Wedding Before K-1

[doombug]

Thanks William.

I was suggesting and thought it was a good idea for people wanting one....a going away party, engagement party...what have you.  Personally....I had a blessing of the rings ceremony, which from my understanding is not a wedding ceremony and does not in any way make anyone man and wife either real or imagined.  Nothing was signed, at all or even hinted to the fact that we was married legally or in the eyes of God.   

To my ear (and it may be clogged full of gunk), this sounds like a commitment more binding than simple novios.

And so it may sound to the one that matters--the CIS adjudicator.

"When it comes to INS matters [now CIS], assumption can be disastrous. Anyone who anticipates involvement with the immigration process would do well to stay intricately informed. Having a lawyer can be very helpful, but it does not preclude you from this advice: It may never occur to you to ask your attorney, before breaking the rule that you never knew existed.

Remember: Love knows no boundaries, but the INS does, and it will enforce them."

[utopiacowboy]

the wait time to get her here can be longer on a k3 - a year or more. Some guys also want a test drive even though that is taboo

Common misconception. As a rule a K-3 does not take longer than a K-1 although the processing time varies as the service centers can get backlogged or every once in a while eliminate their backlogs. It took us 5 months start to finish to get a K-3.

Right now, the NBC is handling K-3 petitions dated September 13, 2006 as of March 15, 2007. The processing times for K-1 petitions in the CSC and VSC are the EXACT same dates, as of March 15, 2007 they are handling petitions dated September 13, 2006. Check it out yourself on the www.uscis.gov site. 

[Jamie]

Again Sean, you completely missed the point.

This isn’t about YOU and it isn’t about BIG PARTIES. It’s about how serious the immigration officials take the subject of visa fraud.

Ray you are missing the point Sean was clearly being funny regarding the party and then threw in the 3 smiley faces for those who couldn’t catch his sarcasm. Sean I suggest you end your jokes with a laugh track and please preface any future posting with a note that this is not about YOU.


It is unlikely that the facts of this article would apply to the men who read this forum. The man married his fiancé in the States probably on a visitors visa where it became easy to catch. While your points on what could trigger suspicion are very good they are very unlikely to occur for those that decide to have a non legal religious ceremony. To be cautious of potential problems in such a situation is good advice but I would not discourage those wanting such a ceremony only that they be aware of potential complications and not reveal what others don’t need to know.

[Ray]

Ray you are missing the point Sean was clearly being funny regarding the party and then threw in the 3 smiley faces for those who couldn’t catch his sarcasm.

Jamie, I think you missed the point of why Sean was being sarcastic, maybe because you missed the earlier exchanges on this topic(?)   

To be cautious of potential problems in such a situation is good advice but I would not discourage those wanting such a ceremony only that they be aware of potential complications and not reveal what others don’t need to know.

Yes, that's exactly the point I was making.

To imply that there is nothing to worry about because nobody is breaking any laws, as Sean is suggesting, is a dangerous assumption to make. If the fiancée shows up at her interview with photos of what "appears" to be a wedding ceremony, the potential for denial is real.

While your points on what could trigger suspicion are very good they are very unlikely to occur for those that decide to have a non legal religious ceremony.

Actually, I have heard of quite a few such cases where the fiancée was suspected of being married. While most of these cases occurred at the Manila consular post, similar suspicions should be expected elsewhere, especially at a high-fraud post. A young lady married in a non-legal, religious wedding ceremony may very likely consider herself married according to her religious beliefs. If she goes into the interview with that mindset, it could cause a huge misunderstanding, especially where the consular adjudicators are actively looking for any evidence of fraud.

Your comment about not revealing to others what they don't need to know is an excellent point. Just make sure that the young lady who participated in one of those non-legal religious ceremonies is fully aware of what could happen if she says the wrong thing during the visa interview or during her border clearance interview on arrival stateside. To be safe, she should be coached to remove any wedding bands, not bring any photos of what may be misconstrued as a legal wedding ceremony, and not to refer to her sponsoring fiancé as her "husband". All of these seemingly harmless things have caused problems for other young ladies before.

