Subject: NCO resolution (fwd)

From: ECHO WANG <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1993 12:08:03 -0400 (EDT)

Zhang Feng and all the colleagues,

	Here is a mail from the LAD net's organizer.  Hope it can be of some
help to all of you in understandig the situation of current interests conflit
te  beween the LAD's and LAS's.  

	Zhang Feng, hope this could be more or less helpful for drafting your
mostion.  Good luck!

	Thanks everybody for taking your time and read this.

Wang Jing

Forwarded message:
> From [email-masked] Fri Aug 20 11:24:22 1993
> Date:         Fri, 20 Aug 93 11:22:41 EDT
> From: Mi MI <[email-masked]>
> Subject:      NCO resolution
> To: Qi Bing <[email-masked]>, IFCSS HQ <[email-masked]>,
>         ECHO WANG <ejwang>, Liqun Dong <[email-masked]>
> 
> 
> Ms. Wang Jing
> 
> Hi. I, Mi Mi, from lads-net fully support your proposal on NCO.
> As matter of fact, I had seen a lot of confusion and fighting on the net
> when LCnet was connected with Yeh Shannon. As we lads-net saw the IFCSS
> lost its steam to push CSPA implementation further, all of us lads were
> somewhat disappointed. When we learnt that Liu Chengyan was invited to
> attend IFCSS Teleconference last week, we decided to take a step forward.
> Needless to say, all of us lads-netters and committee members appreciate
> the tremonduous eforts to achieve CSPA and its implementation. Whatever
> decided by IFCSS for post-CSPA policy change is understandable. We as
> beneficiaries of past IFCSS eforts can not ask more, otherwise we are
> too greedy and selfish. To our LC brothers and sisters, we the lads
> committee firmly believe, that communication and cooperation, mutual
> understanding and solidarity are what we want. After one week
> communication, we get very positive response from our LCnet committee.
> 
> As matter of fact, many ECers are paying their attention to somewhere
> else. While lads are located in China's quota, and will be possibly
> jamming  China's quota for many years to come, their principals are
> not so much concerned about the waiting period. As one of my friends
> pointed out, his wife can wait 6 year until her H-1 visa expires. During
> that time, he probably gets citizenship, and in no way he should panic.
> Some minor children can wait even longer. My daughter is 9. My only
> concern is she gets her GC when she is ready for college. That is
> almost ten years later. Of course some elder children are closer to
> college and they are worried. But the population is quite small. So the
> most urgent problem is for LCs, not for lads.
> 
> As matter of fact, passing another CSPA is almost impossible. What we
> can do is to make room for LC by removing lads from China quota.
> As the new interpretation made clear by Madam Rita Boie, IIers with
> Advanced Parole can apply under CSPA. Further, the possibility of
> allowing IIers with only Work Permits, even without any thing may be
> allowed to apply also. With most CSPAerS  have filed already,
> their lads inevitably have gotten more favorable priority dates
> then anyone else, i.e., they are queued much ahead of the others.
> So the policy change does not effect CSS lads too much, unless for
> someone who is still in China. But the impact on the LC is imminent.
> Those IIer lads will compete with LC, worse, be queued ahead of them.
> When the spirit of CSPA is humanitarian and protection, it will be
> ridiculous and self-destructive for IFCSS to oppose the inclusion
> of these IIers. The best and only strategy for IFCSS, is to work
> toward world quota.
> 
> I think, this point, as a major task aimed at helping our LC
> brothers and sisters, should be included in your resolution.
> 
> Sincerely yours,
> 
> Mi Mi
> 
> Member of
> Lads-net Committee
> 'Mi Mi               ECHO WANG            8/20/93 NCO's Resolution
>