly nor do I think anybody
should. Additionally she
seems clear that her own interest now are
getting conditions removed so
she can stay and it appears as if that
was her main motivation for
marrying him. That sir is immoral and
borders on illegal and I don't
take lightly to that either. I'm sure
her marriage vows did not include
"... and get a green card ...".


again u got to read my first post here .... there could be other
limitations that she cant go back ..... read my first reply again....


No, but thanks.

thats ok ... good for you....

Huh? Where did I say
that others need be saints? Also, I am not acting
out of anger,
frustration based on hurt feeling and things like
insecurity and
jealous...

good for you .... others can do that in perticular condition
same way you might do it or i may do it....

I am! I welcome you to join
me! ;-)

thanks i am already joining you ....

What makes you think I
don't understand this already?

your way and content of replies

And she
to him.

and what is the problem here ? go read again very first
post.... i bet you wont be happy if ur wife goes meet her Ex
Boyfriend.... sorry no offense intended here .... this just an example
to show my views .... if you say it would be ok with u then u r
lying....

Well we don't have many single girls on this newsgroup but
married ones
have already chimed in agreeing with my interpretation of
the situation
so the above statement seems doubtful at best.

you got
to look deeply in this one again

Huh?!?

once again i should live ur
slogan for u here

have a great day.... from Pasha
--
I was trying to
daydream, but my mind kept wandering.


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

will u plz explain it to me how to use other style ...i dont know...so
from future it will be easier for both of us .... thanks ... Pasha


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Pasha Patel wrote:
I find your quoting style makes it difficult to tell where you are responding... how many points did u make

Not sure. Didn't bother to count 'em.
and where should i reply????????

Reply to the ones you wish to reply to.
I guess that's my point, people can, will and do make judgments before they know the whole story. In fact I'd say it's really impossible for people not to. They may refrain from commenting about their judgment but they already made the judgment nonetheless. nobody gave a right to anyone to judge someone over this board or anywhere

Surely you jest. I have the right to my own opinion just as you do yours.
leave that thing to her and her husband only

She came here asking for advice.
...she came to ask help and solution here...if u can its your kindness...otherwise no need to increase stress for someone here....

Sometimes the truth is difficult to swallow.
Yes in really life I do "call 'em as I see 'em". I do not feel bad about it either. sorry about that ... nothing can be done here....

Nothing to be sorry about. I don't have a problem with it.
I did ask nicely - I didn't ask meanly. I did also give the OP my impression of her words. Some people see that as a benefit to know how they are being perceived. Again, she is free to explain further and show me where my judgments are wrong - I don't have a problem with that. well go over the thread again and see if i pointed my first reply in this matter to you ??????????

Why?
that was general where some people tried to give their decision without even asking OP

So? What's your point? This is a newsgroup AKA a discussion group.
People discuss things here.
But we weren't talking about women's psychology we were talking about rights, no? and rights comes over there too

Huh??? What are you talking about?
.... why one person wants to fight over his right and another wants to let it go ... ?its related to their nature / mentality / psycology

You're confusing. The comment was made that somebody has rights over
somebody else. This is not true. End of story - no nature / mentality
/psychology necessary.
Thanks for the advise however I don't agree. thats your own choice... i dont give my decision / prejudice here like others do .... u get it here...?

I know it's my choice.
Did I claim to? No. Do you know each and every culture? No. Does anybody? Probably not. and thats the reason we should think 100 times before telling something ...

Again, I disagree.
. Oh I realize that different people (both women and men by the way) *feel* differently based on their culture. That doesn't necessarily mean that it's right however. and u still dont know about the case in details like anybody else over this board

If we really went with your philosophy then nobody would say anything
until every detail was conveyed. Hardly helpful.
So she could inform us of what we don't know (however I believe that what she has already informed us of and it's tone says volumes). who knows replies over this board caused her great shock / more damage and she just cant feel secure / comfortable to come again and post over this board ? do u know that ?

That, as you said, is her decision or choice.

Look people come in here asking for help, advice and guidance all the
time without giving up the details. Who known why exactly. Sometimes
their ashamed or embarrassed. Other times they are just ignorant and
entering this immigration mess. The nature of responding calls for
making some assumptions, judgments, etc.
Says who? You? Sorry, again I disagree. well of course you would disagree...coz u see it only your way

No that's not it. Pay attention here. It's simply because I don't see it
your way.
...but u got to see it from other ways too.... its not always same unless you walk in other's shoes...

Exactly, so who's to say that your way is right for me? Why I'm to say.
I see your point, I just don't agree with it. Please allow me to hold my
own opinion.
Her posting was not about having difficulties adjusting it was, as the subject states, about an accusation by her against him. I do not take accusations lightly nor do I think anybody should. Additionally she seems clear that her own interest now are getting conditions removed so she can stay and it appears as if that was her main motivation for marrying him. That sir is immoral and borders on illegal and I don't take lightly to that either. I'm sure her marriage vows did not include "... and get a green card ...". again u got to read my first post here

I read it before.
.... there could be other limitations that she cant go back ..... read my first reply again....

She can go back - she just doesn't want to. And if there are real
reasons, say fear for her life (which I don't think is the case) then
she can apply for asylum.
No, but thanks. thats ok ... good for you.... Huh? Where did I say that others need be saints? Also, I am not acting out of anger, frustration based on hurt feeling and things like insecurity and jealous... good for you .... others can do that in perticular condition same way you might do it or i may do it.... I am! I welcome you to join me! ;-) thanks i am already joining you .... What makes you think I don't understand this already? your way and content of replies

Well you are wrong.
And she to him. and what is the problem here ? go read again very first post...

Ah no. As I said I read it already.
. i bet you wont be happy if ur wife goes meet her Ex Boyfriend....

This is not an ex boyfriend, this is (possibly because the OP was
unclear initially and has not clarified) the mother of his kids. If you
have a child with another person I'm sorry but you are responsible for
that child and thus will have a relationship of some sort with the other
parent (or you will abandon that child which, to me, is deplorable
conduct) regardless if you marry somebody else. Anybody else who does
not understand this or is unwilling to tolerate this is either way too
selfish, foolish or wishes to be involved with a parent who shucks his
or her responsibilities by abandoning his/her offspring.
sorry no offense intended here .... this just an example to show my views .... if you say it would be ok with u then u r lying....

