Pages

Showing posts with label blogs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blogs. Show all posts

Friday, September 30, 2016

Well lets see
 1. Invade iraq , completely  dismantle  the country and leave it in ruins. 
2 give billions of dollars to extremists in syria and spread false propaganda  through channels like CNN ans BBC to create conflict which results in millions of deaths
3. Libya - need i say anything
Directly responsible for so many deaths and indirectly for deaths due to factors like starvation etc 
So you destroyed their country killed their loved ones and u expect them just to stay silent . Some joined these extremists groups due to desperation and some due to hatred against usa. 
I am not saying what ISIS are doing is right but one country s freedom fighter is another country s terrorist. I mean we all have seen the helicopter video that wikileaks leaked and how the CIA tortured the iraqi army and treated them like dogs . I absolute hate ISIS but what i hate even more is how the americans are always projected as the good guys. Through its invasion of Iraq. The Iraqi army got disbanded, many of whom joined ISIS. American-operated Iraq was where ISIS was born, and this was due to Saddam Hussein’s removal from power; don’t let any idiot tell you that it was Zarqawi who “created ISIS by himself,” nothing like that happens in this world, or the next.

Some good content regarding the origin of ISIS is here already, but I won’t chase down or debunk some of their over-simplifications… giving a summary of ANYTHING to do with Islamic History can be ‘written-off’ as being ‘too simplistic’ … by ‘someone.’
But an in depth history of just who stepped upon whose toes… isn’t all that necessaryIF the West were to address all the issues and complaints, that exist in the Middle East… then ‘Islamic Extremism’ would continue.
Note: Islamic Extremism is NOT the same as Islam- the faith. For the former we are speaking to radical Ideology, and for the latter we are speaking to Religion(s)…plus 1.6 Billion followers. It’s extremely important to NOT confuse these two very distinct issues: political agendas, and religion.
The West at that time, and perhaps now, believes that IF these tribal factions were Democratically represented (within the artificial and poorly thought-out borders that contain the tribes) then they would discover some peace. Certainly too, in February of 2011, thousands of Muslims marched the streets of Cairo demanding a Democracy, so they too wish a Representative government… but even then… there would do NOTHING to stop the ongoing ‘flavor of the month’ terrorist groups that form ‘In the US; in the EU, or in the Middle East, such as ISIS.
But true enough, the failure of the elected (propped up perhaps) Iraqi leader to be truly inclusive in the U.S.’ sponsoring of a Democracy (which renewed the ongoing castigation of the largest single group of fundamentalist Sunni, and that cataylized the ISIS movement (a flavor of the year) to too easily recruit from the disenfranchised). But there have been group after group of previous ‘Islamic radicals’ going back to… Allah. (From the British point of view, Madison and Jefferson were radicals as well, so ‘radical’ is a relative term).. so now we have three groups to distinguish: Islamic Religion, Radical Islam, and Terrorist fanatics that simply wear Islamic religion like a taqiyah (hat).
If there were a key concept that needs be explored to understand the genesis of a terrorist, it would be simply ‘disenfranchised.’ A separated individual, poorly connected to a Faith, disillusioned by historic familial practices, and upon migrating into a more Western culture: becomes a stranger in a strange land, and poorly handled emigration has been a fertile ground for the disenfranchised.
The EU’s idea of multiculturalism is to allow, and encourage diversity, which means:separate. Separate ‘areas’, separate language, separate… and swallowing ‘British Culture’in Britain, or American Culture in the U.S. The easy denigration of former historic ‘heros’ which are now dismissed as ‘land grabbers,’ ‘slavers’ or racist (all true of course, but no reason for us to be embarassed by it TODAY. (You can’t fight asphalt streets if you live on one with your car, and you can’t ‘fight’ slavery when you -historically- swim in it). So: very little true integration is encouraged in the name of Politically Correct tolerance and multiculturalism, nor is a palate of ‘new beliefs and histories’ even proudly presented.
For the U.S., since less than 50 percent of the immigrants are on a legal road to citizenship, it’s more a ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ as the Politically Correct policy, for: neighbors, workers and schools. Instead of the U.S. or U.K. building a stronger identity or culture at home, they’ve pissed it away over the passed 50 years, in the name of multiculturalism.
