Gem Safari

Advocate for our children. Conservative, Logical, #SaveOurChildren

[Right Angle News Network @Rightanglenews]

It’s been revealed that the black woman Democrats put on a pedestal for “bravely” riding a train with Patriot Front members was engaging in indecent exposure on the train moments before the photo was taken and has a lengthy arrest record.

[Kevin Sorbo @ksorbs]

Does anybody actually believe that these are real people?

[Rodney @cryptojourneyrs]

@libsoftiktok Here’s the entire story SO FAR!

[Basil the Great @BasilTheGreat]

A 13 year old girl tells how scary it is going to school

"Asian boys coming up to me saying I'm gonna rape you"

Why are little girls in Britain living like this?

[Brian Lilley @brianlilley]

So let me get this straight.
Doug Ford is hounded to trying to buy a plane and incurring $200K in costs for returning.
Mark Carney buys 6 jets at $115 million each and spends $200k on catering for three flights and it is all good?

[Gem Safari @GemSafari]

@ctvottawa He has been useless to us.... ashamed I voted for him.

[Lynne Brooks 🇨🇦 @LynneBr37562004]

Montreal Canada 🇨🇦

Canadians is this what you voted for?

[Gem Safari @GemSafari]

@harryjsisson https://t.co/1mhRLVQ62Y

🤣🤣🤣 Oh Harry!!

[Gem Safari @GemSafari]

@harryjsisson Did you not see the greeting with red carpet he received???? Poopy on your head again Harry!

[Libs of TikTok @libsoftiktok]

BREAKING: Bonnie Wallace, the woman who was SILENCED and REMOVED from a @HoustonISD board meeting for exposing p*rn books in school libraries, is SUING the district for violating her First Amendment rights.

[Miranda Devine @mirandadevine]

Liberal woman who refused to cooperate with prosecutors after maniac attacked her on subway weeks before he pushed retired NYC teacher to death has regrets: "Maybe a part of me was just like, I don’t want to put another black man in jail." https://t.co/QihuYD552f

[Gem Safari @GemSafari]

@harryjsisson @SecWar @KidRock @USArmy Harry Sissy... you had no issues with Biden pissing money away. Hypocrit!

[The Canadian Independent @canindependent]

BREAKING: Ontario Court of Appeal Dismisses Lawsuit Over Teen Sean Hartman’s Death Following COVID-19 Vaccination.

In a significant decision released today, the Hartman v. Canada (Attorney General) ruling was upheld by the Ontario Court of Appeal, dismissing a lawsuit brought against the federal government over the death of a teenage boy following a COVID-19 vaccination. The court found that the claim had no reasonable prospect of success and agreed with a lower court decision to strike it in its entirety.

The case was brought by Daniel Hartman, whose 17-year-old son, Sean Hartman, died in September 2021. Sean, who had been described as previously healthy, was found dead beside his bed 33 days after receiving the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Following the vaccination, he had been taken to hospital due to symptoms his father believes were related to the vaccine.

Sean’s father, Dan Hartman, says his son chose to get vaccinated so he could continue playing hockey, as vaccination was required for participation in many sports and activities at the time.

Hartman’s lawsuit alleged that federal officials, including the Minister of Health, were negligent in approving, promoting, and monitoring the vaccine, and that they acted with reckless indifference or wilful blindness to potential risks.

The Court of Appeal acknowledged the devastating nature of Sean Hartman’s death, describing it as a tragic loss for his family and community. However, the judges concluded that the legal claims could not succeed. Central to the ruling was the finding that the federal government does not owe a private duty of care to individual members of the public when making broad public health decisions during a pandemic. Instead, such decisions are made in the interest of the population as a whole, often requiring difficult trade-offs that may carry risks for some individuals.

The court also determined that the claim failed to establish the necessary elements for misfeasance in public office. Specifically, there were no material facts showing that government officials acted in bad faith or knowingly engaged in unlawful conduct that would likely cause harm to Sean Hartman. The judges noted that the clinical trial data referenced in the lawsuit supported the conclusion that the vaccine was highly effective, undermining the argument that officials knowingly promoted a harmful or ineffective product.

In addition, the court found that the public statements cited in the claim were directed broadly at Canadians and did not create a specific relationship or obligation toward Sean Hartman as an individual. As a result, there was no legal basis to establish the proximity or duty of care required for a negligence claim.