While I probably would not be super enthused I would certainly
understand it if my wife had to have a relationship with say her
previous husband or boyfriend because she shared kids with him. Wouldn't
you?
Well we don't have many single girls on this newsgroup but married ones have already chimed in agreeing with my interpretation of the situation so the above statement seems doubtful at best. you got to look deeply in this one again

Ah, could you stop attempting to tell me what I need to do 'cause I
ain't gonna do it just because you say so. I do not need to look deeply
into this one again at all.
Huh?!? once again i should live ur slogan for u here

Huh again???
have a great day.... from Pasha

It seems obvious that your native language is not English and I'm making
allowances for that, however, your quoting style (or lack thereof) as
well as choppy sentences make communication with you very difficult.
--
Ever wonder what the speed of lightning would be if it didn't zigzag?

Pasha Patel wrote:
will u plz explain it to me how to use other style ...i dont know...so from future it will be easier for both of us .... thanks ... Pasha

Sorry I can't do that. I don't use BritishExpats I use Usenet. I can,
however, explain quoting.

In general when you respond to a Usenet posting (and BritishExpats uses
Usenet) often you "quote" the article you are responding to. As such
there needs to be some sort of visual indication what material is quoted
and what material is new. There are various quoting styles but most
share the concept of distinguishing quoted content from new content.

There are what is called "top posting" and "bottom posting" and "inline
style". I tend to use inline style. Top posting is putting your content
at the top and letting the quoted stuff tack onto the bottom. Obviously
bottom posting is the opposite. Both top posters and bottom posters tend
not to trim out irrelevant stuff from the quoted material. Inline style
means that you break the quote where you wish to make a comment.
Typically, but not always, inliners trim excess.

As far as distinguishing quoted material, traditionally this was done by
prefacing the quoted material with a ">". If the article is quoted again
then the first level of quoted material gets an additional ">" thus
making ">>" and so on. So you would see:
Third level quote Second level quote First level quote
My response.

With the advent of the web based discussion board such standards have
broken down, with the dumbing down of the interface for neophyte users
often they don't even know anything about quoting. So how a specific web
site might implement quoting is unique to that web site, thus you must
ask BE or other BE users how they do it.

I do want to mention here that apparently BE has changed in some way
because it's messing up quoted material more and more lately, breaking
lines at odd places and in general just looks like crap here in the
Usenet. For example, I posted:

Everybody judges and those who say they don't are lying.
Additionally some people express their opinions, others remain
quiet. Many responded judging based on what was said. Some
additionally asked for clarification. This is the process of
communication, no?

Which BE broke into:

Everybody judges and
those who say they don't are lying. Additionally
some people express
their opinions, others remain quiet. Many responded
judging based on
what was said. Some additionally asked for
clarification. This is the
process of communication, no?


Why it did this I have no idea.

--
Suicidal twin kills sister by mistake!

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria lairdside wrote:
Suffice to say I disagree with you on that one. I would of
course as I'm a graduate psychology student..lol
Ah I see. So then psychology grads are just naturally disagreeable. I
understand now! ;-) -- I won't rise to the occasion, but I'll
slide over to it.

Disagreeable? Forensic psychology students?
Me?

Why that's the nicest thing anyone's said to me all day!! :)

I
love you too darling!


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

lairdside wrote:
Disagreeable? Forensic psychology students? Me? Why that's the nicest thing anyone's said to me all day!! :) I love you too darling!

Glad to be of assistance.

--
Where there's a will... I want to be in it.

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria lairdside wrote:
Disagreeable? Forensic psychology students? Me?
Why that's the nicest thing anyone's said to me all day!! :) I love you too darling! Glad to be of assistance.
-- Where there's a will... I want to be in it.

:D

Btw -
cute website :)


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Take Pasha's advice, "You guys need to go to marriage counseling". It
does not sound like he is threatening you, but also does not sound like
he loves and thinks of you as his equal and life partner. I assume that
you have lost the abilty to communicate with him about what is
happening??

Get a job, sell on eBay, do something so that you do not
have to realy on him for money. Sometimes men like your husband don't
value things until they are gone, maybe this is what happened with his
ex-wife? Maybe he has you right where it is most comfortable for him, a
maid, a lover, a cook? If he is turning 6k a month then there should be
no financial trouble in the household, (Unless he is knee deep in dept.)


Just a few random thoughts, I wish you all the best...

Scott


--
NOA1 NSC December 16th, 2002


Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Excellent point(s) Scott.

Taking somebody for granted is not really
abuse, but it does not bode well for a successful marriage.


Originally posted by ScottHenshaw Take Pasha's
advice, "You guys need to go to marriage counseling". It does not sound
like he is threatening you, but also does not sound like he loves and
thinks of you as his equal and life partner. I assume that you have lost
the abilty to communicate with him about what is happening?? Get a
job, sell on eBay, do something so that you do not have to realy on him
for money. Sometimes men like your husband don't value things until
they are gone, maybe this is what happened with his ex-wife? Maybe he
has you right where it is most comfortable for him, a maid, a lover, a
cook? If he is turning 6k a month then there should be no financial
trouble in the household, (Unless he is knee deep in dept.) Just a
few random thoughts, I wish you all the best...
Scott


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Leslie66 wrote:
Excellent point(s) Scott. Taking somebody for granted is not really abuse, but it does not bode well for a successful marriage.

Hear, hear. I agree (See Leslie - we do agree on somethings).

--
Do you think that when they asked George Washington for ID that he just
whipped out a quarter?

Actually, I agree with most of what you've said in this thread with the
exception of the portion of your quote that I snipped and replied to
(which BTW I thought said a lot more about your state of mind than the
OP's).

IMHO the OP (who has apparently left the building) sounds
pretty narcissistic and high-maintenance. I have a low tolerance
threshhold for all this whining and hand-wringing (whether it comes from
men or women) when decisive action is the only way to improve your
situation, IOW get a job. On the other hand her husband doesn't sound
like much of a prince. However, being unappreciative or unattentive is
not, in and of itself, abuse.

Originally posted by Andrew
Defaria Leslie66 wrote: Excellent point(s) Scott.
Taking somebody for granted is not really abuse, but it does
not bode well for a successful marriage. Hear,
hear. I agree (See Leslie - we do agree on somethings). -- Do
you think that when they asked George Washington for ID that he just

whipped out a quarter?


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Truth is always bitter but if you don’t know the whole case … u don’t
know the truth either …. Well where the discussion started and where it
ended …. You skip main points to reply and answer to some other points
so that way we can never discussion on the main topic ….

