Recent Updates
  • Dolphins have started out 2-0 on the road. Jets lost Aaron Rodgers for the year, although Aaron Rodgers claims he may return towards the end of the season. In any case, Dolphins are my pick to make the superbowl now rather than the Jets. I strongly believe Aaron Rodgers would have made all of the difference in that Dallas Cowboys game for the New York Jets. Certainly, the Dallas Cowboys game would have been far more competitive if Rodgers was playing.
    Dolphins have started out 2-0 on the road. Jets lost Aaron Rodgers for the year, although Aaron Rodgers claims he may return towards the end of the season. In any case, Dolphins are my pick to make the superbowl now rather than the Jets. I strongly believe Aaron Rodgers would have made all of the difference in that Dallas Cowboys game for the New York Jets. Certainly, the Dallas Cowboys game would have been far more competitive if Rodgers was playing.
    Like
    8
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1335 Views
  • Watching my Jaguars VS the Chiefs. Second quarter and my Jags are up 3-0 in a game that has been full of mistakes. Jags just intercepted Mahomes right now. Heck yeah! It wouldn't surprise me one bit if my Jags do beat Kansas City today. I am not expecting another fluke year from Kansas City.
    Watching my Jaguars VS the Chiefs. Second quarter and my Jags are up 3-0 in a game that has been full of mistakes. Jags just intercepted Mahomes right now. Heck yeah! It wouldn't surprise me one bit if my Jags do beat Kansas City today. I am not expecting another fluke year from Kansas City.
    Like
    15
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1439 Views
  • I know i have said this before and i will repeat it again as i have gotten no answers from Trump Supporters. Trump is the man that along with congress signed Cisa into law. Cisa is precisely what allows Government to Collude with Big Tech in censoring speech through a backdoor portal. It allows Government to abridge freedom of speech.

    You have to understand that it was a Republican President (Donald J. Trump), along with a majority Republican Congress that made Cisa possible. It wasn't the Democrats, although the Democrats ended up enforcing it to its maximum Capacity.

    That is why i know this Trump indictment and everything else going on with Trump is all theater. Nothing is going to happen to Trump. I am more convinced than ever that this move is for the sole purpose of creating a victim out of Trump that way the Establishment can justify a Trump win and make it appear as if Trump was elected by the people rather than selected by the Establishment's Uni-Party.

    Please tell me why you support a man that colluded with the Establishment against the people to sign a law that abridges freedom of speech contrary to the first amendment?
    I know i have said this before and i will repeat it again as i have gotten no answers from Trump Supporters. Trump is the man that along with congress signed Cisa into law. Cisa is precisely what allows Government to Collude with Big Tech in censoring speech through a backdoor portal. It allows Government to abridge freedom of speech. You have to understand that it was a Republican President (Donald J. Trump), along with a majority Republican Congress that made Cisa possible. It wasn't the Democrats, although the Democrats ended up enforcing it to its maximum Capacity. That is why i know this Trump indictment and everything else going on with Trump is all theater. Nothing is going to happen to Trump. I am more convinced than ever that this move is for the sole purpose of creating a victim out of Trump that way the Establishment can justify a Trump win and make it appear as if Trump was elected by the people rather than selected by the Establishment's Uni-Party. Please tell me why you support a man that colluded with the Establishment against the people to sign a law that abridges freedom of speech contrary to the first amendment?
    Like
    14
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1745 Views
  • I don't know if any of you American Football fans saw all of the players wearing number 0 yesterday? This number never existed in all my life time of watching Football and all of a sudden this year every team has a player with number 0.

    The Bucs Linebacker YaYa Diaby is number 0. The Miami Dolphins Wide Receiver Braxton Berrios is number 0 and so is Jacksonville Jaguars Wide Receiver Calvin Ridley another number 0. Does anyone know the reason for this? From the 3 games i watched, all of these number 0 players performed quite well yesterday.
    I don't know if any of you American Football fans saw all of the players wearing number 0 yesterday? This number never existed in all my life time of watching Football and all of a sudden this year every team has a player with number 0. The Bucs Linebacker YaYa Diaby is number 0. The Miami Dolphins Wide Receiver Braxton Berrios is number 0 and so is Jacksonville Jaguars Wide Receiver Calvin Ridley another number 0. Does anyone know the reason for this? From the 3 games i watched, all of these number 0 players performed quite well yesterday.
    Like
    10
    2 Comments 0 Shares 1701 Views
  • Ubelievable game between the Miami Dolphins and the Chargers. Tua threw for 466 yards and 3 Touchdowns. Tyreek Hill had 215 receiving yards and 2 Touchdowns. The Dolphins offense was unstoppable from the opening drive. They were so explosive that not even their 3 turnovers stopped them from winning this game.

