- jeffree star without makeup. Jeffree Star; Jeffree Star. Mr. Anderson
- jeffrey star no makeup.
- jeffree star no makeup. jefree star without makeup.
- Jeffree Star
- a kiss from jeffree star.
- jeffrey star no makeup.
- Jeffree Star and Hanna Beth
- Aside from the makeup line
- jeffree star as a man.
- jefree star no makeup. jeffree
- jeffree star as a man.
- jeffree star no makeup. jeffree star with no makeup.
- jeffree star tattoos.
- jeffree star no makeup. Jeffree Star; Jeffree Star. AppleScruff1
- jefree star no makeup. mrs question Jeffree+star; mrs question Jeffree+star
- Hi, my name#39;s Jeffree Star and
- Jeffree Star or Share
- finishing touches jeffree
- To dress how he wants without
images Aside from the makeup line 
wallpaper jeffree star without makeup. Jeffree Star; Jeffree Star. Mr. Anderson
2011 jeffrey star no makeup.
more...
more...
2010 jeffree star no makeup. jefree star without makeup.
more...
hair Jeffree Star
more...
hot a kiss from jeffree star.
more...
house Jeffree Star or Share
tattoo jeffrey star no makeup.
more...
pictures Jeffree Star and Hanna Beth
dresses jeffree star no makeup. jeffree star with no makeup.
more...
makeup jeffree star as a man.
girlfriend jeffree star no makeup. Jeffree Star; Jeffree Star. AppleScruff1
hairstyles jeffree star as a man.
Source URL: http://anirban-serendipitous.blogspot.com/2011/06/jefree-star-no-makeup.html
Visit anirban serendipitous for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
sanju_dba
09-09 01:20 PM
did any one did math...
EB1 - all current
|
|
\/
EB2 - World current
|
|
\/
EB2 - India / China
|
| ( When above EB2 India/China gets current 2-3years? )
\/
EB3 All
|
|
\/
EB3 I/C ( When EB1 , EB2 is Current , all visa numbers will flood to EB3 right ? so may be in 4-5 years EB3 may get current ? )
EB1 - all current
|
|
\/
EB2 - World current
|
|
\/
EB2 - India / China
|
| ( When above EB2 India/China gets current 2-3years? )
\/
EB3 All
|
|
\/
EB3 I/C ( When EB1 , EB2 is Current , all visa numbers will flood to EB3 right ? so may be in 4-5 years EB3 may get current ? )
wallpaper jeffree star without makeup. Jeffree Star; Jeffree Star. Mr. Anderson
maximus777
06-08 06:17 PM
Plain and simple. From now on just imagine that you are working in one of those persian gulf countries - work on a visa as long as you work. This way its less stressful. If you have immigration intent, then enter illegally. :mad:
arnab221
09-10 12:26 PM
ouch that is so ironic.... 'Equine Cruelty'?? What about 'immigrant cruelty'?
some of the priorities in this country are all screwed up...
That shows the on what priority we are on their list . We are below horse also :D
remember a Horse a US Citizen horse while you are not , so cruelty to a US citizen is always before cruelty to aliens .
Man sees a woman getting chased by a dog.When the dog is about to bite the woman,
the man intervenes and kicks the dog.
A reporter was seeing all this.He said "That was great.
I'll definitely publish this in newspaper.Tomorrow the headline will be
'LOCAL HERO SAVES LADY FROM A DOG'."
The man replied "Thank you, but I'm not from here.I am from US". Reporter " OK.
Then the headline will be
US CITIZEN SAVES WOMAN FROM A DOG".
Man: Actually, I live in US but I'm not a US citizen.
I'm a Pa****i national".
Next day, the headline in the paper read .... .... .... .... .... .... ........ .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ....
TERRORIST ATTACKS A LOCAL DOG
* This Joke is copied from the internet and in no way reflects my personal feelings . This is just for having some fun and cheering us up .
some of the priorities in this country are all screwed up...
That shows the on what priority we are on their list . We are below horse also :D
remember a Horse a US Citizen horse while you are not , so cruelty to a US citizen is always before cruelty to aliens .
Man sees a woman getting chased by a dog.When the dog is about to bite the woman,
the man intervenes and kicks the dog.
A reporter was seeing all this.He said "That was great.
I'll definitely publish this in newspaper.Tomorrow the headline will be
'LOCAL HERO SAVES LADY FROM A DOG'."
