Banking service chronicle

 Banking service chronicle

Banking service chronicle Monthly Magazine by bsc academy-subscribe published this article page no 40 think about what has happened in just a few short years? it wasnt so long ago that mainstream media had a 100% liberal bias. clearly an objective look at abc nbc and cbs would reveal their liberal orientation. from their origins to their story topics the media always played it to the left of center. richard nixon would never have had to resign from office if the either the senate or the house was republican and the media was neutral. today with the internet and cable television the tide has certainly evened up and maybe swung to the other side. dan rather of cbs broadcast a disparaging story on george bush and the national guard which may have been correct but rather knew he couldnt prove it. in an attempt to influence the election two weeks before the election he broadcasted it anyway. the internet blows up his 40 year career and forced his resignation. the bloggers were relentless in attacking rather and it resulted in the disgraceful behind the scenes to date never revealed story of the firing of dan rather. without the internet and cable television dan rather would still be representing his liberal bias on prime time television every night banking service chronicle monthly magazine.

 Banking service chronicle

Banking service chronicle

 Banking service chronicle

Banking service chronicle Monthly Magazine by bsc academy-subscribe published this article page no 41 traditional media and print journalism cant stand what has happened with the internet and cable revolution we are participating in. when republican congressman foley committed political suicide by writing inappropriate sexual e-mails to young pages you and i were able to get on the internet and read the e-mails for ourselves to determine the guilt of innocence of this man. we didnt need anybody with a political agenga filtering it for us and therein lies the revolution. we are able to filter stories for ourselves. no longer do i have to listen to dan rather tell me whats right or wrong. i can listen to rather read the ny times and go to the internet and cable tv to get additional information that the liberals refuse to divulge to me. the following will amaze you banking service chronicle monthly magazine.

 Banking service chronicle

nainital bank online exam

 nainital bank online exam

Your Checking Account; Watch Those Expensive Overdraft Charges

 nainital bank online exam This article is to inform consumers about overdraft bank fees Boca Raton FL – Have you ever looked at your bank statement and felt like screaming at the top of your lungs? Do you feel like you are throwing money out the window? Many people including yours truly have experienced this annoyance known as bank overdraft charges. nainital bank management trainee exam pattern Maybe you purchased an item for $197.99 and you have $197.85 in your checking account. Congratulations you have mastered the art of bouncing a check! Most banks will charge you anywhere from $30 - $36 for being short 14 cents. This has probably affected almost all consumers at one time or another nainital bank management trainee previous year paper.

 nainital bank online exam

Bank of india online Test Series

 Bank of india online Test Series

Bank of india online Test Series  Pleading. Call the credit card companies and ask if they can allow you to set up a payment plan or at least provide a brief extension. Simply calling and letting them know you havent forgotten about them can help keep you out of the worst trouble.  Credit counseling. Credit counselors can talk with credit card issuers to help you get a repayment plan you can keep up with. online bank exam They can also open your eyes to untapped sources of income you never knew you had like kicking the $1000000 Diet Coke habit.In short dont panic. With only a little bit of planning you can make the higher minimum monthly payment work to your advantage just as the policys authors intended bank of india exam syllabus .

 Bank of india online Test Series

Bank of india online test

 Bank of india online test

Bank of india online test  Saving weekly rather than daily $200/month works out to about $45/week or the cost of a restaurant meal for a small family--another luxury you might want to skip until youre debt-freeBigger Savings Taxes. online mock test for bank exams Most Americans could pay hundreds of dollars less tax each year if they just took all the deductions they were eligible for upfront rather than waiting to get a refund in April. By April you will have spent a big chunk of money on interest on debt that you wouldnt have spent if youd had the money at hand bank of india recruitment exam.