[papi]

Just make sure that the young lady who participated in one of those non-legal religious ceremonies is fully aware of what could happen if she says the wrong thing during the visa interview or during her border clearance interview on arrival stateside.

this is actually a rather important comment all kidding aside. I have met many gringos i think playing with fire trying to workaround the k1 yet still get married in colombia. big mistake

[papi]

As a rule a K-3 does not take longer than a K-1

Utopia, you sure of this amigo? I hear differently

[william3rd]

wearing a wedding band at an interview?!?!?!?!?!? Just about as kosher as claiming to be a tourist and bringing a wedding dress in a garment bag. . . . . . . . 

If it smells like a duck. . . . then it is off to secondary inspection for a closer look.

[utopiacowboy]

Utopia, you sure of this amigo? I hear differently

Don't take my word for it. Look it up yourself on www.uscis.gov. You'll see what I posted above. The two service centers that handle K-1s (California and Vermont) are processing them with the same delays as the National Benefits Center which handles ALL K-3 petitions. For all of them it's September 13, 2006 as of March 15, 2007. Go ahead and file for a K-1 - it's not going to get her here any faster than a K-3.

[sean126]

Papi, I agree. I don't see anything wrong with having a party either and I NEVER said that I did. Don't listen to what Sean said I said, listen to what I actually said.

NOBODY accused you of breaking any laws, committing visa fraud or being dishonest, so please quit playing the poor victim!

Ok, lets listen to what Ray actually said when he wasn't insinuating I was endorsing visa fraud as a good idea and how he wasn't locked in on my personal feelings about a perfectly legitimate and harmless ceremony that was not a wedding of any kind, shape or form.  Remember....He wants us to listen to what he said.  And he has said he hasn't accused me of endorsing visa fraud and then turns around and uses it several times....but of course he wasn't insinuating it about me.  Since he likes to use quotes....which by the way restates what I said before about him focusing on my feelings and not any actual facts, I've inserted some of his.  Remember....LOLOLOL, this is all in my head about what he wasn't saying and what he wasn't insinuating.  I'm a victim, who's not getting it through my thick skull that he wasn't insinuating anything and he wasn't using my feelings about what I felt  and what I personally named a party to try and build an argument.  I guess just for fun....he throws in some ideas that just magically flows with his un-insinuating comments that I never said anything about....such as wedding rings on the hand, impressions made by rings, if she doesn't give the "right' answers...so on and so forth.  Again, I'm playing a victim here who's over paranoid.

...then get married without the "fake wedding" BS. Then petition her for a visa as your spouse...

.....Some folks get married and attempt to hide it so they can use the shorter fiancée visa but that is visa fraud and one of the things they are looking for. Even though you are not legally married on paper, the presence of "wedding ceremony" photos, a wedding band on her finger, or a simple slip of the tongue can trigger red flags for the consular officers or ICE inspectors....... Be very careful before having a “fake” wedding!

Getting her here "the fastest way possible" is not always a wise path to follow. ...

wedding ceremony?  Yes I said it, but was it how I "felt" about it or was it a fact?  Hmmmm..   wedding band on finger?  a slip of the tongue?  This is suppose to mean what?  How is telling the truth going to trip her up in her story?  Insinuation here or all in my head?  Oh, I almost forget....visa fraud came up.  Of course he's not insinuating anything here....as he so said.
Is this an isolate example?  Let's see what ray actually said, like he suggested.  Has he said I was commiting fraud? No, but the question now becomes....why even bring it up, if it's not meant for me?   I stutter....wouldn't that be just as much of a "red flag" when she is supposedly examined very closely?  A wedding dress in her luggage!!!  Oh my God!!!!  A woman on a K-1 visa has a WEDDING DRESS, A WEDDING RING and lord knows what other kind of red flags...the nerve of a fiance going to another country on a fiance visa with wedding items.  What's that you say?...a Catholic priest blessed their rings?  and theres pictures to prove it?  Holy cow Batman....to the Batmobile!!!!  I've never heard of Catholics having wedding rings blessed by a Priest that the family was good friends with.  That's overly suspicious to the average human being with more than 3 brain cells.  Her husband is stuttering pretty bad....they must be lying. LOLOLOLOL.  Oh, I'm sorry...lets get back to me not being accused of promoting visa fraud and how it's not even insinuated.