The man replied "Thank you, but I'm not from here.I am from US". Reporter " OK.
Then the headline will be
US CITIZEN SAVES WOMAN FROM A DOG".
Man: Actually, I live in US but I'm not a US citizen.
I'm a Pa****i national".
Next day, the headline in the paper read .... .... .... .... .... .... ........ .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ....
TERRORIST ATTACKS A LOCAL DOG
* This Joke is copied from the internet and in no way reflects my personal feelings . This is just for having some fun and cheering us up .
2011 jeffrey star no makeup.
FrankZulu
01-31 08:54 AM
Desi3933, I appreciate the time you have taken to explain the details for people in this situation.
more...
DSLStart
09-10 02:33 PM
curretnly debating on HR6020 about illegal immigrants.
Jaime
09-18 09:15 PM
First, I would like to congratulate everyone who contributed to the success of the DC rally on Sep 18, 2007...
I was there and I am proud of our ImmigrationVoice members for this FANTASTIC effort!
We are just starting and taking baby steps with these kind of activities...So, anything I mention below is not a critic, but a humble feedback/opinion...Please don't get offended.
1. We must immediately change our name to LegalImmigrationVoice.org( LIV.org)...But still Immigrationvoice.org should work....This should be done ASAP...like within next week...Please conduct a poll for this ASAP.
2. We must/should always wear formal suits for these kind of rally....this would definitely give us a very high status and definitely there will not be any confusion if the rally is by legal or illegal immigrants. Even if it is hot summer, we must stick to this dress code...
3. In all the signs we had today, we need to have one line clearly in bold as "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" - bold and clear..
Also, all our T-shirts should have
"Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" in the back
4. One of the rally participants told me that a guide was telling a tourists bus passengers quote "these folks are illegal immigrants...", the rally participant who heard this went to the guide and explained that we are legal immigrants...if you think the guide is not smart enough to read our signs and understand that we are legal immigrants, read next point...
5. On the rally route, one gentleman, who was dressed in suit, looked well educated came up to me and asked what we are concerned about...I told him that green card process for Legal Immigrants is taking between 5-10 years and we are requesting to expedite it.....so it is clear that all our signs need this text at the bottom "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants"
We cannot be perfect the first or second time....Lets learn from this rally....
A pat in the back to all those who attended the rally....
Good Luck
I totally agree, even the congressman that addressed us had the two (legal and illegal confused and lumped together) He was great otherwise, but it's just that Congress and Americans are so used to associating the two, or they plain don't know about "legal highly-skilled". A major next step we need to undertake is education! Whenever we've explained the difference to our American friends they wholeheartedly support us!
I was there and I am proud of our ImmigrationVoice members for this FANTASTIC effort!
We are just starting and taking baby steps with these kind of activities...So, anything I mention below is not a critic, but a humble feedback/opinion...Please don't get offended.
1. We must immediately change our name to LegalImmigrationVoice.org( LIV.org)...But still Immigrationvoice.org should work....This should be done ASAP...like within next week...Please conduct a poll for this ASAP.
2. We must/should always wear formal suits for these kind of rally....this would definitely give us a very high status and definitely there will not be any confusion if the rally is by legal or illegal immigrants. Even if it is hot summer, we must stick to this dress code...
3. In all the signs we had today, we need to have one line clearly in bold as "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" - bold and clear..
Also, all our T-shirts should have
"Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" in the back
4. One of the rally participants told me that a guide was telling a tourists bus passengers quote "these folks are illegal immigrants...", the rally participant who heard this went to the guide and explained that we are legal immigrants...if you think the guide is not smart enough to read our signs and understand that we are legal immigrants, read next point...
5. On the rally route, one gentleman, who was dressed in suit, looked well educated came up to me and asked what we are concerned about...I told him that green card process for Legal Immigrants is taking between 5-10 years and we are requesting to expedite it.....so it is clear that all our signs need this text at the bottom "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants"
We cannot be perfect the first or second time....Lets learn from this rally....
A pat in the back to all those who attended the rally....
Good Luck
I totally agree, even the congressman that addressed us had the two (legal and illegal confused and lumped together) He was great otherwise, but it's just that Congress and Americans are so used to associating the two, or they plain don't know about "legal highly-skilled". A major next step we need to undertake is education! Whenever we've explained the difference to our American friends they wholeheartedly support us!
more...
coolmanasip
03-07 08:45 AM
Guys....like everyone else I have been doing exhaustive research on this subject for last month or so.....I have resigned this week from my job and have decided to use AC21...... following are answers to some of your questions...