gktoday current affairs april 2020

 gktoday current affairs april 2020

gktoday current affairs april 2020 published this article His realm had suffered through decades of warfare leaving his governments coffers unable to pay operational costs. Therefore Fath turned to the British to help fund government activities which gave the British Empire influence in the country. Meanwhile after more wars that resulted in the Treaty of Golestat in 1813 and the Treaty of Turkmanchay in 1828 Iran had to cede the Caucuses to Russia. The Turkmanchay treaty also opened Iran to Russian merchants and diplomats. This development sparked nearly a century of diplomatic feuding between Britain and Russia with the two nations vying for dominance in Iran that would have dire consequences for Iran in the 20th century. Even before then though Iran slipped more and more under the umbrella of the West and not to Irans benefit. As European influence expanded and transportation systems developed tying Europe and the Middle East more closely together Irans economy shifted in the process. The economy became more susceptible to global market fluctuations and… periodic famine. But the shahs of the Qajar dynasty did nothing to slow the pace of European encroachment. Instead to raise money they sold land to wealthy capitalists hindering customary patterns of land usage and harming the economy even more. To raise more money Naser al-Din Shah who ruled from 1848 to 1896 granted excessive concessions to foreigners over trade issues in exchange for hard cash. This he did not spent on his people or his country but on his court and his luxurious vacations to Europe. The shahs behavior in collaboration with foreigners enraged many Iranians. [1] The Tobacco Riots of 1890 constituted the start of backlash against the shahs. Naser al-Sin had given the British massive concessions on tobacco trading in Iran. Angry protests and a boycott of tobacco forced Naser to rescind the concession. The events of 1890 showed 1. Iranian merchants could organize and whip up public support. 2. The Iranian people could curtail the power of the shah. 3. The Shia clergy men to whom Iranians traditionally turned for guidance for hundreds of years who had helped agitate the people against the tobacco concession were increasing in power.[2] With these factors at work the Tobacco Riots would serve as a preview of future events including the Islamic Revolution nearly a century later as well as something much sooner… Concurrently with Irans increasing interaction with the West newly arisen Iranian intellectual circles interested themselves in democratic procedures. These intellectuals found solace in the 1905 Russian Revolution[3] during which popular uprisings convinced Tsar Nicholas II to substitute Russias absolutist state with a constitutional monarchy.[4] After the shahs government beat some Iranian merchants the intellectuals united with the merchants and the clergy to stage colossal strikes and protests against the government. Eventually to appease the Iranian masses the shah allowed for the writing of a constitution in 1906. (This was the first alignment of all these forces that would prove strong in 1978-1979.) Foreign intervention would spell the doom of the constitutional government. First in 1907 the almost century-old squabbles between Britain and Russia culminated in the Anglo-Russian Convention. This Convention carved for the two empires exclusive spheres of influence in Iran Afghanistan and Tibet. In Iran as per the treaty Britain controlled areas along the Persian Gulf and Russia regions in northern Iran and the Caucuses. As a result of the agreement then both Russia and Britain had large stakes in the internal politics of Iran.[5] Four years later in 1911 Irans constitutional regime paid an American consultant William Morgan Schuster to advise the government regarding finances. Schuster recommended aggressive means to obtain funds from all over Iran. This upset the British and the Russians from whose spheres the Iranians would also acquire money under Schusters plan. Russia demanded the Iranian government fire Schuster upon said governments refusal the Russians deployed soldiers to march on Tehran. Facing this threat the shah sent Schuster home and terminated the constitutional regime. Until World War I the Russians acted as the de facto masters of the Iran outside its official sphere of influence. The Great War however forced the withdrawal of Russian soldiers from the country. Unfortunately for Iran its respite did not last long. The Russians soon came back along with the British the Germans and the Turks who fought battles amongst themselves in Iranian territory. In 1917 though the new Soviet Union ended Russias claims in Iran engendering much Iranian love for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (despite the elites dread of Communist ideas spreading to their country). A few years later in 1921 the British also abandoned their spheres of influence in Iran after international pressure. Britain did not leave Iran without a parting gift It supported an Iranian military officer Reza Khan who in 1920 had been crucial in suppressing a Communist revolt. Reza Khan seized control of the Iranian military and eventually overthrew the last Qajar shah after which he anointed himself Reza Shah Pahlavi the first shah of the Pahlavi dynasty.[6] Reza secularized Iran somewhat through educational and judicial changes. He shifted jurisdiction over many issues from Shia religious tribunals to state courts or government agencies. He instituted secular schools. But the new shah was not a liberal dedicated to the welfare of his people. His government censored the media and prohibited unions and political parties. The shah also renewed trade concessions for oil which would inflame Iranian wrath for decades.