Shockingly, the court also claimed that allowing Hartman’s case to proceed could have broader consequences, including discouraging governments from making urgent public health decisions during emergencies due to fear of legal liability.

The Court of Appeal further upheld the lower court’s decision to deny leave to amend the claim, finding that the proposed changes would not have addressed the fundamental legal deficiencies. The judges emphasized that lawsuits must be based on clearly pleaded facts, not on the possibility that supporting evidence might emerge later.

Ultimately, the court concluded that while the circumstances surrounding Sean Hartman’s death are deeply tragic, the law does not support holding the federal government liable under the claims presented. The appeal was dismissed, bringing the case to a close, with no costs awarded to either side.

The Canadian Independent spoke with Dan Hartman by phone this evening. He said he is “seriously considering” taking the case to the Supreme Court and that he and his legal team will evaluate their next steps over the coming week. Hartman noted that the cost of taking the case to the Supreme Court could exceed $20,000. He added that he does not want to ask those who have already donated to his cause to contribute further but said, “What other option do I have?”

Dan believes the courts are not willing to find the government liable or hold it accountable, as doing so would amount to an admission of wrongdoing. He also argues that such a finding would make his larger lawsuit against Pfizer significantly easier to pursue.

If you want to donate to Dan’s legal fund, you can do so at the link in the comments section.

[Gem Safari @GemSafari]

@ElectionsCan_E 🖕🖕🖕🖕 Stop using pencils!!! When fn bs people can bring pallets home to record. We are done. No democracy!!!!

[Mario Zelaya @mario4thenorth]

🤣🤣🤣

@CTVNews - see below.

And stop spreading misinformation

Like I said,

a pen is allowed.

PS. My defamation demand letter will hit your inbox and Bell Media’s General Counsel, tomorrow.

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

Canada is cooked

[sokrates @Sokratesws]

@elonmusk Claude is highly motivated to defeat OpenAI in all branches, but I have a feeling something significant will happen to them, and this bubble 🎈 will burst with this crazy price surge.

[Tim Pool @Timcast]

What the fuck

[Rebel News @RebelNewsOnline]

CBC documents show less than 5% of Canadians tune in despite $1 billion annual subsidy

Internal briefing documents from Canada’s public broadcaster offer a rare glimpse behind the curtain ... and the picture they paint is anything but flattering.

Despite commanding billions in taxpayer funding and dominating the media landscape by sheer size, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation appears to be losing the one thing that actually matters: its audience.

According to the documents, fewer than 5% of Canadians watch CBC television, with that number declining year after year. In an era where digital platforms, streaming services and online media are booming, the CBC stands out for moving in the opposite direction. Even as population growth surges and media consumption increases, the public broadcaster is shrinking.

Yet what’s striking is not just the decline, it’s the CBC’s apparent indifference to it. Rather than focusing on viewership, trust, or impact, the internal presentation leans heavily on spending as its primary measure of success. The broadcaster proudly highlights its share of national media expenditures, boasting that it accounts for a significant portion of spending on news, drama, and entertainment.

This obsession with scale over substance raises uncomfortable questions. If success is measured by how much money is spent rather than how many people are actually watching, what incentive is there to improve? With approximately $1.4 billion in annual taxpayer funding, making up the bulk of its nearly $2 billion revenue, the CBC operates in a financial reality far removed from its private-sector competitors.

That imbalance has broader consequences. By simultaneously receiving public funding and competing for advertising dollars, the CBC effectively crowds out independent media. Private outlets must fight for revenue in a market where their largest competitor is backed by the state.

The documents also reveal a sprawling organisation: thousands of employees, dozens of platforms and international bureaus. But scale alone does not translate into influence. In fact, the data suggests the opposite. Subscription revenues are falling, viewership is declining, and newer ventures like its streaming platform struggle to gain traction against global giants.

Perhaps most concerning is what the documents don’t address. There is little mention of audience satisfaction, public feedback, or editorial balance. The CBC has become increasingly out of step with large segments of the population, particularly on political and cultural issues.

In the end, the contradiction is stark. A broadcaster with unmatched resources and reach is steadily losing relevance among the very public that funds it.

[Concerned Canadian @Concern70732755]

Note the date -he candidly with his sage advice has been an abject failure !