For the benefit of anyone else out there reading this, a fiancée visa is for someone intending to marry in the States. Attempting to have a wedding overseas, recorded or not, and also using the fiancée visa, is bordering on visa fraud and can very possibly get you into a huge mess. There have been many discussions before on "fake" or unrecorded marriages for those wishing to use the fiancée visa route.....

Fiance visa for people intending to marry in the U.S.?  Really?  I'm glad you let us know that Ray.  Why was it even said?  Could it be another insinuation that I was suggesting otherwise?  This whole spill doesn't even pertain to anything I was saying....unless it was an insinuation.  Here again...It's not insinuating I was promoting visa fraud.  An unrecorded marriage?  Fake marriage? Could this be stuck on my personal feelings again or facts?  Of course it's all in my head.  LOLOLOL.

I don’t know Sean, it seemed pretty clear to me. You said to EVERYONE it was a real wedding. Your words...

You had a “fake” wedding and then recommended it for others. How did I mis-interpret?

How did you mis-interpret?  oooh, I don't know Ray....possibly because your focus was on what it meant to me and not on actual facts?  That's just a ball park guess from someone who's paranoid and don't know what your talking about.  Heaven forbid I say...."Hey, go play paintball.  It's like killing someone without actually killing them.  It's a "fake" death"  Then I guess I wouldn't have someone bringing up the fact that I am promoting killing and murder.  Huh?  Whats the difference?  I can call it what ever I want....change what I called it and see if you can make the same arguments.  Substitute "engagement party" or how about "going away" party...substitute any name you like and see if your opinion doesn't change.  Didn't you say you wasn't against a "party" or is that going to change now too?  You got hung up on the name that I personally gave it.  Hell,  we even have a certified immigration lawyer that said theres nothing wrong with it?  I forgot...."What if" and supposedly she's wearing a wedding band and calling me "husband" by mistake.   You might as well tell people who stutter..."Hey, don't go to another country....they might detain you because they don't believe you because your stuttering too much"  Or how about...."Man, you better hope the officials or officers don't ask you any questions about your fiance at the entry point...your stuttering is going to send off a giant red flag and they might deport her or at least detain her, you shouldn't even try bringing a girl over. You better let her come in the country by herself."  I personally do not see a difference in the arguments I've just stated and the silly argument that you've been feebly trying to defend with "what ifs" and focusing on my own personal feelings.  As if what I called it and what it meant to me is going to make a hill of beans.

This isn’t about YOU and it isn’t about BIG PARTIES. It’s about how serious the immigration officials take the subject of visa fraud.

If a couple doing a K-1 try to circumvent the law by having a wedding before entry, as this couple obviously did, then the consequences can be devastating......
 
If another couple decides to have a fake wedding ceremony, or an unregistered ceremony,.....
What could trigger such a suspicion on the part of the officials? It could be something as simple as a wedding band on her finger, or the impression left when a ring was recently removed. Or it could be photos she has of the “wedding" ceremonythat raise suspicion. Consular officers or immigration inspectors have been known to ask “trick questions” in an attempt to trip the ladies up. The wrong answers to questions or perceived untruthfulness is all the ammunition they need to make life miserable for you.

Again Sean, it was never about you or your big “wedding” party. It was about giving advice to others that could cause them much pain and suffering down the line.