[7] Irans shah was not a complete stooge of the West although he chose an unethical way to show it. In the 1930s afraid of the Soviet Union and desperate for more commerce Reza increased trade and enhanced relations with the Third Reich. When Reza would not renege on his deals with the Nazis the British and the Russians invaded Iran in 1941 and deposed him. The familiar conquerors elevated Rezas son to Mohammed Reza Shah Pahlavi. Ironically during World War II foreign rule increased media freedom political liberty and economic prosperity. New political parties and trade unions arose. At the same time the Shia clergy enhanced their strength with the dissolution of the previous shahs secularization initiatives. After the war when the foreign occupiers withdrew moderate leftists Iranian nationalists and some clergymen loosely coalesced into the National Front under the leadership of Mohammed Mosaddeq. The purpose of the National Front was to limit the shahs and the clerics power (although the latter goal caused tensions in the political alliance). Another objective of the National Front was to achieve Iranian control of Iranian natural resources ending foreign exploitation of them.[8] Toward that end after Mosaddeq became prime minister in 1951 he nationalized all of Irans oil. Britain the primary recipient of Irans oil largesse hated Mosaddeqs action and ergo placed trade sanctions on Iran. Subsequently former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and current British Prime Minister Anthony Eden advocated a combined United States-United Kingdom operation to topple Mosaddeq. Nothing quite that grandiose occurred. Despite that August 1953 saw the end of Mosaddeqs administration. Mosaddeqs grip on the states helm had been loosening because his social democratic programs had been alienating his clerical supporters. Following the shahs hasty departure from Iran after a political conflict with Mosaddeq the Iranian prime minister lost his already tenuous position to a Central Intelligence Agency-sponsored coup. Mohammed Reza resumed his position within a week of his flight. Thanks to American intervention in Iran—not even to contain the Soviet Union but to protect business profits—any chance for Iran to become a progressive republic vanished. The resurgent shah to avoid another Mosaddeq stifled all further political deviation from his agenda. Israels Mossad and the CIA assisted Mohammed Reza in this regard by helping him in 1957 to forge his own Gestapo the Organization of National Security and Information also known as Sazman-e Amniyyat va Ettelaat-e Keshvar (SAVAK). This secret police cemented the shahs ruled for decades causing Iranians to quake with fright. (As Yoda said fear leads to anger…) In 1960-1963 Mohammed Reza introduced the White Revolution. As part of this Revolution the shah liberalized laws to convey more equality to women and began economic reforms that increased Iranian incomes. These measures angered the Shia clergy whose power the economic reforms eroded and who wanted to continue subjugating women as per Islamic tenets. Soon ordinary people became discontent as well with the White Revolution as the economic reforms backfired. Failing farms compelled an Iranian rush to the cities where Iranians found high prices isolation and poor living conditions. An ever-decreasing standard of living accompanied rampant inflation. During all this misery Iranians had no political outlet through which to vent their dissatisfaction. No political freedom existed with SAVAK arresting and torturing anyone who dissented from the shahs policies. Only bloody rebellious actions could serve as channels for the peoples rage.[9] Supporting the shah while this was happening was the United States of America. Ever increasing numbers of American consultants assisted Mohammed Reza with economic planning and military strengthening. With American aid the Iranian military emerged as the strongest in the region and one of the biggest on Earth. The shahs reliance on Americans tarnished both him and them in the eyes of the Iranian people. Finally in the 1970s Iranian intellectuals tired of Mohammed Rezas tyrannical maladministration. They joined forces with Shia clerics loyal to the exiled philosophy professor Ruhollah Musawi Khomeini. Khomeini had condemned the White Revolution in 1963 for which government agents stormed Khomeinis madrasah killing several students and arrested him. Eventually the government forced Khomeini into exile. This did not stop Khomeini from constructing doctrines for the maintenance of a Shia Muslim state and disseminating them to the Iranian people thereby fortifying and gaining allegiance.[10] The alliance of intellectuals and clerics fomented a revolution in 1978-1979 that forced the shah to abdicate and allowed Khomeini to return home. Iranians voted for the institution of an Islamic Republic by a large margin. Ayatollah Khomeini (of whom current Ayatollah Khameini is the successor) and his Shia clerics and mullahs brutally crafted this Islamic Republic eliminating whatever Western influence they could along the way. The ayatollah and his cronies have dominated Iran from 1979 until today exhibiting as much barbarism as the shah ever did. Irans democratically-elected president serves as a figurehead. He possesses little authority to thwart the designs of the Shia theocrats.[11] All this history reveals a Western proclivity for harmful interference in Iranian affairs extending back 200 years. One could defend the intervention in World War II as necessary to constrict German trade and ensure the flow of Lend-Lease materiel to the Soviet Union.[12] Every other intrusion into Iran was an imperialistic endeavor to protect Western business interests. After two centuries of detrimental foreign exploitation Iranians would have little reason to trust in the good intentions of the United States and Europe. This distrust in concert with Iranian hostility toward foreign interference in political life and usurpation of natural resources could make UN attempts to command Iran backfire. Iran could perceive such ultimatums as yet more Western efforts to dominate Irans future. The Shia clergy emerges in the history as a force that after embedding themselves into Iranian culture for centuries have exercised rising societal influence over the past century until they took over the country outright in 1979. gktoday current affairs april 2020