The further apart the incoming cultures, the further the disenfranchisement. The disenfranchised among the ‘well tolerated’ youth of Hispanic or Muslim background find themselves angry, as they cannot identify with either Western or their family heritage culture in many cases.
Freedom of speech, religion and the expectation of equal treatment under the law, regardless of gender, race, or sexuality is the hallmark of the West, but that too is subordinated in keeping with Political Correctness and the tolerance of ‘diversity.’ I observed a Muslim woman being admonished by her male work-group peers for ‘showing too much skin (forearms actually)’, and these Muslim men therefore denied her use of the small Mosque on the company grounds. ‘Oh that’s horrible- going on in Middle East’ (someone said); NO! This was not in the EU or the Middle East, this was at a major chip manufacturer’ site just outside Portland Oregon!I don’t really know that ISIS was the creation(to destruction) by U.S. But i would rather say that terrorism was definitely created by U.S. As because during Cold War between America and Russia.There were not any major wars but some regional wars occur. It was U.S who wanted to attack on Russia but not by his name. So U.S decided to attack by the peoples of Afghanistan and nearby.U.S supported them by giving them weapons to them so that they can attack Russia.They used to help for anything.They were given money,food,weapons,drugs and many other things. So U.S created terror of which today ISIS is a major part in creating terror.But today (as we all know “Sometimes table turns”) America is also threatened by these Groups.
Much like Al Qaeda, the Islamic State (ISIS) is made-in-the-USA, an instrument of terror designed to divide and conquer the oil-rich Middle East and to counter Iran’s growing influence in the region.
The fact that the United States has a long and torrid history of backing terrorist groups will surprise only those who watch the news and ignore history.
The CIA first aligned itself with extremist Islam during the Cold War era. Back then, America saw the world in rather simple terms: on one side, the Soviet Union and Third World nationalism, which America regarded as a Soviet tool; on the other side, Western nations and militant political Islam, which America considered an ally in the struggle against the Soviet Union.
The director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan, General William Odom recently remarked, “by any measure the U.S. has long used terrorism. In 1978-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism – in every version they produced, the lawyers said the U.S. would be in violation.”
During the 1970′s the CIA used the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt as a barrier, both to thwart Soviet expansion and prevent the spread of Marxist ideology among the Arab masses. The United States also openly supported Sarekat Islam against Sukarno in Indonesia, and supported the Jamaat-e-Islami terror group against Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in Pakistan. Last but certainly not least, there is Al Qaeda.
Lest we forget, the CIA gave birth to Osama Bin Laden and breastfed his organization during the 1980′s. Former British Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, told the House of Commons that Al Qaeda was unquestionably a product of Western intelligence agencies. Mr. Cook explained that Al Qaeda, which literally means an abbreviation of “the database” in Arabic, was originally the computer database of the thousands of Islamist extremists, who were trained by the CIA and funded by the Saudis, in order to defeat the Russians in Afghanistan.
America’s relationship with Al Qaeda has always been a love-hate affair. Depending on whether a particular Al Qaeda terrorist group in a given region furthers American interests or not, the U.S. State Department either funds or aggressively targets that terrorist group. Even as American foreign policy makers claim to oppose Muslim extremism, they knowingly foment it as a weapon of foreign policy.
The Islamic State is its latest weapon that, much like Al Qaeda, is certainly backfiring. ISIS recently rose to international prominence after its thugs began beheading American journalists. Now the terrorist group controls an area the size of the United Kingdom.
In order to understand why the Islamic State has grown and flourished so quickly, one has to take a look at the organization’s American-backed roots. The 2003 American invasion and occupation of Iraq created the pre-conditions for radical Sunni groups, like ISIS, to take root. America, rather unwisely, destroyed Saddam Hussein’s secular state machinery and replaced it with a predominantly Shiite administration. The U.S. occupation caused vast unemployment in Sunni areas, by rejecting socialism and closing down factories in the naive hope that the magical hand of the free market would create jobs. Under the new U.S.-backed Shiite regime, working class Sunni’s lost hundreds of thousands of jobs. Unlike the white Afrikaners in South Africa, who were allowed to keep their wealth after regime change, upper class Sunni’s were systematically dispossessed of their assets and lost their political influence. Rather than promoting religious integration and unity, American policy in Iraq exacerbated sectarian divisions and created a fertile breading ground for Sunni discontent, from which Al Qaeda in Iraq took root.
