rosey12387

Can you pull a map from google^?

Tried but was having trouble.

Here are the exact coordinates if you do a googlemaps search: 45.508436, -73.525245.

From their website:

"Here at Club Sommet, you'll enjoy a beautifully designed suite in a building filled with fabulous amenities. From the Cecconi Simone designed lobby, lounge and rooftop deck to the convenient concierge, underground parking, indoor and outdoor swimming pools, fitness centre, yoga room, landscaped courtyard with a cascading waterfall, winter garden lounge, bike storage and lockers, dry cleaner and depanneur - everything at Club Sommet has been designed to offer you a fabulous urban lifestyle."

On the side of Pierre-Dupuy opposite the casino, there is a parking area just above the circuit Gilles Villeneuve. Anyone else think that's a good area for a hotel/entertainment/possible Cirque du Soleil complex?

I like it. And I think with signage the greyness will be broken up a bit.

I'm not so sure about the ruelle theory. Unless I'm missing something, in between Drummond and Crescent is de la Montagne, so if the project touches both streets wouldn't it have to span over de la Montagne?

While I'm certainly not trying to take the wind out of the sails of this project, (great design!) I was wondering what you guys thought of this design compared to Panizini's original renderings for the lot a few years ago. (I think at that time THIS project was called Le Mackay)

i have not mentionned the environment once here, i'm just rolling my eyes at how badly Labonté is flip-flopping... after all the crap thrown at car drivers, now all of a sudden he wants them back... yeah:rolleyes:

My bad, I thought it was alluding to hypocrisy over cars being bad for environmental reasons.

its somewhat of a good idea... but its coming after years of car bashing and "we can close ste-catherine to cars, buisness will be better"...

 

that was a load of bullshit alright

Don't you know the environment is only in danger when the economy is doing well? It's a new theory called "global selective memory".

It's time ecological conservatives and eco-capitalists like Jim Harris (ex-leader of the Green Party) get seats in Ottawa. The environment has always and will always be a pertinent issue that needs to be taken care of. Even without the whole idea of carbon emissions our environment is in major need of help. Several eco-capitalists have run for the Conservatives especially in Toronto, unfortunately none have yet to be elected by their constituents. I'm crossing my fingers for the next election, whenever that may be, regardless of which party comes out on top, that we elect some eco-capitalists to the HOC.

do you thing the three other political partys would have even think about this coalition if Harper's plan would have been reasonnable ?

While I can't speak for anyone else I sure do.

Let's remember all the confidence votes of the last parliament. 2 of the 3 coalition parties always voted non-confidence. The other one, remained absent and has finally found a good time to take power after a 2.5 year break. This coalition was formed due to a so called lack of stimulus. The opposition parties have yet to really explain what stimulus means other than throwing money at failing companies.

Pour ma part, je crois que le Bloc fait bien d'appuyer la coalition. Après tout, les conservateurs n'ont que 37,6% du vote populaire alors c'est normal que les 62,4% autre décident pour le ROC.

Meanwhile only 38.1% of Quebec voters voted Bloc and they got 65.3% of Quebec seats. And Chretien won a majority with 38.46% in 1997. We can all play with statistics until we're blue in the face.

What's more important in this discussion is there should be a large distinction between Quebec bashing and separatist bashing. While the Bloc claims to be a party looking out for Quebec's interests it time and time again clearly states it is a party who’s goal is the separation of Quebec. Those two things are not necessarily one and the same.

The anger is not aimed at Quebecers or Quebec as a whole. It is at the 38.1% of those who voted in Quebec who voted for the Bloc a party made up of separatist MPs.

Because let's not forget before Harper the Bloc did not like Martin, nor did they like Chretien or Mulroney, the man many PC MPs betrayed to create the Bloc. The Bloc would likely hate Jack Layton just as much if he became PM.

The Bloc has the unrealistic goal of making sure all of Quebec's needs are always met. And since there are 9 other provinces that will never be possible no matter what party is in power. Not to mention it's questionable that a party could have the specific goal of continually supporting the interests of a province when that province has over 7,000,000 people all with opinions of their own. Let's not forget we have 5 major parties, with 5 different platforms to choose from next Monday not 1. All 5 seem to think Quebec has different interests.