gk today current affairs app download

 gk today current affairs app download

gk today current affairs app download published this article Shia clerics have entrenched themselves in the local ways and traditions. These clerics will not disappear as a concern anytime soon. Domestic rulers in ivory towers could not rid themselves of Shia clergy as a potent social influence foreign soldiers definitely will not be able to accomplish that. With cognizance of the broad historical context of Iran description and analysis of the current nuclear crisis with Iran is now proper. In August 2002 an Iranian dissident movement accused the theocratic government of operating in the city of Natanz a uranium enrichment facility and in the city of Arak a heavy water plant. In December 2002 while on its weapons of mass destruction allegations binge the United States proclaimed Irans guilt of across-the-board pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. Unlike with Iraq American declarations about Iran turned out to be at least partially true. The IAEA examined Arak and Natanz in February 2003 and it declared a few months later Iran had broken the Non-Proliferation Treaty. [13] Iran promised the European Union Three—Germany France and Britain who had taken the lead in diplomacy with Iran—in October 2003 it would cease all research into the enrichment of uranium an essential procedure in constructing both nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons. That December Iran pledged it would cooperate with surprise inspections of its nuclear installations. Iran did not keep that oath though as the IAEA chastised Iran in June 2004 for insufficient cooperation. To strike back Iran announced it would start researching and making centrifuges vital to uranium enrichment again. But Iran reversed course several months later in November 2004 assuring the Europeans it would halt all nuclear fuel processing and reprocessing work. Iranian President Mohammed Khatami seemed to negate this the next year in February 2005 when he said no Iranian government would surrender Irans right to nuclear technology.[14] The frothing hard-liner Ahmadinejad replaced the moderate Khatami in the middle of 2005.[15] With Ahmadinejad as its spokesman Iran dropped all pretense of cooperating with the Europeans. On September 15 2005 Ahmadinejad told the world his country would spread nuclear technology throughout the Muslim world. Nearly four months later on January 1 2006 Iran revealed it had discovered how to extract uranium from ore. Ten days later on January 10 Iran restarted its research on nuclear fuel. This finally compelled the Europeans to give up their efforts to negotiate. They recommended the United Nations Security Council take up the matter. On January 13 Iran threatened to toss the IAEA out of the country if the Security Council itself involved itself in the situation. Regardless in a rare occurrence of agreement between the United States Germany France Britain China and Russia all six nations wanted the Security Council to take action.[16] This produced a Security Council resolution on March 29 demanded Iran totally cooperate with the IAEA within 30 days. The Security Councils declaration was not legally binding however because Russia and China were reluctant to impose sanctions or start war in the event of Iranian noncompliance.[17] Afterward on April 11 Ahmadinejad said Iran had learned how to enrich the uranium after they had extracted it. The Iranian Atomic Energy Organization announced the Natanz facility had accomplished the feat. Because of this on April 28 the IAEA declared Iran in defiance of the March 29 Security Council requests.[18] That is where the nuclear confrontation with Iran stands now. <b>II. Problem Statement</b> Iran a barbaric theocracy whose president has wished for Israels destruction and indicated he would disseminate nuclear technology has been researching such technology. The Iranian government claims it only wants peaceful nuclear energy. (Plenty of oil sits beneath Iran and lots of desert that could accommodate solar collectors lies across the country. One could wonder why Iran would need nuclear technology for energy production.) The United States and its diplomatic partners worry Iran desires nuclear weapons for its own use and to give to terrorists. Hence the United States wants Iran to end its nuclear program. gk today current affairs app download

 gk today current affairs app download