New Employer support - There is no need for the new employer to support the GC process.....After you file 485, the process is yours as an individual and not of any employer....All you are saying is that my I-140 was once approved with some employer and USCIS took forever (read more than 180 days) to give me my green card......so as long as your job is in the same profession (read occupational classification) you are okay....so NO, the new employer does not need to support the process....all they have to say in the employement verification letter is that we intend to hire this person on permenant basis after getting his Green Card...... Please read Yates Memo of 2005 and it will tell you all there is to know about AC21.....
Lawyer Support and Expenses------- I can imagine lawyers trying to make whatever case for asking whatever ammount of money for AC21 as that is a new business area for them?----- I do not think you need a lawyer for this.....there are plenty of letters on the net that show the template....also, if you are sure your employer is not going to revoke the I-140 then you are not even required to send the letter untill if and when USCIS asks for employement verification letter.....
As per charges from RK and Murthy...
Rajiv Khanna - $3000 for primary +$1000 per dependent
Murthy - $2000....
I have done some exhaustive research on this AC21 crap and have decided to change the employment......
New Employer support - There is no need for the new employer to support the GC process.....After you file 485, the process is yours as an individual and not of any employer....All you are saying is that my I-140 was once approved with some employer and USCIS took forever (read more than 180 days) to give me my green card......so as long as your job is in the same profession (read occupational classification) you are okay....so NO, the new employer does not need to support the process....all they have to say in the employement verification letter is that we intend to hire this person on permenant basis after getting his Green Card...... Please read Yates Memo of 2005 and it will tell you all there is to know about AC21.....
Lawyer Support and Expenses------- I can imagine lawyers trying to make whatever case for asking whatever ammount of money for AC21 as that is a new business area for them?----- I do not think you need a lawyer for this.....there are plenty of letters on the net that show the template....also, if you are sure your employer is not going to revoke the I-140 then you are not even required to send the letter untill if and when USCIS asks for employement verification letter.....
As per charges from RK and Murthy...
Rajiv Khanna - $3000 for primary +$1000 per dependent
Murthy - $2000....
I have done some exhaustive research on this AC21 crap and have decided to change the employment......
2010 jeffree star no makeup. jefree star without makeup.
babu123
07-13 01:36 PM
What Murthy did is right job. We should not blame her as she did it lately.
I am not her client.
There are so many lawyers in US, But none of them wrote letter to USCIS.
This is not the time to blame her. This is the time to unite with her and do protest. Remember she is asking on our behalf.
I am not her client.
There are so many lawyers in US, But none of them wrote letter to USCIS.
This is not the time to blame her. This is the time to unite with her and do protest. Remember she is asking on our behalf.
more...
gsc999
04-23 10:44 AM
This meeting was a success since IV was able to display support for the bill and also then follow up after the meeting. IV core members worked hard to make this event a success and we are happy to report this.
Many thanks to gsc999 for bringing a banner and wearing IV T shirt
---
Pappu, thank you for your kind words. I just had the T-shirt. Canadian_Dream brought the banner. Canadian_dream has been a very active member behind the scenes. Both of us coordinated this effort so that we could share the work. Next time we promise to be better prepared.
Go Northern California Group, Go IV!
Many thanks to gsc999 for bringing a banner and wearing IV T shirt
---
Pappu, thank you for your kind words. I just had the T-shirt. Canadian_Dream brought the banner. Canadian_dream has been a very active member behind the scenes. Both of us coordinated this effort so that we could share the work. Next time we promise to be better prepared.
Go Northern California Group, Go IV!
hair Jeffree Star
map_boiler
07-18 08:43 AM
Our packet was delivered to NSC on July 2nd at 7:55 am...
more...
feedfront
09-21 12:23 PM
Hi Guys,
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.
Don't worry too much, just follow the instructions and respond. Well, I will suggest to use your current employer and their attorney as paperword will be smooth, efficient and fast.
You can hold your H1 transfer for a week or two till you don't respond.
I think your attorney (whoever you pick to work on RFE) will definitely mention AC-21 to keep it issueless.
I have also switched my employer and not filed AC-21. I've been sent RFE and that's what my attorney will do (I assume). I had asked him before (after switching job) if I needed to file AC21 letter. He said it's not mandatory and added that it can be handled if any RFEs are issued. Well, I did not send AC21 because he was asking for fee and I did not want to DIY project on such important. He's my previous employer's attorney.