People judge
in their routine life … and that s not new … but what is right thing to
do makes a difference here …. Just coz somebody jumps from 25th floor
doesn’t mean everyone has to do it …. Newsgroup and discussion board
doesn’t give you or anybody a right to judge over other peoples’ life
particularly when you don’t know the whole situation. in simple way "
It's nobody's business" Whatever thoughts you hold to …that’s fine … but
that cant be all the time right too … it applies to everyone ….

There
is no philosophy or psychology here on this topic …. There are other
ways to ask for more information before giving comments like “u r
selfish…u should fly back …. And so on…”

Be it my way or your way it
doesn’t really matter …what matters is right thing. If judges in court
started doing their way without looking at evidences and reviewing facts
about cases ….then you know what would happen …thank god laws don’t
follow that way ….

If she doesn’t want to go back …there could be other
reasons too but she didn’t write here…so we got to know little bit more
before making any derogatory comment here …. Well there are several ways
without even asylum to stay here ….

Even if she is mother of his kid
…. When he got married to her … he should be careful always …that this
shouldn’t create any further problem …and who knows the whole story ?
could be a lot more things to come out…right ? we don’t know unless she
says …. And if there is nothing wrong with her husband then he can make
her understand…some people are just like that … they feel insecure….they
can solve it with a nice conversation or going to marriage counseling…
but again giving decision without knowing facts is immature thing… Well
the way she got replies here … I m sure she will never feel comfortable
to share her pain / facts here …. You see now how it hurts people when
they make judgments without knowing the fact ….!!!???

Truth is always
truth …. If some people don’t believe … it doesn’t mean truth doesn’t
exist and thank god that law authorities don’t judge like people do over
this board without knowing facts / whole case…That’s all I have to say
here …. Have a great day … Pasha


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Leslie66 wrote:
IMHO the OP (who has apparently left the building) sounds pretty narcissistic and high-maintenance. I have a low tolerance threshhold for all this whining and hand-wringing (whether it comes from men or women) when decisive action is the only way to improve your situation, IOW get a job. On the other hand her husband doesn't sound like much of a prince. However, being unappreciative or unattentive is not, in and of itself, abuse.

You must consider that the OP didn't sound like a princess and that came
from her mouth or fingers as it were, whereas you are relying on her
description of him (i.e. 2nd hand) in order to judge him "not a prince".
I place much less confidence in 2nd hand information, especially when
coming from someone with an obvious issue about that 2nd hand person and
an axe to grind to boot. It's also been my experience that people like
the OP who have some odd sense of entitlement often severely discount
the efforts of otherwise well meaning people, saying anything in order
to get their way (probably due to the sense of entitlement).

I sure wish the OP didn't "leave the building" because it would have
been really interesting to get more data on what's really going on.
--
I said "NO" to drugs, but they didn't listen.

Pasha Patel wrote:
Truth is always bitter but if you don’t know the whole case … u don’t know the truth either

Didn't say it was the truth - I said it was my opinion.
Well where the discussion started and where it ended …. You skip main points to reply and answer to some other points so that way we can never discussion on the main topic ….

I simply commented on the point I felt needing comment.
People judge in their routine life … and that s not new … but what is right thing to do makes a difference here …. Just coz somebody jumps from 25th floor doesn’t mean everyone has to do it

I agree. Some people should jump from the 50th floor! :-)
…. Newsgroup and discussion board doesn’t give you or anybody a right to judge over other peoples’ life particularly when you don’t know the whole situation.

Nobody need request a right to judge somebody else. People just do it.
You don't need a right. It's not something that you go to jail for, for
example, therefore no "right" is required. I've heard you loud and clear
now, over and over, that you don't think I should judge people as
quickly as I do. Fine. That's your opinion. I disagree with that. That's
my opinion. We just don't agree - why don't we leave it at that?
in simple way "It's nobody's business" Whatever thoughts you hold to …that’s fine … but that cant be all the time right too … it applies to everyone …. There is no philosophy or psychology here on this topic …. There are other ways to ask for more information before giving comments like “u r selfish…u should fly back …. And so on…”

Yes, everybody has their own "approach". It's clear you don't like mine.
Fine.
Be it my way or your way it doesn’t really matter …what matters is right thing.

But you see that's what I'm trying to get out. What is the "right
thing"? The "right thing" for me is different than the "right thing" for
you.
If judges in court started doing their way without looking at evidences and reviewing facts about cases ….then you know what would happen …thank god laws don’t follow that way ….

Agreed. However this is not court.
If she doesn’t want to go back …there could be other reasons too but she didn’t write here…

So then write them.
so we got to know little bit more before making any derogatory comment here …. Well there are several ways without even asylum to stay here …. Even if she is mother of his kid …. When he got married to her … he should be careful always …that this shouldn’t create any further problem …and who knows the whole story ? could be a lot more things to come out…right ?

Sure. Let them come out.
we don’t know unless she says …. And if there is nothing wrong with her husband then he can make her understand…some people are just like that … they feel insecure….they can solve it with a nice conversation or going to marriage counseling… but again giving decision without knowing facts is immature thing…

I know the facts she presented. If she wants a better decision the
present more facts.
Well the way she got replies here … I m sure she will never feel comfortable to share her pain / facts here ….

That's her choice. Sometimes things are painful in and of themselves and
we must simply bear the pain.
You see now how it hurts people when they make judgments without knowing the fact ….!!!???

I'm not so sure. How do you know that I was not dead on right? After
all, like you are fond of saying, we don't know the whole story. She
could have went away because she realized that she was found out (For
the record I don't think that this is the case here).
Truth is always truth …. If some people don’t believe … it doesn’t mean truth doesn’t exist and thank god that law authorities don’t judge like people do over this board without knowing facts / whole case…That’s all I have to say here ….

I agree that the truth is the truth. In some aspects the truth can come
close to undeniable. In most other aspects the truth is left up to an
interpretation of the person. IOW what's true for one person is not
necessarily true for another person. Just because you see something as
"your truth" does not mean that I see it as "my truth".
Have a great day … Pasha

--
Sure you can trust the government! Just ask an Indian!

Its not about me not liking your opinion or you not liking mine …. Its
just the fact that people give judgment without knowing the matter … and
those judgments don’t help a person anyway … u don’t need to agree with
others opinion either … u can do whatever u want unless u don’t harm
others… u can hold on to ur thoughts … coz we don’t see things same way
…so whats the use of discussion here? Even if some ways are wrong for
lot of people … person can only realize this if he is involved in it and
get this kinda attack from others … I have no problem with ur approach
at all as long as that doesn’t create extra problem for person who come
here to seek help ….

“The "right thing" for me is different than the
"right thing" for
you.”

