004 dating sites taiwan dating culture

Podcast: Play in new window | Download In this episode of the podcast, I deal with the so-called UNIT dating controversy, which suggests that we, and everyone in the Doctor’s universe, have no idea when Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart headed the organization. Hopefully, we can put this issue to rest once and for all. It’s very clear when those stories took place, if we interpret the show according to the principles of canon that I outlined in Podcast #2. The story never states explicitly the year in which it is set, but it does provide some chronological indicators that imply it.

Were all the records destroyed and people’s memories erased? If you’ve been a fan of Doctor Who for any length of time, you’ve probably heard by now of the “U. If you haven’t listened to that episode yet, I recommend you cue it up and give it your ear. First, in episode one, in the scene set in the museum, we are told that the Yeti creature, which Professor Travers brought back from Tibet, has been in the museum for 30 years.

The purpose of this report was to ascertain whether there were any indications of preferential lending to any executive officer or principal shareholder by a correspondent bank.

Section 601 of the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006 (Relief Act) removed several statutory reporting requirements relating to insider lending by insured banks and savings associations (institutions).

That is, if two parts of the canon appear to contradict, we should choose the more explicit over the less explicit and allow the explicit to define the meaning of the implicit. So yeah, Derrick Sherwin wanted to be set in the near future.

In this case, the dates given in needs to be brought into line with the explicit material, which places the U. But he wasn’t explicit about it in the show itself, and we need only concern ourselves with what was actually said or seen in those stories.

The problem is that, even though the years of these classic UNIT stories are never stated in dialogue, indications are that they take place, not in the 1980’s, but in the 1970’s. Let’s go back to the rules of interpretation I laid out in episode 2 of this podcast.

I’m sure the information is on her driver’s license. But if the TARDIS can travel backwards and forwards in time, how is there a contradiction? Explicit statements in the show establish this beyond doubt. There are far more interesting and substantial conundrums in the show to be concerned about.

She can be from 1980 and travel back to the 1970s to have those adventures. Yes, some may say, “but she got into the TARDIS at the end of . I do hope that Chris Chibnall doesn’t unnecessarily muddy the waters further in this regard.

Is it not possible that she has been with the Doctor a few years?

One of these amendments, which became effective on October 13, 2006, eliminated the statutory requirement that an executive officer or principal shareholder of an institution file an annual report with the institution's board of directors during any year in which the officer or shareholder, or a related interest of the officer or shareholder, has an outstanding extension of credit from any of the institution's correspondent banks.

In previous years, the FFIEC distributed a copy of the FFIEC 004 report to institutions for use by their executive officers and principal shareholders in complying with the annual reporting requirements pertaining to extensions of credit from correspondent banks.

Leave a Reply