I think for these RFEs you don't need great attorney as case is not complex. I think anything will work as long as you've not misused any GC's requirements.
Good Luck!
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.
Don't worry too much, just follow the instructions and respond. Well, I will suggest to use your current employer and their attorney as paperword will be smooth, efficient and fast.
You can hold your H1 transfer for a week or two till you don't respond.
I think your attorney (whoever you pick to work on RFE) will definitely mention AC-21 to keep it issueless.
I have also switched my employer and not filed AC-21. I've been sent RFE and that's what my attorney will do (I assume). I had asked him before (after switching job) if I needed to file AC21 letter. He said it's not mandatory and added that it can be handled if any RFEs are issued. Well, I did not send AC21 because he was asking for fee and I did not want to DIY project on such important. He's my previous employer's attorney.
I think for these RFEs you don't need great attorney as case is not complex. I think anything will work as long as you've not misused any GC's requirements.
Good Luck!
hot a kiss from jeffree star.
new_horizon
06-10 04:08 PM
Done
more...
house Jeffree Star or Share
Kodi
04-02 10:15 AM
bump
tattoo jeffrey star no makeup.
bostonqa
04-24 01:33 PM
I also got my "Card production ordered" status few days back.
however I also received a mail for biometrics appointment of 05/02?
the biometrics letter date is 4/14 and my "Card production" status change was on 04/21.
why would they send me a biometrics appointment and then approve my 485 and issue me a GC? is this common?
should I still go for the biometrics appointment or just ignore it, I'm assuming that i'd have my physical GC in had before 05/02
---------------------------------------------
PD - JULY 2003 EB2 RIR
Concurrent I-140/I-485: No (I-140 Approved Earlier)
Mailed From State: MA
Mailed to (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Received at (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Transferred to TSC (state Yes/No): Yes
485 Receipt Date : June 14th 2007
485 Notice Date : July 2nd 2007
MY FP Completed : 08/02
485 LUD - 08/02, 08/02
however I also received a mail for biometrics appointment of 05/02?
the biometrics letter date is 4/14 and my "Card production" status change was on 04/21.
why would they send me a biometrics appointment and then approve my 485 and issue me a GC? is this common?
should I still go for the biometrics appointment or just ignore it, I'm assuming that i'd have my physical GC in had before 05/02
---------------------------------------------
PD - JULY 2003 EB2 RIR
Concurrent I-140/I-485: No (I-140 Approved Earlier)
Mailed From State: MA
Mailed to (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Received at (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Transferred to TSC (state Yes/No): Yes
485 Receipt Date : June 14th 2007
485 Notice Date : July 2nd 2007
MY FP Completed : 08/02
485 LUD - 08/02, 08/02
more...
pictures Jeffree Star and Hanna Beth
Ahimsa
11-08 02:49 PM
Hi
I live in Iselin
My labor filed in Nov 2003 as NY EB3 RIR
Not yet approved -- "In Process"
I live in Iselin
My labor filed in Nov 2003 as NY EB3 RIR
Not yet approved -- "In Process"
dresses jeffree star no makeup. jeffree star with no makeup.
pappu
01-11 01:21 PM
Hi:
I just joined the chapter.
Would love to be able to volnteer my services to this cause. How can I help? Also it may be a good idea to start a local support group for those of us in line waiting for this immigration hell to be over...may be a get together of some sort....
Wishin' for a better future ahead for all us immigration victims
PD for self: August 03
Labor Cert: pending
PD for husband: Dec 03
Labor Cert & I-140: appoved.
welcome.
pls contact varsha and others to start chapter activities.
varsha, pls plan some action items for the chapter.
I just joined the chapter.
Would love to be able to volnteer my services to this cause. How can I help? Also it may be a good idea to start a local support group for those of us in line waiting for this immigration hell to be over...may be a get together of some sort....
Wishin' for a better future ahead for all us immigration victims
PD for self: August 03
Labor Cert: pending
PD for husband: Dec 03
Labor Cert & I-140: appoved.
welcome.
pls contact varsha and others to start chapter activities.
varsha, pls plan some action items for the chapter.
more...
makeup jeffree star as a man.
sodh
07-24 06:02 PM
What i have heard is that the recent I140 approvals (2006/07) contains A#.
Only the ones who were on OPT.
