Canadian Government Website Tries to Freak Out Children

See the source image

Hey, you can’t blame me for this! This is an official Canadian government website announcing that “Santa is moving to the South Pole” because of Climbit Change melting the North Pole (

The site is called “Weak Signals,” because it’s supposed to scan the environment to detect “weak signals of possible change.” I think it also denotes a very, very weak commitment to the truth.

Santa Claus, says the Canadian government, has signed “an agreement with the international community”–whatever that is–that will help “relocate individuals and corporations facing the impacts of climate change.”

They want world government so bad, they can taste it. A world government run by themselves. And if they think it might be helpful to scare the kiddies with visions of Santa and his elves drowning as the ice suddenly gives way–well, they’re immoral enough to do that.

See, if they can seal the deal on Climbit Change, they win all the marbles. Once you establish that everything you do is to Save The Planet, you can do anything you please. Sort of like the way ordinary liberties get suspended or trampled on in wartime, when the state doesn’t have time for all the niceties. It used to worry Winston Churchill that World War II might go on long enough for the government to grow addicted to “wartime measures.” As it was, rationing in Britain went on for years after the war was over: the government just couldn’t give it up.

Don’t let “the international community,” whoever the blazes they are, get a hammerlock on Lady Liberty: because they won’t let go.

14 comments on “Canadian Government Website Tries to Freak Out Children

  1. Sort of like The Patriot Act being handily and miraculously prepared, read, marked up, passed by the House and Senate and signed by President G. W. Bush on October 26, 2001, little more than a month after September 11, 2001. Nothing suspicious there. And Homeland Security wasn’t far behind, being signed, sealed and delivered to unsuspecting Americans on November 25, 2002. Our Congress can tie their collective shoe laces that fast! And yet, when it comes to ripping rights from the American people, they get the job done lickety-split.

    Nothing to see here. Move along.

    1. What? Those upstanding, moral, ethical people on the Hill? I’m shocked! Mr. Hegel would be proud.

    2. Two different things: 1) Having certain elements of the Patriot Act already on paper, the result of several years’ work; 2) Having the whole thing already drawn up and ready to go.

      No. 2 would imply that 535 members of Congress knew 9/11 would happen and not one of them ever blabbed about it. That’s just not credible, and it leads inevitably to conspiracy theorizing, which I reject. Not only do I hold it unjust to make such sweeping accusations, especially when we don’t have a lot of evidence; but I simply can’t attribute that kind of Fu Manchu stuff to a bunch of blockheads who couldn’t organize a softball tournament with only two teams in it.

      This is a sore point with me. I lost friends on 9/11, and I don’t appreciate the conspiracy theory. It is disrespectful to their memory.

      Sorry, I don’t mean to snap at anybody, especially on Christmas Day. But really, our government is more than bad enough without thinking they have it in them to assassinate 3,000 Americans and then successfully keep quiet about it. Lie to us, steal from us, treat us like fools–you bet, every day. But to go out and murder a whole bunch of us–no. Not even a Democrat would do that.

    3. I don’t believe that anyone in the US governement had prior knowledge of 9/11, but I believe there the Patriot Act was in place, waiting for an opportunity to be used.

    4. . . . as in – ‘never let a good crisis go to waste’? They’ve become expert in that.

    5. We should remember that the nearest thing to 9/11, in US history, is the attack on Pearl Harbor. I disregard theories that “Roosevelt knew it was coming,” blah-blah. Most of the Japanese government didn’t know it was coming. But aside from that, America responded very swiftly indeed.

      True, it’s easier to do that when you have an enemy with a flag and a navy and you can declare war on him.

      I admit that Churchill was right to worry that government might easily get addicted to “wartime measures.” That’s always in the picture. It doesn’t require any special explanation: lust for power is part of fallen man’s sin nature.

    6. There are, of course, people in the government whose job is to draw up contingency plans. Some of those would have gone into the Patriot Act. There would also be historical precedent–from various measures taken during WWII, for instance–to serve as models.

      I was working in a Congressional campaign around that time, and the candidate had mixed feelings about the Patriot Act. I said we ought to be concerned with restricting the enemy’s freedoms, not our own. But he had a hard time making up his mind–a weakness which saw him quite handily trounced in the election.

Leave a Reply