The short answer to the question, "Does a Presumption of Intent to Immigrate, INA 214(B), Violate Human Rights"? No.
The short answer to the question, "Does a Presumption of Intent to Immigrate, INA 214(B), Violate Human Rights"? No.
Mr. Knowitall Sir,
With all due respects and regards!
I truly appreciate your “NO” to the “Presumption”…..and add…..
1. When Club’s in India displayed “Dogs and Indians not allowed” it was presumed a dog and an Indian were not fit to join the club. There was no Human Rights violation.
2. When M.K.Gandhi was presumed to be a colored man not fit to travel in the First class compartment train at Pietermaritzburg. There was no Human Rights violation.
3. When Rosa Parks was asked by the bus driver to vacate her seat for the whites. There was no Human Rights violation.
The violation became effective when:-
1. One had to prove you were not a dog or an Indian to be allowed into the club.
2. Or Gandhi was thrown out from the first class compartment.
3. Or when Rosa Parks got arrested for her refusal to vacate the seat for a white man.
My question was and still is:-
“Does 214 (b) violates Human Rights with no provisions of appeal in the US?”
A. Till the moment I did not get the 214 b booklet I did not even know if any such law existed, for an applicant to satisfy the presumed assumption, that I was open to be called a liar, if I was an intending immigrant; when I had specifically applied on the DS-160 for a B1-B2 nonimmigrant Visa . There was no Human Rights violation. (true)
B. The moment I am refused the visa and given the 214 b duly certified by a US embassy official, it violated my human right by certifying that I had lied, for I had immigrant intent on a non immigrant visa. A confirmation for me to seek and ask:-
“Does 214 (b) violates Human Rights with no provisions of appeal in the US?”
Thank you, for being kind enough to have replied. I have no wish to defame any one, will accept being called a liar too; But think, how many people go to the US embassies and get to be called liars and don’t even know about it!
Lol.
Truly yours,
-Jai
You seem to be thinking that "Human Rights" is some sort of universal law.
Is that correct?
For you Mr. Dogmatique Sir,
Hahahahaahahahahhaha! TRUE.
A quote for you:-
"In the United States Senate, one of the things I observed in the early days - and it's still used - and that is that you take someone's argument and then you misrepresent it and misstate and disagree with it. And it's very effective. I've done it myself a number of times. But eventually, eventually people catch on." -Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, speaking at the National Press Club in Washington.
And for you Mr. Knowitall Sir,
"Problems cannot be solved at the same level of awareness that created them."
-- Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)
Lol Does one need a lawyer for moral obligation, due from a great country like the United States of America on HUMAN RIGHTS?
With all due respects to every one.
-Jai
Sorry, If I have said something that hurts you. I will delete the entire posts I have made if you want me to do that!
However, will refrain from posting here in the future.
Thanks.
You are free to retain the world's best lawyer, spend every penny you can raise, and litigate the issue to the Supreme Court. The answer you get will still be "no".