Only the ones who were on OPT.
girlfriend jeffree star no makeup. Jeffree Star; Jeffree Star. AppleScruff1
perm2gc
12-28 05:35 PM
Guys. Let all of us give a new year gift to our core team by posting about IV in all the forums which we have access.It won't cost you a penny but a 15 minutes of your time.I know everyone are busy but 15 minutes is not too much to spend for guys who are working hard for our cause.I know many people are silently browsing the thread than the people who are posting .Guys don't be behind the doors all the times.You have to come out sometimes and this is the time for you to show little respect to the core team.
hairstyles jeffree star as a man.
jjava100
07-01 03:07 PM
Thank you for contacting me to share your views about Senate Amendment 4319 to the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act (H.R. 4213). I appreciate the time you have taken to correspond with me.
In my position as a United States Senator, I benefit greatly by hearing a wide spectrum of opinions expressed by Oregonians. I listen carefully to these views as I study each issue and decide how to vote on legislation which comes before the Senate. On any issue, I value your thoughts and ideas.
Again, I appreciate your feedback. I have made note of your concerns, and I will certainly keep them in mind. Please keep in touch.
All my best,
In my position as a United States Senator, I benefit greatly by hearing a wide spectrum of opinions expressed by Oregonians. I listen carefully to these views as I study each issue and decide how to vote on legislation which comes before the Senate. On any issue, I value your thoughts and ideas.
Again, I appreciate your feedback. I have made note of your concerns, and I will certainly keep them in mind. Please keep in touch.
All my best,
rockstart
03-10 11:07 AM
Guru's
I have a small doubt on AC -21 especially the same / similar interpretation. in Perm Application there are two places where there is job description. One is Section H field 11 ( Job Opportunity/ job duties) and other one is Section F field 2 ( Prevailing Wage/ SOC code) now both define what the job is the Section H is company specific and Section F is list of USCIS codes under which this particular job falls as subset.
The question is will USCIS judge using section F or Section H for same/ similar interpretation because Section F is pretty Generic and as long as you are in same field it works example in IT if you were say DBA and now data modeler or Systems Analyst or coder they are pretty much same. Here is an example of one such code
15-1051 Computer Systems Analysts
Analyze science, engineering, business, and all other data processing problems for application to electronic data processing systems. Analyze user requirements, procedures, and problems to automate or improve existing systems and review computer system capabilities, workflow, and scheduling limitations. May analyze or recommend commercially available software. Exclude persons working primarily as "Engineers" (17-2011 through 17-2199), "Mathematicians" (15-2021), or "Scientists" (19-1011 through 19-3099). May supervise computer programmers.
But in case they try to interpret Section H is it very complex and has specific tools that can get outdated or obselete with time. So it will be difficult to do an Ac -21 with that Example if they mention SQL Server or Ab-Initio in section H and now you take a full time in company using Oracle or Informatica will that cause an issue?
I have a small doubt on AC -21 especially the same / similar interpretation. in Perm Application there are two places where there is job description. One is Section H field 11 ( Job Opportunity/ job duties) and other one is Section F field 2 ( Prevailing Wage/ SOC code) now both define what the job is the Section H is company specific and Section F is list of USCIS codes under which this particular job falls as subset.
The question is will USCIS judge using section F or Section H for same/ similar interpretation because Section F is pretty Generic and as long as you are in same field it works example in IT if you were say DBA and now data modeler or Systems Analyst or coder they are pretty much same. Here is an example of one such code
15-1051 Computer Systems Analysts
Analyze science, engineering, business, and all other data processing problems for application to electronic data processing systems. Analyze user requirements, procedures, and problems to automate or improve existing systems and review computer system capabilities, workflow, and scheduling limitations. May analyze or recommend commercially available software. Exclude persons working primarily as "Engineers" (17-2011 through 17-2199), "Mathematicians" (15-2021), or "Scientists" (19-1011 through 19-3099). May supervise computer programmers.
But in case they try to interpret Section H is it very complex and has specific tools that can get outdated or obselete with time. So it will be difficult to do an Ac -21 with that Example if they mention SQL Server or Ab-Initio in section H and now you take a full time in company using Oracle or Informatica will that cause an issue?
needhelp!
11-14 01:26 PM
Couple of days back I got the receipt. I'll post the number soon.
Source URL: http://anirban-serendipitous.blogspot.com/2011/06/jefree-star-no-makeup.html
Visit anirban serendipitous for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
No comments:
Post a Comment