As well, if the same party holding the balance of power was a Manitoban or Newfounlander separatist party the same anger would exist. It is not about Quebec persay. It is about separatists holding Canada by the balls. It doesn't matter where that hand comes from. Now if you’d like to cry about how those mean English Canadians are hurting your feelings, that’s your prerogative, just know you’re not actually important enough for them to care about.

And in the case that that anger is directed towards Quebec in general well that's because the heart of the problem comes from Quebec. Despite having only 23% of Canada's population out of the now 163 seats that have power in the house 40% of them, 64 seats, are from Quebec. Meanwhile, the west which represents 31% of the population has 21 seats (1 each for Alberta and Saskatchewan) so they rightfully feel their needs will not be meant.

Could you blame them for wanting Quebec out of their country? In fact, considering it has taken over 141 years for Quebec to make a decision could you not see why they are fed up? I’m sure many of them wish they could have a referendum on Quebec and give it a one-way ticket out of confederation. Let’s not forget Quebec separatists have had two chances and failed and from polling it looks like they would fail again today. It is not fair to keep Canada ransom until Quebec decides it’s ready.

Meta level point of view or not, it doesn't make it true.

Let me tell you, those alligator hunter's in Mississippi living in trailers sure aren't rich.

Conservatism is an ideology and ideologies can be shared by the poor and the rich alike.

I am nowhere near rich and my family was actually pretty poor not too many years ago, but regardless I'm a fiscal conservative through and through.

I mean the party that represent the richest people should not have an infinite advantage compare to other parties

Did you poll all the rich people and ask who they vote for? I didn’t know all those rural seats, the majority of those held by the conservatives, were full of reach people. I didn’t realize all the mutli-millionaires were camping out in Beauceville, Quebec, Brandon, Manitoba and Lethbridge, Alberta. Let’s take a look at which ridings some of the richest Canadians do live in:

Shaugnessy in Vancouver: Liberal-held Vancouver Quadra

Rockcliffe Park in Ottawa: Liberal-held Ottawa Vanier

Forest Hill in Toronto: Liberal-held Eglinton-Lawrence, Liberal-held St. Paul’s

Rosedale in Toronto: Liberal-held Toronto Centre

Bride Path in Toronto: Liberal-held Don Valley West

Westmount in Montreal: Liberal-held Westmount-Ville Marie

Outremont in Montreal: NDP-held Outremont

Hampstead in Montreal: Liberal-held Mont-Royal

Laval-sur-Lac: Liberal-held Laval-les-Iles

Tuxedo in Winnipeg: Liberal-held Winnipeg South Centre (the only Liberal seat in Manitoba)

The Uplands in Victoria: NDP-held Victoria

If they are the party of the rich, well then the rich have pretty poor representation.

While I’m aware many of these people could have still voted Conservative because they only make up part of the riding, until you go door to door and ask these people who they vote for I think your point is mute. Some of the richest men in Canadian politics are Liberals as are some of the richest voters and I know that from first hand experience.

Just because you don’t agree with the way the Conservatives handle fiscal issues does not make them a party for the rich.

Area needs it bad too. Only place where a McDonald's, a Lafleur's and a Harvey's can all close.

As tempted as I am to answer that a promise is a promise so I'm not going to. Maybe if it ever makes it into another thread some time.

Désolé, j'ai effectivement oublié d'éllaborer sur ce point.

Thanks. I appreciate the info.

(And just on a final note, and I promise final Malek. I'm really curious to know why when this topic comes up the West Island is always mentioned. There are a lot more federalist pockets in the province. If I was not from Canada, I'd assume all of Quebec including the rest of Montreal voted overwhelmingly to separate but that this retched federalist West Island place ruined it for everyone else )

Bien que je sais que tu es ironique dans ton commentaire et que tu as ton point de vue de la ''partition'', ce débat à déjà entièrement été fait en droit international.

 

Ce qui ressort des conventions et de la Charte de l'ONU est que la règle première est de préserver l'intégralité des frontières, et ce presque à peu importe le coût.

 

Comme Malek l'a dit, à moins qu'on tombe en guerre de révolution à la Russe, le West Island et Gatineau vont rester dans un Québec souverain.

 

Ce n'est pas pour t'obstiner, mais pour t'apprendre ce qui en est.

 

La partition n'aura pas lieu autant que le ciel est bleu, que l'eau est mouillée et que la nuit, il fait noir. C,est un fait, pas un sujet dont on peu débattre.