    The two very concerning things i saw with the Dolphins was their run stop defense and of course the turnovers. Their run stop defense was horrendous. They did a decent job at containing Justin Herbert that is for sure.

    I strongly believe the dolphins would have won this game convincingly if they didn't have all of those turnovers and had they done a better Job at stopping the run. They couldn't stop the run for their lives. None the less this was one hell of a game. My oldest daughter for the first time watched a full football game with me. I tought her how footbal works for four quarters and now she understands it and loves it. We had a really good time.
    Ubelievable game between the Miami Dolphins and the Chargers. Tua threw for 466 yards and 3 Touchdowns. Tyreek Hill had 215 receiving yards and 2 Touchdowns. The Dolphins offense was unstoppable from the opening drive. They were so explosive that not even their 3 turnovers stopped them from winning this game. The two very concerning things i saw with the Dolphins was their run stop defense and of course the turnovers. Their run stop defense was horrendous. They did a decent job at containing Justin Herbert that is for sure. I strongly believe the dolphins would have won this game convincingly if they didn't have all of those turnovers and had they done a better Job at stopping the run. They couldn't stop the run for their lives. None the less this was one hell of a game. My oldest daughter for the first time watched a full football game with me. I tought her how footbal works for four quarters and now she understands it and loves it. We had a really good time.
    Like
    15
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1679 Views
  • It is officially over. My Jacksonville Jaguars have won game 1 on the road and against a divisional rival the Indianapolis Colts. I couldn't be happier for my Jacksonville Jaguars. Tampa Won earlier on! Currently watching the Miami Dolphins game and they are looking great on their first drive. Dolphins are now 2 yards away from the endzone. Hell no, Dolphins just fumbled after that amazing drive and handed the ball back to the Chargers.
    It is officially over. My Jacksonville Jaguars have won game 1 on the road and against a divisional rival the Indianapolis Colts. I couldn't be happier for my Jacksonville Jaguars. Tampa Won earlier on! Currently watching the Miami Dolphins game and they are looking great on their first drive. Dolphins are now 2 yards away from the endzone. Hell no, Dolphins just fumbled after that amazing drive and handed the ball back to the Chargers.
    Like
    15
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1613 Views
  • I have been looking for attornies to represent me on my religious discrimination case against the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. I was referred to an attorney by the name of Michael Julien, who's phone number is 561-995-9990. This attorney is a complete scumbag and deceiver who thought i was some pushover or something.
    He cannot be an expert on Title VII as he falsely claims, as most of his assertions are in fact contradictory to Title VII. I will expose all of the flaws in the logic he brought up and i refuted in our conversation today.

    1. According to this "Title VII attorney," who named pretty much all of the medical industries and agencies both Public and Private, who all agree that Covid is hazardous, is all the evidence the court needs to throw my case out. This of course means that he takes the recomendations of agencies such as the CDC as Law, and from his arguments it seems as he believes they Legislate Law. 25 years of experience in Law and Title VII has not helped him one bit. Unless he is trying to find ways to skirt the Law!

    CDC recomendations aren't equal to Law. The United States is a Country of Laws not about the Science nor any of their recomendations. The CDC, CMS nor any other agency cannot impose laws that violate my religious rights nor anyone elses. The University of Miami using these agencies to justify their religious discrimination is ridiclous and will not fly. The point this horrible attorney was trying to make is, that the court was going to decide that the University of Miami was within their rights to not accomodate my sincerely held religious beliefs against the nasal swab because of the science as stupid as this may sound. In other words. The courts according to this scumbag would not rule according to Title VII Law. The Courts would rule in favor of the University of Miami because they would consider the science over the actual law.