Nope … I disagree … that’s only ur way … or my
way … laws r almost same everywhere…

Yep I would like to know little
bit more facts too in this case…. I hope she writes them here without
having fear from people who give their decision / prejudices right a way
without knowing facts…

Just because you see something as
"your truth"
does not mean that I see it as "my truth".

Again wrong … truth is one
only… its way of thinking that differs … about opinion then one has to
clarify that and not start attacking someone….

Ask any government about
solution of burning issues and people should leave their trust in them …
in USA for Example – 10 million illegal …


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Pasha Patel wrote:
Its not about me not liking your opinion or you not liking mine ….

Sure it is.
Its just the fact that people give judgment without knowing the matter …

And that's your opinion is it not? And it's not that I don't know the
matter at all. True I don't know everything about the matter and you can
argue that there is not enough information but then again that would be
your opinion again. It also can be said that you'll never know the whole
matter. But does this mean that you make no judgments until everything
is known, especially when it is not possible to know everything? To do
so would render you ineffective and inoperable. So then we are talking
about a matter of degree - exactly how much needs to be known before a
judgment can be made? So what we are arguing here is that degree, that
line. Obviously your degree is different than mine so again we are back
to a difference of opinions.
and those judgments don’t help a person anyway …

Maybe it's a "wake up call".
u don’t need to agree with others opinion either …

Oh I'm very aware of that.
u can do whatever u want unless u don’t harm others…

I think I'm doing that already.
u can hold on to ur thoughts …

I know I can.
coz we don’t see things same way …so whats the use of discussion here?

To discuss and experience other people's viewpoints of course.
Even if some ways are wrong for lot of people … person can only realize this if he is involved in it and get this kinda attack from others … I have no problem with ur approach at all as long as that doesn’t create extra problem for person who come here to seek help ….

Seems to me this person already has a problem, a problem with her
husband. It is my opinion that she has another problem, a problem with
herself, perhaps one she is discounting. Considering that the only
person she can really fix is herself I think it might be wise to look
inward to see how she has contributed to her troubles.
“The "right thing" for me is different than the "right thing" for you.”

Yup. (Oops, that was me talking above (I think) - again your quoting
style is odd and apparently you do not wish to change it)
Nope … I disagree … that’s only ur way … or my way … laws r almost same everywhere…

But we are not talking about laws here, nor physics, nor algebra, etc.
Yep I would like to know little bit more facts too in this case…. I hope she writes them here without having fear from people who give their decision / prejudices right a way without knowing facts…

At this time and considering her problems she needs to develop a thick
skin - and quick!
Just because you see something as "your truth" does not mean that I see it as "my truth". Again wrong … truth is one only…

Sounds like a religious issue. Sorry I don't buy it. In some fields
truth can be determined, in many fields it can't and it open to
interpretation.
its way of thinking that differs … about opinion then one has to clarify that and not start attacking someone….

Huh? Not sure what you are saying here. Of course, I was saying my
opinion. The OP should know that.
Ask any government about solution of burning issues and people should leave their trust in them … in USA for Example – 10 million illegal …

Sorry you totally lost me here.

--
Stop repeat offenders. Don't re-elect them!

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria Pasha Patel wrote:
Its not about me not liking your opinion or you not liking
mine Â…. Sure it is. Its just the fact that people
give judgment without knowing the matter Â… And that's your
opinion is it not? And it's not that I don't know the matter at all.
True I don't know everything about the matter and you can argue that
there is not enough information but then again that would be your
opinion again. It also can be said that you'll never know the whole
matter. But does this mean that you make no judgments until everything
is known, especially when it is not possible to know everything? To
do so would render you ineffective and inoperable. So then we are
talking about a matter of degree - exactly how much needs to be known
before a judgment can be made? So what we are arguing here is that
degree, that line. Obviously your degree is different than mine so
again we are back to a difference of opinions. and those
judgments donÂ’t help a person anyway Â… Maybe it's a "wake up
call". u donÂ’t need to agree with others opinion either Â…
Oh I'm very aware of that. u can do whatever u
want unless u donÂ’t harm othersÂ… I think I'm doing that
already. u can hold on to ur thoughts Â… I know I
can. coz we donÂ’t see things same way Â…so whats the use of
discussion here? To discuss and experience other people's
viewpoints of course. Even if some ways are wrong for lot of
people Â… person can only realize this if he is involved
in it and get this kinda attack from others Â… I have no
problem with ur approach at all as long as that doesnÂ’t
create extra problem for person who come here to seek help
Â…. Seems to me this person already has a problem, a problem
with her husband. It is my opinion that she has another problem, a
problem with herself, perhaps one she is discounting. Considering
that the only person she can really fix is herself I think it might
be wise to look inward to see how she has contributed to her
troubles. “The "right thing" for me is different than the
"right thing" for you.” Yup. (Oops, that was me talking above
(I think) - again your quoting style is odd and apparently you do not
wish to change it) Nope Â… I disagree Â… thatÂ’s only ur way
Â… or my way Â… laws r almost same everywhereÂ…
But we are not talking about laws here, nor physics, nor algebra, etc.
Yep I would like to know little bit more facts too in this
caseÂ…. I hope she writes them here without
having fear from people who give their decision / prejudices right a
way without knowing factsÂ… At this time and
considering her problems she needs to develop a thick skin - and
quick! Just because you see something as "your truth" does
not mean that I see it as "my truth". Again
wrong Â… truth is one onlyÂ… Sounds like a religious issue.
Sorry I don't buy it. In some fields truth can be determined, in many
fields it can't and it open to interpretation. its way of
thinking that differs Â… about opinion then one has to
clarify that and not start attacking someoneÂ…. Huh? Not sure
what you are saying here. Of course, I was saying my opinion. The OP
should know that. Ask any government about solution of
burning issues and people should leave their trust in them
… in USA for Example – 10 million illegal … Sorry you
totally lost me here. -- Stop repeat offenders. Don't re-elect
them!

Ok you guys, I'm butting in with a third party opinion.


Feel free (Andrew I KNOW you don't need an invitiation) to correct me
if I misinterpret the points you are trying to make.

1) The truth is
subjective, it is all about perception. It is belief based, we BELIEVE
that something is the truth. Therefore it must be subjective rather than
objective by it's very nature. We`cannot know that something is the
truth, unless (for those who believe in Him/Her/It )we are God, or some
form of "all knowing being" anyway.

2) Andrew made a point with which I
wholeheartedly agree.

