0
   

Canada = Switzerland

 
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2004 10:01 pm
http://www.onteast.on.ca/photos/sbanks.JPG
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2004 10:03 pm
Those were Lake Louise, Mont Tremblant, Quebec City and the Sandbanks near the Bay of Quinte.

This pic is near my hometown, where hamburger and mrs. hamburger still live.

http://www.onteast.on.ca/photos/24.JPG
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2004 10:08 pm
ya know Thousand Islands Dressing and Waldorf Salad?

this is where they came from

http://archive.tri-cityherald.com/travel/stories/nation/boldtcastle.jpeg

Quote:
Boldt Castle was to be more than a grand dream. It was to be a physical - and enduring - testament of Boldt's adoration for his wife, Louise.

As millionaire proprietor of the world-famous Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York City, money was no object to Boldt, who set out to build a full-size Rhineland castle on an island he purchased from E.K. Hart, a New York congressman.

Beginning in 1900, Boldt's family spent four summers on the island while as many as 300 stonemasons, carpenters and artists worked.

The plans included an indoor pool, 16 fireplaces, a power house, a drawbridge, Italian gardens, a swan pond, a three-story dovecote, a Roman archway that was to be the formal entry for launches delivering guests to the island, and service tunnels equipped with trolleys.

The Alster Tower, where the family lived those summers during construction, was the first building constructed. Also called the Playhouse, it was to contain a billiard room, a dance hall, library, bedrooms, kitchen and a bowling alley in the basement.

In 1904, tragedy struck when Louise died suddenly from tuberculosis. Boldt telegrammed the island and ordered an immediate halt to construction. Seventy years later unopened packages of tiles and other building materials still remained.

A brokenhearted Boldt could not imagine his dream castle without his beloved Louise. He never finished it, and he never returned to Heart Island.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2004 11:13 pm
pueo, Don't write off Canada, Canada, and/or Canada. It's really nice during the summer and fall. When my wife and I did the trans-Canada train tour last August, the weather was about perfect for a visit. Canada has so many different personalities for the visitor, that writing it off would be a big mistake.
0 Replies
 
pueo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2004 11:53 pm
but it's cold
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2004 11:56 pm
In the winter, maybe. But during the summer months, it's really nice and beautiful.
0 Replies
 
Ceili
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 12:02 am
Not during the summer. There are several deserts in canada, vineyards with world class vintages sprinkled from sea to shining sea, snorkeling, surfing, boating...........
I could go on.
During the Worlds 2001, Track and Feild marathon here two years ago africans were passing out from heat exhaustion. Africans!!!
0 Replies
 
pueo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 12:02 am
it's getting down to 74 degrees here at night. to me that's cold.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 11:55 am
pueo wrote:
but it's cold


Yeah, that's one of the great things about Canadia . . . i break out in a sweat whenever the temperature goes over 60 degrees Fluerenhagger . . .
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 11:58 am
The difference is that Canadians have been disarmed by their government and their own ignorance.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 11:59 am
Rolling Eyes

A well regulated militia, being a irrevelvancy in the minds of conservative fanatics--the right to keep an arsenal which would be the envy of third world dictators shall not be infringed.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 12:02 pm
Excuse me Setanta, but with 1 person per square mile, or less, no way I'd be out there unarmed. You'd have to be a fool.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 12:03 pm
No i wouldn't.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 12:06 pm
What is your opposition to firearm ownership by law abiding citizens? In every case where we've attempted to take away guns from citizens the crime rates have gone up. Give the guns back and they go down. Explain.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 12:09 pm
I have spend a great deal of time in the northern part of the U.S. and it's pretty sparse. But get up into rural Canada and there's nothing there but a bunch of drunks scattered about the shield. These are not necessarily friendly people. I'm assuming you probably spend most of your time in a more urban setting.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 12:17 pm
I'm under no obligation to explain your partisan slant on questionable statistics--the known leading cause of cancer in laboratory animals. Your comment about the population density of Canada is misleading. Of the roughly 10,000,000 square kilometers of the nation, about 75% is uninhabited altogether. The majority of the population clusters along the US border. Vancouver is about the size of Cleveland; Toronto, in which 10% of the nation's population lives, is about the size of Chicago. If you live in Canada, and the surrounding populations density is 1 per square mile, you have chosen an isolated spot. Especially now that the Inuit have largely abandoned nomadic habits, and the Slave nation and the Athabaskan nation have moved into villages, population density figures simply reflect how much "empty" land there is there. Population density as a justification for gun ownership is ludicrous, to my mind, with regard to any nation.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 12:22 pm
Really?

I have a cabin in Michigan that is miles from anywhere. My nearest neighbor is on the other side of a river. Going in there I have to take a 2-track about 1/2 mile off the main road.

Now, what if I stumble into someone that isn't supposed to be there? Or what if someone unwanted comes to visit? Just exactly what am I supposed to do? Nicely ask them to leave?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 12:26 pm
Depends on the level of threat. I'm not saying you should not have your bang-bang toys, i've just reacted to what i see as your ridiculous condemnation of Canada because they have different fire arm laws. It is their right, you know, to legislate as they see fit.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 12:29 pm
I do not have any "bang bang toys". Anybody who treats a gun like a toy deserves to be shot.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2004 12:38 pm
No one deserves to be shot, unless there is a clear-cut case of self-defense. If you shoot someone dead who has entered your home, with what can reasonably be characterized as violent intent, you have a good case for self-defense, whether you live in the Bronx among millions, or miles from anyone in the deep woods south of Christmas, Michigan. Shoot someone dead in your back yard, whether it's in St. Louis or somewhere deep in the Brooks Range in Alaska, and you'll play hell avoiding at the least a charge of manslaughter. Population density as a justification for gun ownership is a non-starter.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Help me plan our Great American Vacation - Discussion by FreeDuck
Wheelchair - Discussion by gollum
SPACE TRAVEL VIA THE HUBBLE TELESCOPE - Discussion by Charli
Silvia, Cauca Department, Colombia - Discussion by Pitter
How many countries have you visited? - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Been to Australia a couple of times - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Went to Ghirardelli Chocolate Festival today in SF - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Places I have traveled to - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Little known flying secrets! - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 04/23/2024 at 01:27:35