The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) used to have a different name: Al Qaeda in Iraq. After 2010 the group rebranded and refocused its efforts on Syria.
There are essentially three wars being waged in Syria: one between the government and the rebels, another between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and yet another between America and Russia. It is this third, neo-Cold War battle that made U.S. foreign policy makers decide to take the risk of arming Islamist rebels in Syria, because Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, is a key Russian ally. Rather embarrassingly, many of these Syrian rebels have now turned out to be ISIS thugs, who are openly brandishing American-made M16 Assault rifles.
America’s Middle East policy revolves around oil and Israel. The invasion of Iraq has partially satisfied Washington’s thirst for oil, but ongoing air strikes in Syria and economic sanctions on Iran have everything to do with Israel. The goal is to deprive Israel’s neighboring enemies, Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Palestine’s Hamas, of crucial Syrian and Iranian support.
ISIS is not merely an instrument of terror used by America to topple the Syrian government; it is also used to put pressure on Iran.
The last time Iran invaded another nation was in 1738. Since independence in 1776, the U.S. has been engaged in over 53 military invasions and expeditions. Despite what the Western media’s war cries would have you believe, Iran is clearly not the threat to regional security, Washington is. An Intelligence Report published in 2012, endorsed by all sixteen U.S. intelligence agencies, confirms that Iran ended its nuclear weapons program in 2003. Truth is, any Iranian nuclear ambition, real or imagined, is as a result of American hostility towards Iran, and not the other way around.
America is using ISIS in three ways: to attack its enemies in the Middle East, to serve as a pretext for U.S. military intervention abroad, and at home to foment a manufactured domestic threat, used to justify the unprecedented expansion of invasive domestic surveillance.
By rapidly increasing both government secrecy and surveillance, Obama’s government is increasing its power to watch its citizens, while diminishing its citizens’ power to watch their government. Terrorism is an excuse to justify mass surveillance, in preparation for mass revolt.
The so-called “War on Terror” should be seen for what it really is: a pretext for maintaining a dangerously oversized U.S. military. The two most powerful groups in the U.S. foreign policy establishment are the Israel lobby, which directs U.S. Middle East policy, and the Military-Industrial-Complex, which profits from the former group’s actions. Since George W. Bush declared the “War on Terror” in October 2001, it has cost the American taxpayer approximately 6.6 trillion dollars and thousands of fallen sons and daughters; but, the wars have also raked in billions of dollars for Washington’s military elite.
In fact, more than seventy American companies and individuals have won up to $27 billion in contracts for work in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan over the last three years, according to a recent study by the Center for Public Integrity. According to the study, nearly 75 per cent of these private companies had employees or board members, who either served in, or had close ties to, the executive branch of the Republican and Democratic administrations, members of Congress, or the highest levels of the military.
In 1997, a U.S. Department of Defense report stated, “the data show a strong correlation between U.S. involvement abroad and an increase in terrorist attacks against the U.S.” Truth is, the only way America can win the “War On Terror” is if it stops giving terrorists the motivation and the resources to attack America. Terrorism is the symptom; American imperialism in the Middle East is the cancer. Put simply, the War on Terror is terrorism; only, it is conducted on a much larger scale by people with jets and missiles.
Read More »

U.S. really create ISIS? How?


The US did not deliberately create ISIS. But there would have been no ISIS but for American missteps and incompetence during the US occupation of Iraq.
Before we invaded in 2003, there were no armed islamist groups like ISIS in Iraq. Horrible as Saddam was, he had at least managed to keep a lid on them. Then we invaded, removed Saddam from power, and the Pentagon failed to issue the necessary orders for securing property. That led to widespread looting and a nearly instantaneous social breakdown in the absence of minimal security.