Blame has never solved anything. Control of
others is no substitute for lack of self control. IMHO the OP needs to
take control of her life - if she is unhappy with her husband then leave
him to live his life as he sees fit. No-one has a mandatory obligation
towards anyone else over the age of eighteen to care, provide and
protect. Someone may feel that someone else should be doing "this that
and whatever" for them for whatever reason.

The reality of the matter
is that they do not. Demand until you are blue in the face, you can't
force someone to love you and you can't expect someone else to
compensate for your own emotional dysfunction. It doesn't work, it never
has and it never will.

The only person who is capable of making you
happy is yourself, for if you do not accept this responsibility then no-
one else can successfully compensate for your own lack of love of self.


We should not wish to control others excepting extreme circumstances.
We can control ourselves and we ALWAYS have a choice.

Each of us
determines their own fate and lives with the consequences. We must learn
and move on or we are bound to repeat the same mistakes over and over.


Personally, I much prefer new mistakes to old ones I've tried before
:D (They are MUCH more fun!)


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Yep … agreed with lairdside …

Again Andrew missed important points ….
Good for him …. Talk to the point instead of making some irrelevant
comments …. I can do the same… I thought you would give some real good
point but u r all same … wish u all the best holding on ur points … u
got to answer to my points made in past and not just skip them …each
time I give you points to answer to and again u skip them … well I don’t
have time for cat fight unless u seriously want to debate on with points
that hold water …. Good luck … Pasha


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by lairdside Blame has never solved
anything. Control of others is no substitute for lack of self control.
IMHO the OP needs to take control of her life - if she is unhappy with
her husband then leave him to live his life as he sees fit. No-one has a
mandatory obligation towards anyone else over the age of eighteen to
care, provide and protect. Someone may feel that someone else should be
doing "this that and whatever" for them for whatever reason. The
reality of the matter is that they do not. Demand until you are blue in
the face, you can't force someone to love you and you can't expect
someone else to compensate for your own emotional dysfunction. It
doesn't work, it never has and it never will.

Lairdside,
the only reply worth reading is yours. I hope the OP can find it and
read it from among all the other crap that has been posted by people who
obviously have too much time on their hands....


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by lairdside QUOTE}1) The truth is
subjective, it is all about perception. It is belief based, we BELIEVE
that something is the truth. Therefore it must be subjective rather than
objective by it's very nature. QUOTE} Interesting Comment?
IMHO...... Matter cannot be destroyed; only "changed" into other forms
of Matter? Truth or Fallacy? I think there are some undeniable "truths"
on this planet. Truth be told, as of this moment, on this newsgroup, in
this thread, the OP has not responded to any of the comments offered!
Subjective Truth or "Absolute" truth? '-) {QUOTE}2) Andrew made a
point with which I wholeheartedly agree. Blame has never solved
anything.{QUOTE} Hmmmmm, unless your sister is raped! She/ the
State BLAMES/alleges, charges, tries and convicts the purpotrator! I
guess BLAME offered some relief to the victom! No? You think we
shouldn't BLAME one who commits a crime when it leads to the harm of
another? To harm; in the sense of ones loss of liberty, property or
bodily harm? To BLAME.....ie; an allegation of loss. {QUOTE}Each of
us determines their own fate and lives with the consequences.{QUOTE}
Not really, example; I get in my car and drive, "through no fault of
my own" I get in an accident and I am killed by a "drunk driver." You
mean to say I made a choice to "die" by driving my car! Moreover,
because I made a choice to drive I determined my fate that day would be
death? My friend this is one of many "fates" we have no controll over.
Break it down further, example; I wake up and "walk" to the store, while
walking I am caught in the cross fire of a "drive by shooting." You mean
to say I made a choice to "die" ie..... the act of
"determining/choosing" I would walk, I would also be determining my fate
to die? No, we do not ALWAYS determine our own fate! Sure, some times we
"test" fate like "jumping out of a perfectly safe plane" and
parachuteing to the ground! Here "fate" offers four choices, a) you jump
and land safely, b) you land but injury yourself, c) you die, d) you
don't JUMP! {QUOTE}We must learn and move on or we are bound to
repeat the same mistakes over and over.{QUOTE} Truth is an
"interesting thing" no?....lol. How true!


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by David9287
Originally
posted by lairdside QUOTE}1) The truth is subjective, it is all
about perception. It is belief based, we BELIEVE that something is the
truth. Therefore it must be subjective rather than objective by it's
very nature. QUOTE} Interesting Comment? IMHO...... Matter cannot
be destroyed; only "changed" into other forms of Matter? Truth or
Fallacy? I think there are some undeniable "truths" on this planet.
Truth be told, as of this moment, on this newsgroup, in this thread, the
OP has not responded to any of the comments offered! Subjective Truth or
"Absolute" truth? '-) {QUOTE}2) Andrew made a point with which I
wholeheartedly agree. Blame has never solved anything.{QUOTE}
Hmmmmm, unless your sister is raped! She/ the State BLAMES/alleges,
charges, tries and convicts the purpotrator! I guess BLAME offered some
relief to the victom! No? You think we shouldn't BLAME one who commits a
crime when it leads to the harm of another? To harm; in the sense of
ones loss of liberty, property or bodily harm? To BLAME.....ie; an
allegation of loss. {QUOTE}Each of us determines their own fate and
lives with the consequences.{QUOTE} Not really, example; I get in
my car and drive, "through no fault of my own" I get in an accident and
I am killed by a "drunk driver." You mean to say I made a choice to
"die" by driving my car! Moreover, because I made a choice to drive I
determined my fate that day would be death? My friend this is one of
many "fates" we have no controll over. Break it down further, example; I
wake up and "walk" to the store, while walking I am caught in the cross
fire of a "drive by shooting." You mean to say I made a choice to "die"
ie..... the act of "determining/choosing" I would walk, I would also be
determining my fate to die? No, we do not ALWAYS determine our own fate!
Sure, some times we "test" fate like "jumping out of a perfectly safe
plane" and parachuteing to the ground! Here "fate" offers four choices,
a) you jump and land safely, b) you land but injury yourself, c) you
die, d) you don't JUMP! {QUOTE}We must learn and move on or we are
bound to repeat the same mistakes over and over.{QUOTE} Truth is an
"interesting thing" no?....lol. How true!

Hi:

We are going
to have to agree to disagree on the first point. Once people belived
that the world was flat - that also was an "undeniable truth".

At the
end of the day, does any of us really KNOW that we actually exist in the
form in which we percieve ourselves to be?