Ooops, theres that word again thats not an insinuation...dare I say it?  Visa Fraud!!!   If you don't care about my big parties...Again, why even bring up visa fraud.  I will get to that in a second, lets move on....circumvent the law?  Wow, nice wording.  But what exactly does that have to do with me Ray?  Oh, I think we will see in a second.....unregistered ceremony?  Is that another name for "fake wedding"?  Oh look, you had them both in the same sentence....could be a link there.  I don't knowwwwww.   Wow, we went from "fake" wedding ceremony to just plain wedding ceremony. Hmm....are we implying something here.  Oh yeah....that's an insinuation, vague, but it is.  LOLOLOLOLOL   Wrong answers or percieved untruthfulness?  Are you kidding me?  How can someone give wrong answers if they are truthful?  percieved untruthfullness?  Wouldn't my stuttering be a MAJOR red flag?  (see argument about that in prior masterful analogy above).   Advice I am giving is going to cause not only pain and suffering, but much pain and suffering.  Hmmm....what are we talking about here Ray?  The fact that your not directly saying I'm promoting dishonesty, visa fraud or law breaking or the fact that you seem to be insinuating it?  You ready to finally give an specific and clear answer Ray?  Here goes.....

So, it appears your saying....If I want to commit visa fraud, commit dishonest acts, break/bend the rules and laws then you don't care.  You just don't want me to advise other people to do it?  What I did wasn't visa fraud, it wasn't dishonest, it didn't bend OR break any rules or laws, it wasn't even remotely close...we have a certified immigration attorney with thousands of visas under his belt also saying it wasn't....so why even say anything about visa fraud??? unless you think it is?  If that is the case, you think what I did was visa fraud  (Follow closely here Ray...it's about to get interesting).....and you don't want me to advise others to commit visa fraud....and if that's the case....TA DAH!!!!!! Your accusing me of promoting what?  Let me hear someone in the Back of the room shout it out!!!!!........VISA FRAUD!!!!!!  You can answer now Ray....Here's a direct question so you don't miss it....do you or do you NOT think what I did was visa fraud, dishonest, breaking or bending the rules/law?  If not, then why even bring up "visa fraud" with the other nice little catch phrases you used if it wasn't an insinuation?  Because it certainly had absolutely nothing at all to do with what I was saying.  If you do, then you just made yourself out to be a complete liar by saying your not accusing me of promoting visa fraud, breaking laws or being dishonest.  Which is it my good man? Or do you prefer to attempt to change your story or use the words I described about how I felt?  Why not try making an argument with facts?  

Are we having fun yet peoples?    Are we beginning to see any particular pattern with what I'm not being discretly accused of?  I forgot...it's all in my head.  

Sean, listen VERY carefully. I’m only going to say this one more time.

NOBODY accused you of breaking any laws, committing visa fraud or being dishonest, so please quit playing the poor victim!

Ok Ray, tell me one more time what your NOT accusing me of.

Sean, once AGAIN, I really don't care that you had a fake wedding ceremony.

But when you advised others that having a fake wedding and using a K-1 was a good idea, then it's time to disagree.

so for the rest of the folks out there contemplating having a fake wedding and then using the K-1, DON'T DO IT!

Fake wedding?  Are we using what I felt about a party and what it meant to me personally or are we using facts?   Your actually trying to make someone reading this believe that what I feel is fact?  Or are you simply trying to make an argument just for the sake of making one?  Bored?  Nothing else to do?  LOLOLOL.  Ok, a "fake" wedding isn't illegal.  But obviously your very passionate about me not advising others to do it....yes?  So, in your mind....there Is something wrong with it...yes?  Because as you said....you don't want me to advise doing it.  Yes?  OK, it isn't illegal, but you think something is wrong with it.  You've used terms and phrases to make your arugment like.... "visa fraud", "circumvent the rules", "some folks get married and attempt to hide it", "wedding band on her finger", "slip of the tongue", "red flags", "attempting to have a wedding overseas", "recorded or not", "how serious immigration officers take visa fraud", "bordering on visa fraud", "fake" or unrecorded marriages"(linked together), "unregistered ceremony", "trick questions" in an attempt to trip ladies up", "wrong answers to questions or percieved untruthfulness", "your advice could bring much harm and suffering".    These are phrases used to help give support to your opinion, yes?  Or am I imagining the words I'm reading also.  They're not taken out of context....you inserted them to help formulate a thought process about "why" you think I am wrong, Yes?  Or was you trying to push two totally unrelated ideas into one thought?  Me, I think it was (Ok people....give me a drum roll) Insinuations!!!!!!!  what would you think?  That your masterfully combining two unrelated thoughts together into one at an attempt to save precious "typing time" off your life?