Then the Coalition Provisional Authority geniuses we put in charge of running Iraq thought it would be a great idea to disband the Iraqi army - an act that instantly put hundreds of thousands of heavily armed young men, with nothing to do, out on the streets and out of anybody’s control.
Then, to triple down on the stupid, we implemented a “de-Baathaification” purge, along the lines of the de-Nazification that followed the defeat of Germany, notwithstanding glaring differences between the scope and reach of the Nazi party in Germany, and the toothless haplessness of the Baath party in Iraq. That removed thousands of technocrats and bureaucrats necessary for the routine functioning of government, and wrecked its ability to deliver basic services such as electricity, garbage removal, or furnishing the minimal safety necessary to keep schools open.
Needless to say, it didn’t take long for a complete collapse of law and order and a series of insurgencies spanning most of the country. And our incoherent response - waves of random arrests that swept both foe and would-be friend; a plethora of checkpoints manned by nervous, confused, and frequently trigger happy troops who shot up cars full of innocents; frequently indiscriminate use of firepower that piled up “collateral damage”; and numerous instances of abuse and even outright massacres that were often unpunished, added fuel to the fire.
The insurgency began attracting foreign Islamist fighters from all over for jihad tourism in Iraq. Something that hadn’t happened in decades of Saddam’s rule, did within months of US rule. Even Al-Qaeda, which had no prior presence in Iraq, opened up a branch office,Al-Qaeda in Iraq , which quickly became one of the most virulent and bloodthirsty of the insurgent groups. It even set up a proto statelet, openly governing some regions in Western Iraq - the same ones where ISIS would get its start a few years later.
Al Qaeda in Iraq was eventually beat down, but its surviving members, such as Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, would go on to form ISIS soon as the US withdrew from Iraq. Helped in no small part by America’s final gift: the US trained Iraqi army, a sad sack and astonishingly incompetent, corrupt, and cowardly mob - something I addressed in my answer to Why is the Iraqi army losing Abrams tanks so easily?
In short, we didn’t set out to create ISIS, but we screwed up so bad that the emergence of ISIS or something equally bad was inevitable.
Indirectly, yes.
Because the Americans intervene in Iraq, they killed Saddam and imposed democracy in a place that has sectarian conflicts, and didn´t work because the Iraqi factions do not understand each other. The Americans claim that Iraq had chemical weapons, but it didn´t, Iraq had ceased to use them for a long time, since the Iran-Iraq War, but even so, the US and UK invaded Iraq without the UN endorsement.
So the Iraqi people thought that the Americans wanted to destroy Iraq for invading their country without any apparent reason, and came to fight against them with the air bombings and civilian casualties. Iraqis became more and more angry with the Americans and then,they started to ally to armed groups that fought US Armed Forces.
Due to the US Armed Forces in Iraq are very strong, they began to use unconventional methods of combat, such as terrorism, insurgency, the use of car bombs and suicide bombers to try to defeat the Americans. Over time, these groups have gained strength,money and weapons. With the high(and maybe unnecessary) expenses in 2011, the US withdrew their troops from the country. Then came the saying "When the cat's away, the mice will play" and these groups started fighting each other, wanting to dominate areas in Iraq, and others harness the power.
Another factor that shows that the US may have helped in the creation ISIS, was that the American army has left some of their military equipment such as helicopters, Humvees, rifles, M1 Abrahms in Iraq during the withdrawal in 2011.
Create? No of course not. “Create” has a rigorous meaning that cannot be shifted just because of politics or expediency. The more important question is: Does the United States bear at least some responsibility for the creation of ISIS? The answer is quite clear: Yes.
The US has a terrible policy in the Middle East. It ceased being “good” about 1991. After that point in time, it began to completely fall apart. What do I mean about this? The US has always had a bit of Realpolitik and pragmatism. The US was never under any impression that the people wanted and certainly were not ready for contemporary republicanism.
It pushed regimes internally to modernize at a pace that worked for them while keeping the ship as steady as possible. After that point in time, the US has failed to keep that policy. Worse, it began to shift its own policy around the world from “Maintain stable regimes that favor trade” to “Also make sure we push regimes to democratize.”
