Still waiting oh great sperm burper!
"Sergei" wrote in message
news:8f8ctvoa5et71m5vsiaauumt1jpjcp07fs@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 19:23:45 GMT, "Steve"
> wrote:
>
> >On what basis would it be me? Other than your sperm-burped out opinion?
> >
> >"Sergei" wrote in message
> >news:s17ctvktmnhoqtbtgkbvlktne7b9hmihv7@4ax.com...
> >> Hi folks,
> >>
> >> we have here another aikido like troll claiming "it wasn't me" - LOL
> >>
>
>
> Just check your own post below which gave us the clue and then
> tracking you down was just a child's play - if you think that invented
> in 97 mail2news remailers can hide your ID today then thing again you
> moron.
>
> Here is your post with clue at the bottom:
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 17:08:47 -0700, "Steve"
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Andrew Miller" wrote in message
> >news:IM5Bb.39854$bC.35593@clgrps13...
> >> Before you even start scratching your head to try to invent something
> >> creative here I'll give you a hand.
> >>
> >> In my reply I gave you info about 3 facts -
> >>
> >> (1) a difference between visa sticker's validity and actual admission
> >> granted
> >>
> >Knew Already, I only put that information in to show that they were
eligable
> >to stay that long.
> >> (2) info that your family should leave Canada upon expiration of their
> >> admission or apply for extension and that process takes about 6 weeks
at
> >> present. You can verify it here:
> >>
> >> http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/times/process-in.html
> >>
> >Actually its 53 days! I guess you were kind of wrong on that one??????
> >> (3) info that fact of applying for extension in itself doesn't extend
> >their
> >> status. They may remain in Canada after applying for extension
(providing
> >> that application was submitted before expiration of granted admission)
> >under
> >> so called "implied status", but if application is refused then they are
> >out
> >> of status from the day their original admission expired.
> >>
> >> Can you now point exactly which of those 3 infos are false?
> >>
> >Actually you said that they would be here illegally, let me quote you:
> >
> >"Note that fact of
> >sending application doesn't make their stay legal."
> >
> >Which was also misleading and incorrect.
> >
> >Andrew, here is your new Mantra, please repeat until you have it
memorized:
> >
> >Would you like fried with that?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >ant
>
> * * * * * * * * * *
|
|
|
|