Let me ask you something.....What difference does it make WHAT I call a legitimate blessing of the rings ceremony?  You read...."like a wedding, but technically not" and went ballistic.  Then you got on this kick "fake wedding" "fake wedding" "fake wedding or unregistered wedding"  "unregistered wedding"  "unregistered wedding wedding ceremony"  "wedding ceremony....trying to commit visa fraud, dishonesty, circumventing the rules!!!!!!!!"  "It's ok for you to do it, but don't advise others to do it".  

Let me clue you in on something....a blessing of the rings ceremony is not even CLOSE to being a wedding.  No vows were exchanged, No "I pronounce you man and wife" was uttered or heard, No papers of any kind was signed.....this was not, is not and will never be a wedding in any fashion.  So what if I want to call it a fake wedding?  So what if I say....in my heart she's already my wife.  Don't others say that too?  Does it mean they are married?  Does it mean because I thought of it as a fake wedding that it was a sneaky underhanded dishonest thing to do?  If I say, "let's go play paintball and pretend like we kill each other".....I'm promoting killing and murder, right?  

I don't see anything wrong with having a party either and I NEVER said that I did. Don't listen to what Sean said I said, listen to what I actually said.

Ok Ray, let's hear it ONE more time, just so the people in the back room can hear you. LOLOLOLOL.

I am not talking about parties. I'm talking about "fake wedding ceremonies". If somebody wants to have a fake wedding ceremony and then have his fiancée use a K-1 visa, that's up to him and I really don't care.

My whole point is making folks aware that having a fake wedding has the potential to cause big problems for your fiancée when she goes for her visa interview or at her POE.

IMO, that was more than just a “party”. It was a “fake wedding”.

OH, in your opinion huh?  Now it's moved from what I felt...to your opinion, which by the way is a blessing of the rings ceremony is a "fake" wedding.  Yes?  That's what I am reading, right?  So, in order for you to be right.....a blessing of the rings ceremony must be more than just a party. LOLOLOLOLOL.  Of course it does, because if a blessing of the rings ceremony was only...."a blessing of the rings ceremony" then that would make you....(dare we even think it?)  Wrong!!    ROFLMAOOOOOOOOOOO   It doesn't matter what anyone calls it dude....it's still only a blessing of the rings ceremony. LOLOLOLOLOL.  I know, I will call it a "pre-vasectomy" because we all know that running joke about sex being phase out after marriage. LOLOLOLOLOL.  Now your against surgery with unlicensed surgeons.    Roflmaooooo Now I promoting willful medical malpractice.  LOLOLOL.  

What was that again Ray?

IMO, that was more than just a “party”. It was a “fake wedding”.

Can all the people in the back row give me a "Whoop, there it is!!!"   ROFLMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

Ok, now it went from how I described it felt to me to honestly being your opinion and thats what clearly is the whole entire basis for your argument.  LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

What....what....one more, for the kids at home tuning in.

A young lady married in a non-legal, religious wedding ceremony may very likely consider herself married according to her religious beliefs. If she goes into the interview with that mindset, it could cause a huge misunderstanding, especially where the consular adjudicators are actively looking for any evidence of fraud.

....Just make sure that the young lady who participated in one of those non-legal religious ceremonies is fully aware of what could happen if she says the wrong thing during the visa interview or during her border clearance interview on arrival stateside. To be safe, she should be coached to remove any wedding bands, not bring any photos of what may be misconstrued as a legal wedding ceremony, and not to refer to her sponsoring fiancé as her "husband". All of these seemingly harmless things have caused problems for other young ladies before.

Ok, here we are actually putting into your side of the argument...."a non-legal religious wedding ceremony"  Wait a minute cowboy....there was no wedding ceremony.  NEXT...