Sounds great on paper. A lot of ideas sound great on paper but are horrible in application. There are others:
  • Companies should publish all executive officers’ salaries.
  • Congress should abolish pork spending and cease handing out bonus checks on the chamber floors to those members who have records of passing bills and cooperating.
In those two instances, removing those provisions caused chaos in their respective organizations. The former resulted in EO’s competing in the US for salary that drove the numbers through the roof. The latter resulted in polarization of politics because chamber leaders lost two strong (and very cheap: the debt has been impacted less than 5% by those aspects) methods of pulling members to the middle to get things done.
Idealists destroy systems. The world is complex and pragmatists understand that making politics has always been like making sausages — it’s ugly business that average citizens think they know what’s best for the world, but if they really saw and knew, they’d freak the fuck out. The law of unintended consequences says that generally systems fall into patterns that mostly work for them and to gum it up with idealistic gibberish usually causes more harm than good.
The American idealists who decided that Latin America and East Asia were ready for democracy after the fall of the USSR, also felt like it was time to bring that to the Middle East. It worked in Latin America and Asia, largely. Those regimes that favored the US (South Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia, Philippines, Brazil, Chile and on and on) all converted to democracy from about 1979–1999, they all fell into standard republican patterns.
The US felt like this was a great thing and largely it was. But not in the Middle East. That region has a combination of potent religious and cultural attitudes that make it challenging to work. Many borders were arbitrarily formed by Gertrude Bell and Thomas Lawrence. The stable autocrats that were allowed to rise to power and created a “more or less” stable area, were dis-favored. After the First Gulf War and especially the Second Gulf War, the US’s attitudes about regime change caused a societal collapse that has resulted in people swinging to extremes.
Some of those people, in their desperation, joined various terrorist groups. One of those groups is ISIS. The people who founded that group get the credit for that affair. But the US cannot divorce itself from a significant portion of responsibility because Bush failed to anticipate the horrible results of his Administration’s vile actions and Obama failed to anticipate the results of the sudden withdraw of American forces in Iraq. Obama also made a promise about how/why the US would interfere, and then tippy-toed back away from that promise.
Read More »

Monday, September 26, 2016

I answered a similar question, how to make $100 per day with no investment. The same applies for $1000 a day or even more.
Well, there are multiple ways of going about doing this. I will share what I did.
Miami, FL, 2012
So there I am. A 14 year old kid who can't help but think about the car he will be getting in two years. My parents didn't want to spend too much over $10,000 on my first car, but I wanted one that costed around $30,000, so I was quite down in the dumps.
I tried desperately to find ways of making that extra $20,000 online - I tried filling out surveys, joining websites that promised a big payout, and nothing worked. I was stumped.
Then, one day, out of the blue, I met a kid online who was making $1500 a month by doing something called dropshipping. I was amazed. I couldn't fathom the possibility of making so much money without doing hours of work. Suddenly my dream car seemed a lot closer and in reach.
I talked to this kid for hours that night - he was very helpful and thoughtful and I really thank him for bringing me to what I am today. Within my first month of dropshipping on eBay, I made $800 in profits. I was enthralled. This was a miracle for me at the time.
I spent every second of my free time listing things and managing sales, at school, at home, even while traveling. I never stopped. I was addicted. Sales increased exponentially. Things just would not stop selling. The next month I made over$2000profit. Then the next I made $5000. And the next $10,000. And the next $25,000. You can guess where this is going.
Fast forward three years and I am driving my dream car and managing four businesses. All from just one kid who cared to talk with me that one night. Dropshipping set me on a path of self fulfillment from an early age, and I couldn't be happier for it. Now, I don't do dropshipping anymore for my retail business. Instead I purchase my own stock, but it is undoubtedly a great way to start.
So, what is dropshipping?
Well, dropshipping involves:
  1. Finding a reliable supplier who is willing to send out products in your name and not their company's name (blind dropshipping)
  2. Listing every last one of the products from their site into yours. Markup the prices at least 15%. The more products, the higher chances you have of selling in high volumes. This part is tedious. Remember, you have spent $0 so far, you have not bought anything yet.