On the second point, no I do
not believe that is the blame which solves the problem. The state does
not "blame". It holds people accountable for their actions, enacts
justice rather than retribution,which may bring some closure to the
victim.

Our lives are not the result of one isolated choice but of a
series of choices. Each choice we make may seem imperceptable but in
fact may completely alter the course of our life. To this end we do
determine our own fate. Even with divine intervention we have a choice,
for the religious it may be called free will.

Have you read chaos
theory? It's sort of like that :)


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by lairdside Our lives are not the
result of one isolated choice but of a series of choices. Each choice we
make may seem imperceptable but in fact may completely alter the course
of our life. To this end we do determine our own fate. Even with divine
intervention we have a choice, for the religious it may be called free
will. Have you read chaos theory? It's sort of like that :)


Woo Hoo! *Now* this is getting *good*!

Love having you
around, laird ;)


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

lairdside wrote:
Blame has never solved anything.

From the rock band Rush: "Blame is better to give than receive"! ;-)
No-one has a mandatory obligation towards anyone else over the age of eighteen to care, provide and protect.

Does that mean I can stop paying taxes, social security, etc? I think
not (unfortunately) ;-)

For something that is not supposed to be mandatory they make it real
damn hard to get around it!
--
All things being equal, fat people use more soap.

Originally posted by lairdside Hi: {quote}We are
going to have to agree to disagree on the first point. Once people
belived that the world was flat - that also was an "undeniable
truth".{quote} Good response, but we "now" know the "truth" the
world isn't flat and it really isn't round like a "poolball" being it
isn't smooth but it is round shaped. Yes, we will agree to disagree....
:-) {Qoutoe}At the end of the day, does any of us really KNOW that
we actually exist in the form in which we percieve ourselves to
be?{Quote} Cells, flesh, blood, bone (spirit?)... we exist in a
shell. :-) {quote}On the second point, no I do not believe that is
the blame which solves the problem. The state does not "blame". It holds
people accountable for their actions, enacts justice rather than
retribution,which may bring some closure to the victim.{Quote}
2a).Blame; to find fault with; to hold responsible, to place
responsibility for, to Blame; at fault. Alleging we have been wronged we
are placing blame on another or at times on ones self. He or she is to
blame; I was to blame. Blame and alleged wrongs are possibly one in the
same once poven or agreed on by enough people..... {quote}Our
lives are not the result of one isolated choice but of a series of
choices. Each choice we make may seem imperceptable but in fact may
completely alter the course of our life. To this end we do determine our
own fate. Even with divine intervention we have a choice, for the
religious it may be called free will.{quote} Have you read chaos
theory? It's sort of like that :)

Yes, excelent work, in the
metaphysical relm! Rodrinngers Box comes to mind. If a closed box sits
on a table; is it enpty or full........... well, know one really knows
untill the box is open; once it is open are we to beleive what we
find/see?

Re: the OP--- subjective truth or absolute truth she has not
yet responed to this thread, on this newsgroup, as of this moment in
time..... :-) Question: Will the truth set us free?
Take care.


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria lairdside wrote:
Blame has never solved anything. From the rock band
Rush: "Blame is better to give than receive"! ;-) No-one has
a mandatory obligation towards anyone else over the age of
eighteen to care, provide and protect. Does that mean I can
stop paying taxes, social security, etc? I think not (unfortunately)
;-) For something that is not supposed to be mandatory they make it
real damn hard to get around it! -- All things being equal, fat
people use more soap.

Ok - you can care, provide and protect
me with your tax dollars if you REALLY want to.

A bit tenuous that one
I thought though...... ;)


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by David9287 Yes, excelent work, in
the metaphysical relm! Rodrinngers Box comes to mind. If a closed box
sits on a table; is it enpty or full........... well, know one really
knows untill the box is open; once it is open are we to beleive what we
find/see? Re: the OP--- subjective truth or absolute truth she has
not yet responed to this thread, on this newsgroup, as of this moment in
time..... :-) Question: Will the truth set us free? Take care.


Rodrinnger's Box, I know another one a little like that
involving a goat and three doors - a probability conundrum. More obscure
and slightly more abstract :)

What is "truth" anyway?

Sounds like a
concept to me.....

I personally can think of very few potential
absolute "truths".
Naturally, each according to their own hypothesis.

I
am what I am, whatever that is. Likewise for the rest of existence. What
will be will be.

I'm happy with that :)

Good point though. Back to the
OP - where did they go?


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

looks like people are coming out to find the truth while not knowing
whole case ... wouldn’t it be so much easier just to help OP or give
useful advice instead of making any decision about personal life...just
wondering...!!!


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by Pasha Patel looks like people are
coming out to find the truth while not knowing whole case ... wouldnt it
be so much easier just to help OP or give useful advice insted of making
any decision about personal life...just wondering...!!!

This
is true. But there are some people who get their jollies from getting
people's hackles up....


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by Ranjini This is true. But there
are some people who get their jollies from getting people's hackles
up....


I agree with you Ranjini Â…. I even visited your
website Â…very helpful Â…. Thanks for helping peopleÂ…wish you all the
best....Pasha


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by David9287 Yes, excelent work, in
the metaphysical relm! Rodrinngers Box comes to mind. If a closed box
sits on a table; is it enpty or full........... well, know one really
knows untill the box is open; once it is open are we to beleive what we
find/see? Re: the OP--- subjective truth or absolute truth she has
not yet responed to this thread, on this newsgroup, as of this moment in
time..... :-) Question: Will the truth set us free? Take care.



A closed box sitting on a table is full. Whether it is full
with material objects or air, it is still full. Thus the question is
a glass half full or half empty is nonsensical as well. It may be 1/2
full of liquid of some type but the other half is filled with air. So
the glass is, therefore, never empty.

Will the truth set us free? Free
from what? Truth may only serve to bind more tightly than a lie or not
knowing ever will.

And what is an absolute? My version of an
absolute truth might well be your fallicy. It won't alter my perception
but it might yours.

Rita


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Boy have I read some really profound things from this thread and some
real BS. I am pretty sure the BSrs know who they are, we do. :)
But here
is something to chew on (since this thread has become a little
philosophic), that I hope I can learn from:
We saw "The Passion" when it
opened on Wednesday night and something really stood out to me that is
so common in movies and in our everyday life as well.

There was no
revenge, no getting even, no last word, just forgiveness.

Just an
observation

Jeff and Remi


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Pasha Patel wrote:
looks like people are coming out to find the truth while not knowing whole case ... wouldn’t it be so much easier just to help OP or give useful advice instead of making any decision about personal life...just wondering...!!!