"May very well consider herself married according to her religious beliefs".....Yes, if she is a living cartoon character and worships Sponge Bob Square Pants.  Are the smilelys starting to talk back to you Ray? LOLOLL.  NEXT....

"Make sure the young lady who participated in a non-legal religious ceremony (you forgot to put "wedding" in there Ray) is fully aware of what could happen if she says the wrong thing during...blah blah blah."  Now it's not a "wedding", its ANY religious ceremony I take it.  Not only that...your actually writing that she needs to remember to tell the truth about Not being married when she NEVER was married in the first place.  Why do I think you so cleaverly insinuated this?  Well let's look after that....you said "coach her to remove wedding bands", "photos misconstrued as legal wedding ceremony", "don't call the man "husband""  that these are "seemingly harmless things"....DUH!!!!!! To someone trying to be sneaky, dishonest and "circumvent the rules"  I suppose it would be.  But to someone who isn't married, not wearing a wedding band to begin with, doesn't have anyone to call "husband"...its not a problem.  I suppose this isn't an insinuation of any kind either?  

Ray, dude.....you lost this one.  Be gracious.  I tried to be, until you had to grasped for a thread.  You've insinuated I have commited dishonest acts and I am promoting them.  Anyone with an reading level of more than a 4th grader can see that.  You now practically demand that what  isn't a wedding ceremony but just that.  It isn't, never will be dude.  

By the way...I'll write the Pope and let him know that Ray thinks the Blessing of the rings ceremony should be titled "Fake Wedding Ceremony"....because he needs it for a debate.

Don't forget to answer my question Ray, if you don't mind.  It's in bold type for you.  Just answer the question as it's worded please.  After all...this whole thing is about wether or not your accusing me of anything.  We both know the answer to that.  Try a little better misdirection, maybe that will help.  


Prison Wine anyone?  

Release the Doves!!!!!!!  ROFLMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[doombug]

At this point, I think it's only fair that Ray rebut with a 20,000 word essay on how a ring is forged.

[Ray]

                                     

[william3rd]

Tolkien already discussed that in detail in the first part of the Fellowship of the Ring. Just paste that in. . . . .

[papi]

Go ahead and file for a K-1 - it's not going to get her here any faster than a K-3.

Utopia, I have been told otherwise by both immigration lawyers and guys going through the process.

Sean! holy moly! cliffs notes sir

[william3rd]

Processing reports- Posted March 15, 2007 USCIS

K-3 MSC- 09/13/06
K-1 CSC- 09/13/06
      VSC- 09/13/06

No K listings for TSC or NSC since they all seem to end up at CSC.

[papi]

someone wrote on another forum that the former owner of CaliVip has been waiting a year for his wife. Nelson tells me K1 visas run 6 months. I guess if it is now the same it makes sense to marry in colombia and make the family happy. Yet, not all MOB are functional so having 3 months together is not a terrible thing either

[utopiacowboy]

Check out www.visajourney.com for actual experiences. The processing dates on the uscis site are a worst case scenario and many petitions are approved faster than the dates given. There is a Colombia group of posters there.

[jediknight]

good grief sean...and you're a moderator? you should start by moderating that rant of a post. look, if you're happy with what you did you don't have to convince the world that you are right, trust me, we can decide for ourselves whether the advice you or ray give is good or not. that is what these boards are for, to post opinions so that others can listen to or ignore them. stop feeling like you have to prove you are right and have to get in the last word..let it go man,... just let it go and move on.
JK

[sean126]

JK,

I wasn't mad nor was ranting because I was mad.  Unless I have an angry laugh.  Opinions?....Yes.   Being accused of a crime?  I don't think you can use 30 words or less in a rebuttal.  Ray's a worthy debating adversary (whom I respect) which appears to have been given the characteristic of infallibility somewhere down the line.  