    This attorney spent most of his time talking to me about these health care institutions and their recomendations and completely avoided discussing Civil Rights Laws and that under no circumstances can someone's sincerely held religious beliefs be violated by an Employer. He continued using the very bad argument that the University of Miami is an at will employer that can fire individuals for any reason, or no reason at all. Although he is correct that they are an at will Employer, all Employers nation wide are required to abide by Civil Rights Laws such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Religion is a protected class, and no Employer can fire anyone because his religious beliefs conflict with a requirement of the Employer. The Employer needs to find a reasonable accomodation of which the University of Miami refused an accomodation which is a violation of Title VII.

    2. According to this Lawyer, i need to prove to the courts that my religious beliefs need to be consistent, and even claims that the courts would try and scrutinize your past to see if it is consistent with your sincerely held religious beliefs. This lawyer says that if you for example have vaccinated your children or yourself in the past. The court will throw out your case and you will lose.

    I will refute this postion in depth, as i did it verbally on the phone and was driving while speaking to this lawyer. I say to him 25 years of Law my ass. He is a complete scumbag and deserves to be exposed.
    Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 says as follows pertaining to the consistency of an employees religious beliefs. Section 12 Religious discrimination: [21]  The Supreme Court has made it clear that it is not a court’s role to determine the reasonableness of an individual’s religious beliefs, and that “religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection.”[22]  An employee’s belief, observance, or practice can be “religious” under Title VII even if the employee is affiliated with a religious group that does not espouse or recognize that individual’s belief, observance, or practice, or if few – or no – other people adhere to it.[23]   

    Source: https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/section-12-religious-discrimination#h_9593682596821610748647076

    Two points he made in our conversation were refuted on the above source. 1. He said that my religion which is Jewish would disqualify me from having a belief that isn't particularly taught by most Jews. The fact that a belief can be “religious” under Title VII even if the employee is affiliated with a religious group that does not espouse or recognize that individual’s belief, observance, or practice, or if few – or no – other people adhere to it, completely refutes this lawyer with 25 years of experience in Law.

    The second Point is the fact that “religious beliefs do not need to be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection," clearly refutes this scumbag's line of argumentation. Furthermore, Title VII does say that religiois beliefs can evolve and even change, which completely refutes the position of this scumbag lawyer.

    Source: Employers should be aware that an employee’s religious beliefs and practices may evolve or change over time, and that this may result in requests for additional or different accommodations.[241]  Similarly, the employer has the right to discontinue a previously granted accommodation that is no longer utilized for religious purposes or subsequently poses an undue hardship. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/section-12-religious-discrimination#h_71848579934051610749830452

    Considering the above evidence from Title VII, the Employee's beliefs can change and the Employer is obligated to accomodate the Employee's new belief, which is completely contrary to what this lawyer said over the phone that an employee's religious beliefs are unchanging and thus his past decisions determines his fate in the court of Law, and thus the courts would actually throw out a case where the Court finds that an individual's religious beliefs are not consistent with past decisions. Is this really a Title VII expert? I believe this man, such as many idiot lawyers that don't even know how to letigate like him, are either imposters, or are prostitutes of Corporations such as the University Of Miami Miller School of Medicine.