  3. When an order comes in and your customer has paid you, you then buy the product your customer ordered from your supplier and enter their address so it can be sent to your customer. You only buy the products after they have sold in your store.There is no investment or risk.
  4. Enjoy your profits!
Let's say that you have decided to focus Cyber Security, this is now your "vertical market.
Go on to a Jobboard aggregator like indeed.com, and research what companies are looking for Cyber Security expertise and find the most senior job you can find in this particular niche. Let's say for instance that you see that Exxon are advertising for a Global Director for Cyber/Information Security for a salary of $150,000 in Houston.
This is now your "first" search assignment. Using your LinkedIn recruiter account, make a search for every relevant Cyber Security Director based within a 100km vicinity of the job you have seen. Not every potential candidate will have written their LinkedIn account in the same way - so make sure you use derivatives in the Boolean search.
For instance:
(Director OR VP OR SVP) AND (Security OR compliance) AND (global OR head)
This will bring up a list of relevant potential candidates. You can send these candidates an inmail using the LinkedIn account, asking them if/when they are interested to discuss an opportunity.
On average you can expect to get a response rate of approximately 20% from your inmail. So 100 messages sent, leads to 20 candidates that are open for a conversation.
Speak to the candidates, ask about their current situation, what is happening at their current employer and for what kind of opportunities they would consider changing jobs for. Once this has been established you can then sell the job, that you had spotted on the online Jobboard and see if they are interested in it.
If they are, that's perfect. You do a more in depth interview and ask them for references that can verify the information on their CV.
You take the references from the previous employers, check that the candidate is actually any good and whilst you do that you can also ask them if they are currently having challenges recruiting good people - this will lead to more opportunities that you can work on, and will enable you to build a network of clients that are interested in Cyber Security expertise.
Once you have some suitable candidates, go back onto LinkedIn and search for the relevant hiring manager within Exxon.
For example put this into the advanced search:
Job title: (information security OR cyber security)
Location: Houston
Call the switchboard and ask to be put through to the people on the list. Find out who the MAN is (money, authority, need). Contact them and sell your candidates to them.
If it works, then you're in business and can expect to charge a bare minimum of 15% of the annual salary - €22500 - but you can charge upwards of 30%.
Now the beauty of doing it this way, is that every candidate you have contacted, is actually a senior professional who will also have hiring responsibility. Cyber Security is in demand, so as you're interviewing your candidates you can also check to see what possibilities you have to support their current vacancies.
If you speak to 20 senior candidates, you could realistically expect that 20% of them have vacancies that they are struggling to fill.
As a "specialist" headhunter in this space, you can offer your services on a retained basis, where they pay a part of the recruitment fee upfront, let's say $5000 from a potential cut price fee of $15000 and the rest is payable once a candidate has been hired.
Do this process every day - pick a job per day, find the candidates, establish if the candidates are interested or if they have vacancies themselves and then sell the candidates to the job. If clients have other vacancies then sell a retainer and see if they're interested.
Even as a rookie, with no headhunting experience, by working systematically, speaking to 20 candidate/managers per day - you will pick up vacancies that you're able to fill and if you can sell them on a retainer basis then the money is in the bank immediately.
There are 22 working days in a month, so that 440 candidate/managers spoken to, 22 jobs that you've seen advertised and then offered candidates for and probably a whole lot more that you picked up along the way.
You should be looking at a minimum of 2 deals in the bank for around $40,000 of fees for you and with a strong network of 500+ candidates/clients that you can work with in subsequent months.
Hard work initially but easy once you get going.
6. Develop an app story of Ankit Srivastava Here is how I did it.
I made an app.
I had a few goals,to make it the one of the best apps.
It was my first app
Now There were a few things i realized.
I don't have money to advertise.
So what to chose to make?Something which everyone,literally everyone will download if they find it good.
There were thousands of apps already of the same type,so what could I offer extra?The UI.(looks)
So here is the thing,I realized I have to make something which everyone uses and then it has to look good.
So i decided it will be a Music Player.
To make things easy,it has to be free,I am not a good seller,It doesn't hurt anyone to try a free app.