I'm not allowed to post as a regular poster now?  I guess I could possibly get a different ID when I post.  Actually, that's a good idea.  I could just debate with myself.LOLOLOLOL  (sorry if I beat someone to the punch)

Oddly enough, my hand isn't cramping up after writing this. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

[jediknight]

sean, who said anything about being mad or angry? a rant doesn't have to be angry or violent. a rant also means writings that are extravagant, exceeding reasonable bounds, which your post certainly was.
ray is very knowledgeable when it comes to visa information and has consistantly given true and sound advice. from the attention that you are giving this issue it seems like that rubs you the wrong way and you're trying to prove him wrong, knock him down a notch or two, unsuccessfully i will add.
are you familiar with the term self control? please do yourself and all of us a favor, walk away. you've said what needed to be said, your argument has been made, rest your case and let us decide. you need to get over yourself, really, you are not that great.
JK

[sean126]

Mr. Helper,


We can set boundaries then on what a "rant" is.  How about how many times someone can defend himself also.  What say ye???  100 words or more=rant?  300+?  Throw out a number, I would hate of being accused of using my position for personal gain or a soap box.  LOLOLOLOL.  Yeah, it doesn't matter if it's humorous, angry, sad or a  news article. Let's have a blanket word count.

When have I ever not agreed that Ray was very knowledgeable, helpful and that I respect him?

Are you familiar with the terms...liar, provoking, instigator?  Perhaps you should actually read what someone rights.  If someone says "I'm not accusing you of being a child molester" and procedes to compare you or your situation with hypothetical stories of men having sex with 10 year olds, 12 year olds...ect.  Theres only two options to think.  Either he's lying about accusing you OR he is provoking you out of sheer boredom.  

Your telling me you won't defend yourself?  Oh, I shouldn't...because it's Ray.  I forgot. LOLOLOLOLOLOL.  I'll remind you of "getting overself" when you feel the urge to defend yourself just as much as someone is feeling the urge to get you going and then lying about it.  I'm not knocking someone down any notches.  I'm a fan of Ray also.  I guess it's safe to say that even though "someone" has responded to 99% of my responses....he's not trying to knock anyone down a few notches, he's getting over himself.  I guess we can call it casually defending one's self in that particular case, huh?  No, that sounds too combative.  Let's call it "responding nonchalantly."  Wouldn't want to put anyone in the same category as myself.  And your responses are considered....what JK?  Defensive, offensive, casual, setting someone straight, putting someone in his place, breezy, or nonchalant? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

Where was all this when someone else was responding to what I wrote? LOLOLOLOL.


Be careful when responding to this....we need to get over ourselves.    Kind of racking up the responses about the same issue here a little.  As other people like to advise....you can always hit the "ignore" button. LOLOLOLOLOL.

Oh, I'm sorry....was I "insinuating" something or just unintentionally "provoking" you?  ROFLMAOOOOO.
You obviously have a point to prove.  I guess you and a select few are the only ones allowed to do that.

(Until my new alternate ID is approved....I'm not speaking as a moderator,for those that can't tell a difference.)

 excessive baiting, flaming, and not letting a subject drop.  In general...a "nutjob".

[flipflop]

Its not important what we think of Seans party. Whats important is that we dont have newbie dot com up in this mofo 6 months for now lookin for the guy who told him to have a fake wedding because his GCG was turned around at the border. Planet loves credibility is on the line

[papi]

Pretty Boy, you can't join team nutjob until your spanish improves. Until then, we do have openings in the whackjob area 

[doombug]

Since the founding of this great Internet, there has never been a confirmed sighting of a forum moderator--warning--himself.

Ladies and genitals, jot this date down in your journals. This ranks on par with snapping a bona fide photo of that scaredy-cat, Loch Ness lizard thing.

[Disclaimer: The above was said in jest.]

[doombug]

...because his GCG was turned around at the border.

Green Card Girl? (Or for those that swing that way, Green Card Guy?)

[jediknight]

sean, what makes you look foolish and weak is that you're devoting so much time and energy defending yourself against someone who is of no importance in your life. plus you're doing it with sarcasm, which by the way, is the lowest form of wit. i don't have anything to prove, you're doing just fine all by yourself so consider this my last response to someone who, in the grand scheme of things, is not important.
JK