The OP vanished a long time ago.

lairdside wrote:
Ok - you can care, provide and protect me with your tax dollars if you REALLY want to. A bit tenuous that one I thought though...... ;)

Not really. The point I was trying to make, in a light hearted fashion,
was that we are not free from a mandatory obligation towards others in
the society as you had suggested. Each of us gets taxed everyday and
many of those taxes go towards helping others. Leaving aside whether you
or I consider that a good thing or a bad thing for a moment it flies in
the face of your assertion that "No-one has a mandatory obligation
towards anyone else over the age of eighteen to care, provide and
protect" because indeed we do.
--
(A)bort, (R)etry, (G)et a beer?

Rete wrote:
A closed box sitting on a table is full. Whether it is full with material objects or air, it is still full.

Not necessarily so! It could be "full" with a vacuum, which most people
would count as full.
Thus the question is a glass half full or half empty is nonsensical as well.

Of course it is! The glass is too small! ;-)
It may be 1/2 full of liquid of some type but the other half is filled with air. So the glass is, therefore, never empty. Will the truth set us free? Free from what?

From the tyranny of living a life of lies.
Truth may only serve to bind more tightly than a lie or not knowing ever will.

Always tell the truth - It's much easier to remember! ;-)


--
Help! I'm modeming... and I can't hang up!!!

Pasha Patel wrote:
looks like people are coming out to find the truth while not knowing whole case ... wouldn’t it be so much easier just to help OP or give useful advice instead of making any decision about personal life...just wondering...!!!

What if the useful advice she needs to hear is that she must recognize
her own part in this screw up and fix that because after all is said and
done that's all she can do!

You want useful advice for her? OK. She has a failing marriage. She's in
a country that is not her home (at least not yet anyway). She should go
back home and either find another man that is more to her liking and
lifestyle and, if that man happens to be an American, apply for a visa
again and come over based on true love and in a legal fashion. Or, if
she's still hell bent on immigrating to the US then choose another
immigration path. But to attempt to stay here, deceiving her current
husband until such time that she can get a green card then split is
unethetical, immoral and, most of all, illegal.

There, you happy now?

--
It's lonely at the top, but you eat better.

mtravelkay wrote:
Pasha Patel wrote: looks like people are coming out to find the truth while not knowing whole case ... wouldn’t it be so much easier just to help OP or give useful advice instead of making any decision about personal life...just wondering...!!! The OP vanished a long time ago.

But how do we know that that is really the truth?!? ;-)

(Besides perhaps she's lurking...)

--
Don't be so open-minded your brains fall out.

JeffB wrote:
We saw "The Passion" when it opened on Wednesday night and something really stood out to me that is so common in movies and in our everyday life as well. There was no revenge, no getting even, no last word, just forgiveness.

Just got back from seeing /The Passion/. (Yes an atheist watching a
religous movie - I find religion fascinating, don't believe it but it's
still fascinating)... and all I can say is yet Virginia, there is
revenge, getting evening and forgiveness!
--
The more you run over a dead cat, the flatter it gets.

Originally posted by Mtravelkay Pasha Patel wrote: looks like people are coming out to find the truth while not
knowing whole case ... wouldnÂ’t it be so much easier just
to help OP or give useful advice instead of making any
decision about personal life...just wondering...!!! The OP vanished a long time ago.

so how can
it help to find the truth out?


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria Pasha Patel wrote:
looks like people are coming out to find the truth while not
knowing whole case ... wouldnÂ’t it be so much easier just
to help OP or give useful advice instead of making any
decision about personal life...just wondering...!!!
What if the useful advice she needs to hear is that she must
recognize her own part in this screw up and fix that because after
all is said and done that's all she can do! You want useful
advice for her? OK. She has a failing marriage. She's in a country
that is not her home (at least not yet anyway). She should go back
home and either find another man that is more to her liking and
lifestyle and, if that man happens to be an American, apply for a visa
again and come over based on true love and in a legal fashion. Or, if
she's still hell bent on immigrating to the US then choose another
immigration path. But to attempt to stay here, deceiving her current
husband until such time that she can get a green card then split is
unethetical, immoral and, most of all, illegal. There, you happy
now? -- It's lonely at the top, but you eat better.


no problem at all whatever advice you give be it the way she wants or
opposite to her wishes .... i guess this was not a topic of our
discussion ... but with this post ... i agree ... advice could be in
favor or against wish ... it doesnt matter as long as its a right
advice...

"deceiving her current
husband until such time that she can
get a green card then split is
unethetical, immoral and, most of all,
illegal."

I agree 100 % ... there is nothing worse than this .... we
just got to find little bit more out .... and i guess everyone including
me gave the same opinion on this one....

Good night...Pasha


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria lairdside wrote:
Ok - you can care, provide and protect me with your tax
dollars if you REALLY want to. A bit tenuous
that one I thought though...... ;) Not really. The point I
was trying to make, in a light hearted fashion, was that we are not
free from a mandatory obligation towards others in the society as
you had suggested. Each of us gets taxed everyday and many of those
taxes go towards helping others. Leaving aside whether you or I
consider that a good thing or a bad thing for a moment it flies in
the face of your assertion that "No-one has a mandatory obligation
towards anyone else over the age of eighteen to care, provide and
protect" because indeed we do. -- (A)bort, (R)etry, (G)et a beer?


I still feel it's tenuous.

It's a monetary contribution
which we give to the state granted. Which the state utilises on our
behalf to, in part, provide services.

Our responsibility though is to
the State, begins and ends with our accountability to them - not to the
designated individual.

I don't feel that it is relevant in the given
context of the discussion. All comments derive part of their unspoken
meaning from their context. In British English at least - which may
explain our different viewpoints on this.