But then how will I earn?Well via ads.
There is an advantage of ads. as well.As the user base increases.Your money per month increases.If your app is good,user will keep it for a long time and each month your money will increase.
I learned how to make android apps in 7 months.Did freelancing side by side to earn some cash for videos,some screenshots,websites etc etc.
Launched my app ,spammed the shit out of internet,used to sleep for 4 hrs only,the rest used to go spamming,SPAM SPAM SPAM
Did it for 20 hrs a day for 20 days.Only used to sleep when my eyes couldn't open any longer.Then after that did nothing.
My app gained momentum and now has 320,000 downloads within 6 months of it's launch,getting 6500+ downloads these days.
And these has been my earnings.
1st month 100$
2nd month 200$
3rd month 420$
4th month 670$
5th month 1400$
This month (December) 2200$
The app has started earning me 100$ a day,so i am expecting 3400$ the next month.
(These earnings are not cumulative)
The key factor :presentation, video ,screenshots,website,all looked good.
And app?I rate it among the prettiest of all the music apps.
I am expecting the app will be earning me around 5k-10k per month after 6-8 months.
Now let me tell you something to inspire you:
if you go to the android store and search for a "Music Player",my app ranks above google's own music player. Achieved everything within 6 months.
The other answers will give you an idea of many of the options to monetize a high-traffic website, but the truth is, statistically speaking since I don't know you, that you will never get enough traffic to make a full-time income monetizing your blog withjust ads.
Think beyond display ads to monetize your traffic. We have sites that get millions of page views per month and some that get a few thousand per month. Believe it or not, we make more money on the less-trafficked sites? How? I'll get to that in a second, but let me show you the before and after of one of our sites when we replaced banner ads with ads to our own product we private labeled:
This is from one month to the next and nothing changed other than our monetization strategy. Everything remained almost identical:
  • same site design (replaced the Google ads with the same size of our own ads promoting our private labeled product)
  • almost the exact same unique visitors and page views month over month
Your current blog writes about an overcrowded topic (general technology), since there are so many other blogs that cover such topics (from Mashable to MacRumors). Is there any way for you to specialize in one specific topic?
For example, instead of just "tech news", could you write about "Apple Watch news" or "Instagram marketing for small business"? The latter being the better choice. Too many people try a blog on a broad topic and give up too quickly. You have to put as many factors in your favor as possible, why would you do otherwise? I want you to succeed.
I want you to explore a very specific topic that you enjoy and are already kind of good at (you can always get better). This way, you can sell high-end consulting, create information products, start a monthly membership club on the topic or a paid newsletter, etc. For example, if you wrote about "Instagram marketing for small businesses" you have a HUGE audience, but a specific topic: perfect!
If you can change your domain to something like: http://IGforSmallBiz.com and wrote all about this topic and nothing else, get interviewed on podcasts for this topic, and then offer consulting and courses on this product, then you can make a full-time living ($100k+ USD per year) with just a few thousand visitors per month - seriously. Of course, this is just one idea and there are millions of these - I could go through examples like this everyday and it is how we went from 6-figures to 7-figures. You can do it too.
Now, get to writing and making that dough! Remember, provide tons of value up front and don't be afraid to charge for high-touch service and products.
These are the best answers i came across on the quora for making money online!
Cheers!
If I were you, I would focus on building your skill-set.  I am assuming you are starting off in your career so for you experience and building your talent is key right now. You need to pay the bills but the bigger thing is the experience for you. If you do want to get more responsibility, you can take the initiative and work on a project that will help your team. Maybe it would be documenting your results in terms of cold calling for the field agents. Maybe you could track the person's name,  time you called, the overall response, and you can jot down some take aways if any.

Also, if you want to get good at sales, I highly suggest you take a look at a book called Spin Selling 
  • Discover a good or service that you can produce/provide for a profit, and go into business selling that good or service.
  • Everybody wants to know how to earn money faster. What's there to answer? You save up. You work at a better-paying job. You do your best at work to get noticed to get promoted. You spend within your means. You get a 'less expensive' girlfriend/boyfriend. What's there to answer?
Read More »