    I can go on the whole day refuting this guy who claims to be a Title VII lawyer. If you live in Florida, please make sure you tell people not to contact this incompetent fool named Michael Julien!
    I have been looking for attornies to represent me on my religious discrimination case against the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. I was referred to an attorney by the name of Michael Julien, who's phone number is 561-995-9990. This attorney is a complete scumbag and deceiver who thought i was some pushover or something. He cannot be an expert on Title VII as he falsely claims, as most of his assertions are in fact contradictory to Title VII. I will expose all of the flaws in the logic he brought up and i refuted in our conversation today. 1. According to this "Title VII attorney," who named pretty much all of the medical industries and agencies both Public and Private, who all agree that Covid is hazardous, is all the evidence the court needs to throw my case out. This of course means that he takes the recomendations of agencies such as the CDC as Law, and from his arguments it seems as he believes they Legislate Law. 25 years of experience in Law and Title VII has not helped him one bit. Unless he is trying to find ways to skirt the Law! CDC recomendations aren't equal to Law. The United States is a Country of Laws not about the Science nor any of their recomendations. The CDC, CMS nor any other agency cannot impose laws that violate my religious rights nor anyone elses. The University of Miami using these agencies to justify their religious discrimination is ridiclous and will not fly. The point this horrible attorney was trying to make is, that the court was going to decide that the University of Miami was within their rights to not accomodate my sincerely held religious beliefs against the nasal swab because of the science as stupid as this may sound. In other words. The courts according to this scumbag would not rule according to Title VII Law. The Courts would rule in favor of the University of Miami because they would consider the science over the actual law. This attorney spent most of his time talking to me about these health care institutions and their recomendations and completely avoided discussing Civil Rights Laws and that under no circumstances can someone's sincerely held religious beliefs be violated by an Employer. He continued using the very bad argument that the University of Miami is an at will employer that can fire individuals for any reason, or no reason at all. Although he is correct that they are an at will Employer, all Employers nation wide are required to abide by Civil Rights Laws such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Religion is a protected class, and no Employer can fire anyone because his religious beliefs conflict with a requirement of the Employer. The Employer needs to find a reasonable accomodation of which the University of Miami refused an accomodation which is a violation of Title VII. 2. According to this Lawyer, i need to prove to the courts that my religious beliefs need to be consistent, and even claims that the courts would try and scrutinize your past to see if it is consistent with your sincerely held religious beliefs. This lawyer says that if you for example have vaccinated your children or yourself in the past. The court will throw out your case and you will lose. I will refute this postion in depth, as i did it verbally on the phone and was driving while speaking to this lawyer. I say to him 25 years of Law my ass. He is a complete scumbag and deserves to be exposed. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 says as follows pertaining to the consistency of an employees religious beliefs. Section 12 Religious discrimination: [21]  The Supreme Court has made it clear that it is not a court’s role to determine the reasonableness of an individual’s religious beliefs, and that “religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection.”[22]  An employee’s belief, observance, or practice can be “religious” under Title VII even if the employee is affiliated with a religious group that does not espouse or recognize that individual’s belief, observance, or practice, or if few – or no – other people adhere to it.[23]    Source: https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/section-12-religious-discrimination#h_9593682596821610748647076 Two points he made in our conversation were refuted on the above source. 1. He said that my religion which is Jewish would disqualify me from having a belief that isn't particularly taught by most Jews. The fact that a belief can be “religious” under Title VII even if the employee is affiliated with a religious group that does not espouse or recognize that individual’s belief, observance, or practice, or if few – or no – other people adhere to it, completely refutes this lawyer with 25 years of experience in Law. The second Point is the fact that “religious beliefs do not need to be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection," clearly refutes this scumbag's line of argumentation. Furthermore, Title VII does say that religiois beliefs can evolve and even change, which completely refutes the position of this scumbag lawyer. Source: Employers should be aware that an employee’s religious beliefs and practices may evolve or change over time, and that this may result in requests for additional or different accommodations.[241]  Similarly, the employer has the right to discontinue a previously granted accommodation that is no longer utilized for religious purposes or subsequently poses an undue hardship. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/section-12-religious-discrimination#h_71848579934051610749830452 Considering the above evidence from Title VII, the Employee's beliefs can change and the Employer is obligated to accomodate the Employee's new belief, which is completely contrary to what this lawyer said over the phone that an employee's religious beliefs are unchanging and thus his past decisions determines his fate in the court of Law, and thus the courts would actually throw out a case where the Court finds that an individual's religious beliefs are not consistent with past decisions. Is this really a Title VII expert? I believe this man, such as many idiot lawyers that don't even know how to letigate like him, are either imposters, or are prostitutes of Corporations such as the University Of Miami Miller School of Medicine. I can go on the whole day refuting this guy who claims to be a Title VII lawyer. If you live in Florida, please make sure you tell people not to contact this incompetent fool named Michael Julien!
    Section 12: Religious Discrimination
    Notice Concerning the Undue Hardship Standard in Title VII Religious Accommodation Cases. This document was issued prior to the Supreme Court’s decision in Groff v. DeJoy, 143 S. Ct. 2279 (2023).
    Like
    14
    2 Comments 0 Shares 2336 Views
More Stories