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

this is a bogus story by another professional victim
"Leslie66" <member14032@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:1268912.1077730039@britishexpats.com... Originally posted by Andrew Defaria Faniahcc wrote: Maybe he wants me to leave the country to spare him from the affidavit of support he signs. Can you sue your spouse/sponsor for not supporting you? He is earning 6000.00 per month, net. Well I don't think that you can sue him for it because I don't see where it was stated that the man must support the woman. If that were the case then why couldn't it be the other way around - the woman supports the man? Are you supporting him? Truth is, the arrangement within the family as far as for who "supports" who is up to the individuals involved. Sometimes the man works and the woman stays home. Other times they both work. And yes, sometimes the woman works and supports the man. If the people in the marriage are unhappy enough with the arrangement then either of them can "sue" (really petition) to dissolve the marriage. However it's telling that you seem to want him to give to you financially, put everything under joint names and seem to be demanding that he "support" you. What I see missing is what you are contributing to the relationship/family or whatever. Some men are OK with that but many men are looking more for a partner then a parasite. Jesus Christ, Andrew. Could you possible be more biased and jump to more conclusions? The question she asked was if she (the K visa holder) could sue if the spouse/sponsor refused to support her. As the sponsor of a K visa holder, I think this is an interesting question. It doesn't have squat to do with the man supporting the woman thing so get off your soapbox. He (like me) made a promise to the U.S. government to support his foreign spouse/fiance when he (like me) signed the Affidavit of Support. She is asking if she has legal recourse if he stops doing that. Regardless of whether the USC found a parasite (as you inferred) instead of a partner, he still has an obligation his country to support her, because HE sponsored her. Obviously, her question is about how she can legally hold him to his obligation. -- Posted via http://britishexpats.com

lairdside wrote:
I still feel it's tenuous. It's a monetary contribution which we give to the state granted. Which the state utilises on our behalf to, in part, provide services.

Said so nicely, with words to make it appear so nice. However IMHO it's
not a "contribution" that we "give" willingly (in all instances nor for
all people) rather it's a "tax" that they "take" regardless of out
opinion on the matter. The state does not utilize it on our "behalf"
because to do so would assume that that was our wishes, and that is no
always the case.
Our responsibility though is to the State, begins and ends with our accountability to them - not to the designated individual. I don't feel that it is relevant in the given context of the discussion. All comments derive part of their unspoken meaning from their context. In British English at least - which may explain our different viewpoints on this.

Well that probably says something. See here in America the "state" is
considered the people themselves. We do not necessarily feel that we are
accountable to the state. And regardless if the state collects money
from us against our wishes and hands that money over to others, no
matter how noble the cause, it is still that one man is being compelled
to live his life for another man.

And hey, it was you who made the statement that this is not happening.
I'm just pointing out that it is indeed happening.


--
null

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria lairdside wrote:
I still feel it's tenuous. It's a monetary
contribution which we give to the state granted. Which the
state utilises on our behalf to, in part, provide services.
Said so nicely, with words to make it appear so nice. However IMHO it's
not a "contribution" that we "give" willingly (in all instances nor
for all people) rather it's a "tax" that they "take" regardless of
out opinion on the matter. The state does not utilize it on our
"behalf" because to do so would assume that that was our wishes, and
that is no always the case.

It happens. Still IMHO it
belies the original point, being that not even a spouse has the right to
expect the same sort of direct obligation that say, a minor child has.


It's not rellevant to the discussion at hand and so there for is out-of-
context for the purposes of such. Nonsensical in the given forum.


Aren't you bored? :zzz:


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

lairdside wrote:
It happens. Still IMHO it belies the original point, being that not even a spouse has the right to expect the same sort of direct obligation that say, a minor child has.

Maybe you should be more careful with such sweeping generalizations in
the future.
--
Sped up my XT; ran it on 220v! Works greO?_~"

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria lairdside wrote:
It happens. Still IMHO it belies the original point, being that
not even a spouse has the right to expect the same sort of
direct obligation that say, a minor child has.
Maybe you should be more careful with such sweeping generalizations in
the future. -- Sped up my XT; ran it on 220v! Works greO?_~"


It wasn't a sweeping generalization when the context of the
dialogue within which it was contained was applied.

You chose to remove
it from that context.

People can twist and/or misinterpret anything
which we choose to say if they wish to do so. That doesn't make it
correct, pertinent or useful.


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

lairdside wrote:
It wasn't a sweeping generalization when the context of the dialogue within which it was contained was applied. You chose to remove it from that context. People can twist and/or misinterpret anything which we choose to say if they wish to do so. That doesn't make it correct, pertinent or useful.

I beg to differ. You took the context (i.e. is a man responsible for
supporting his wife or a wife for her man) and generalized it to nobody
is required to support anybody else (with a qualifier for kids). That
took it out of the context of that realm and into the realm of the
general and that's why I commented.

--
Why do people say "Oh you just want to have your cake and eat it too".
Damn right! What good is a cake if you can't eat it?

Originally posted by Andrew Defaria lairdside wrote:
It wasn't a sweeping generalization when the context of the
dialogue within which it was contained was applied. You chose to remove it from that context. People can
twist and/or misinterpret anything which we choose to say
if they wish to do so. That doesn't make it correct,
pertinent or useful. I beg to differ. You took the context
(i.e. is a man responsible for supporting his wife or a wife for her
man) and generalized it to nobody is required to support anybody else
(with a qualifier for kids). That took it out of the context of that
realm and into the realm of the general and that's why I commented.
-- Why do people say "Oh you just want to have your cake and eat
it too". Damn right! What good is a cake if you can't eat it?


But it was still within the context of the discussion!

We
write and interpret things differently.

Let's agree to disagree on this
one ok ? :)


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

You should leave immediately no matter what the consequences.
If
possible talk with an attorney, sometimes they consult for free on the
initial visit. Good Luck!!



Originally posted by Faniahcc
Hello My husband is threatening and intimidating me to leave
the country but didn't discuss a "D" though. Why should I? I have
a conditional PR card and will remove conditions on March 2005. We
always fight because of financial matters because he doesn't support
me financially but instead he support his ex-wife. My husband and I
don't have children yet. Recently i found out that he gave her
10,000dollars bec he said she asked favor. He got that money by
refinancing his house. Stupid, right? This woman has children on her
own. They don't have children during their marriage. I know he is
being duped. But i think he still loves her, or else he won't keep
giving money. But when i ask money, he gaves 20.00 or 50.00 or 100.00
not in a nice way but with matching ugly expressions both facial and
verbal. This is all unfair to me. He hurts me verbally many times
already. I can't take it anymore. I got to do something here. He
doesn't want me to get involve in his finances and that is why we
don't have a joint account. The car am driving is under both our
names, though "or". The car he is driving is under his name and his
exwife still. He doesn't want to remove the name of his exwife.
Spooky right? But he paid her all the divorce settlement a long time
already. Why is he still giving her much. Maybe he wants me to
leave the country to spare him from the affidavit of support he signs.
Can you sue your spouse/sponsor for not supporting you? He is
earning 6000.00 per month, net. Will i just shut up my mouth and
wait for March 2005. What if he doesn't signs my removal of
conditions. I got a very big problem, hope someone can advice me
what is the right way to do. Thanks a lot for supporting and
replying. Sincerely
faniah


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com