Could you explain to me why different geographical divisions of Quebec could not have a democratic referendum? Same way Quebec the province can? I'm not trying to be snappy, I'm trying to "learn".

Taliban-Jack? Quoi?

Yes the man who would like us to negotiate with the Taliban. You know that group that pays people to douse school girls in acid?

Wow for once I'm in agreement with Pauline, Quebec separatism would be the answer...for the rest of Canada.

And joining the U.S.? Personally, not for me. I'm proud to be Canadian and would like it to stay that way.

And by the way Malek, Northern Kosovo should go to Serbia. It's exceedingly Serbian and would not affect Kosovo whatsoever.

I agree, let's get on with the original discussion, but just before: don't for one second think partition is a little white lie. It is utterly possible.

And now back to the original topic...Quebec separatists and two federalist morons from Quebec, Taliban-Jack and "I'll talk about Kyoto until I'm green in the face but do absolutely nothing as environment minister" Dion, hijacking the Canadian parliament.

That's the best you can come up with Yara? Sorry I don't have any real examples from the country of Quebec. Maybe it's because it isn't a country yet? But hopefully for you, and I'm starting to think for myself as well, that could come to pass one day. Just remember same way Canada is divisible don't think for one moment that Quebec is not. There are enough federalist pockets on the Ontario and New Brunswick borders that your country of Quebec could quickly shrink in size.

And Malek, good try with UCIM, but it's a totally different situation.

Let me present the following hypothetical situation showing how if Quebec separates and keeps the same parliamentary system (or even have a different one) then it too could be a “joke”.

Say the PQ wins an election and a referendum is called. Results 60% yes, 40% no. Clear majority, so Quebec separates. Then as Quebec starts to become a country the PQ will likely no longer be able to support being a party for the left and right. Different parties will likely form, representing an array of different political beliefs. Then, let’s say, a Canadian federalist party forms and the majority of the 40% that voted ‘no’ are unified under that banner and vote en masse for that party. You could then very well have a rightfully sovereign country with a government that does not support its sovereignty.

If any of you want to call the parliamentary democracy system a joke, go ahead. But to call Canada a joke, because of it, is senseless.

And Erick, this is due to the fact the federal government is a parliamentary democracy. Correct me if wrong, so is the Assemble Nationale. This could happen in Quebec just as easily.

Yara, while the Liberals and the Bloc themselves are not self-proclaimed leftist parties look at their leaders, especially Duceppe.

My problem is this. Quebec needs to make up its mind. If Quebec decides to leave fine, if Quebec decides to stay fine as well. But I don't think it if fair a so-called coalition of the left can be formed when some Bloc voters are not remotely leftist. Quebec does have the right to choose it's future...but choose already! It's not fair for the rest of the Canadian public. The Bloc could easily bring this government down, form a coalition with the Conservatives, then bring them down and form a coalition with the left again and so on and so on. Quebec's rights, although they should be respected, should not come at the expense of the rights of the 9 other provinces to have stable government whether it be from right-wing or left-wing parties.

While I am not a creationist, just on a side note, many Jewish scholars explain that the 6000 years do not correspond accordingly to years as we count them now. It is not as if they actually believe dinosaurs lived between days 4 and 5.

I can't account for Christian creationists, however. Not sure how literal they take it.

And just a note on the Conservatives, because it's getting very tiring hearing the same things over and over again. For one, the Conservative party of Canada is not the Bush administration. The Conservatives had cabinet ministers at both the Democratic and Republican conventions and there are many Conservatives, in general, who support the Democrats over the Republicans as well those who support the Republicans but dislike Bush.

As for trying to void this country of culture and turning us into a "51st" state per say. Give me a break. And calling the U.S. cultureless is ridiculous in itself.

On September 19. the Conservatives announced new funding of $25 million over five years for TV5 -- Quebec's commercial-free arts and culture channel. And with the whole ‘arts cuts’ debacle, from my understanding, net spending on arts and culture had actually increased under the Harper government. The cuts were to programs not deemed priorities or deemed as ineffective. Were they right? Maybe not. I’m not in the arts so I don’t know what the exact impact of these particular programs is. But to act like the Conservatives are trying to just wipe away all culture is an easy cop-out just to remain anti-Conservative. Which federalist party promotes the most provincial autonomy? That would be the Conservatives. And the more provincial autonomy a province has the better able it is to build on defining its own cultural impacts.