Notre Dame on fire in Paris

You didn't watch the church go down. It hasn't been lost, no need to be devastated.

originally posted by: RudeMarine

originally posted by: IAMTAT
I'm suspicious that this happens during the week of Easter.

With the Muslims claiming a fire in the Al aqsa mosque at the same time, ya. Something that only Guilty children pull. "Happened to us too, so it couldn't have been us "

If this is found to be Arson and started as an act of Terror by a Muslim you will see Europe shake with anger. Macron will be tossed out of office and a new leader will round up the Muslims and ship them out.

There are no signs of arson, it was deemed accidental...

a reply to: djz3ro

Divine intervention, God set the fire so the wealthy would put themselves on the altar of sacrifice... you have all this money for my building but not my people? Time to dust off the guillotine I think.

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: TinySickTears

How.many renovation fires have happened in France the last year compared to arson? People keep acting like it's not a logical position to wonder, however data says otherwise.

Renovation fires aren't all that uncommon (you won't hear about all of them because some come under control quick enough to prevent any damage) but when there was actually people going round setting fire to churches for a while, obviously there will be more instances of arson than renovation fires.

I think anyone who says the possibility of arson didn't cross their mind is lying, given the human condition it was always a possibility but then facts started pouring in but some people were too preoccupied with dark skinned people smiling (not laughing and pointing at the burning cathedral, facing away from it with smiles on their faces, some people automatically assumed they were Muslim , based on the colour of their skin. Yes there will be people who have some sort of sick satisfaction at the burning of Notre Dame but I can promise you they are not all Muslim. This is a Catholic place of worship after all, I'm sure there will be some Protestants who find this funny, as well as some Athiests, Anarchists and Mentally Imbalanced folk. Then there will be a small number who clicked the lol emoji on Facebook by mistake (granted not many but one or two for sure, we've all done it though...

originally posted by: Mover3
a reply to: djz3ro

Divine intervention, God set the fire so the wealthy would put themselves on the altar of sacrifice... you have all this money for my building but not my people? Time to dust off the guillotine I think.

I do think it's in bad taste that the wealthy of france feel that the Cathedral is more deserving of their philanthropy than the poor of France. But then again, they won't get their name mentioned on a plaque that will stand for hundreds of years for heloing the poor...

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: RudeMarine

originally posted by: IAMTAT
I'm suspicious that this happens during the week of Easter.

With the Muslims claiming a fire in the Al aqsa mosque at the same time, ya. Something that only Guilty children pull. "Happened to us too, so it couldn't have been us "

If this is found to be Arson and started as an act of Terror by a Muslim you will see Europe shake with anger. Macron will be tossed out of office and a new leader will round up the Muslims and ship them out.

There are no signs of arson, it was deemed accidental...

Not true. The cause of the fire is still under investigation.

a reply to: djz3ro

Bad taste? They're taking the piss... I heard the fund has reached 1bn. What the truck? I don't think there was even that much for Haiti.

a reply to: djz3ro

I understand renovation fires happen, I'm just saying too many checked that potential off the list immediately like it was a ludicrous notion yet the statics denote a large uptick of that potential as of late.

What facts have poured in other than suspecting it was accidental?

All of what you say is true although you seemed to try an end around the fact that there are/were plenty of muslims celebrating this as well. Such a large western Christian phallic symbol nearly destroyed would have been a big accomplishment to someone trying to deal a blow to to such a demographic, especially considering the timing.

Honestly with the turmoil happening over there right now, if it were to be found to be terrorism related, for their sake do you think they would tell?

originally posted by: Mover3
a reply to: djz3ro

Bad taste? They're taking the piss... I heard the fund has reached 1bn. What the truck? I don't think there was even that much for Haiti.

French people donating money to French problems... Oh the horror.

WTF are you talking about? Let Haiti and their neighbours help themselves, just like the French are doing.

I support the French people and their desire to restore and maintain its heritage and symbols of Western progress.

Haiti's a # hole and itll remain a #hole ni matter how much money you pump into it. Its their problem. Quite literally.

Well, the really sad and disappointing fact in all of this is, the fact that the French government (and the recent donors) didn't really seriously fund the renovations of this national treasure far earlier...like decades ago.

That's not singling out the French in general (yes, in this case), because we all fall into the trap of not realizing what we have until it's gone (or almost so).

ETA - And yes, Haiti is, and always will be, a filthy, corrupt, lawless, S# hole!! Remove corruption from this equation and we might be making some progress. It's no wonder the Clinton's wanted to get involved there!! (but that's a topic for another thread).

the vatican should pay for it !

no other solution required

a reply to: sapien82

Yeah, like that will ever happen!! (Think: fat lady's flying and pigs singin')

I actually think it's a bad idea anyway. Put Vatican money into the restoration, and you make it a target.

It may be a religious treasure, but more importantly it is a historical treasure.

a reply to: RMFX1

"French people donating money to French problems..." yeah that's what they're doing. Notre dame suffering damage is one of the greatest problems the French people face.

"I support the French people", no.... no you don't.

"Haiti's a # hole and itll remain a #hole ni matter how much money you pump into it. Its their problem. Quite literally." Where did I say Haiti was our problem? The comparison was to do with humans receiving aid vs a building. French people barely living on a couple hundred euros a month yet Notre Dame is damaged and all the billionaires are rolling about with their cheque-books.

You sound like a narrow minded bigot, not gonna lie.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

surely the fact its a church already its painted itself as a target and has been for 700 years as has any church , by non religious and religious types !

I historical treasure of the Roman Catholic Church , therefore its their responsibility !
its about time the people stopped paying for the church , after all the wealth they have stolen from the religious working class and before that serfs!

a reply to: Mover3

Dude...how many times do you have to be reminded, this thread is about the fire at the Notre Dame de Paris???

It' is NOT about some cause the French people may, or may not, be involved in and whether the globalist elites wish to fund that cause!

It's pretty clear, you don't give a crap about the Notre Dame de Paris, yep, we got it!!!

You're all wound up around the fact the fire is allegedly (per you) getting more attention than your cause. So, start a thread about this, about how the Notre Dame de Paris fire has eclipsed your cause. Personally, I don't think it has eclipsed anything, rather I think you're just mad that someone OTHER than your cause is getting money. Okay, that's worthy of discussion, but just not on this thread.

Yesterday, when challenged, you alluded to the fact that the fire was set to intentionally distract from your cause. Okay, then your point here should be the fire was intentionally set to create a diversion. What that diversion is, and the merits of it, are irrelevant on this thread. Those are for another thread. How hard is it for you to see this???? (pretty hard apparently).

a reply to: sapien82

I don't have any argument in particular with your point, but couldn't one make the exact same argument for the French government's 'stealing money from their people'????

originally posted by: sapien82
the vatican should pay for it !

no other solution required

Why should they? The French are stepping up themselves. Why should the Vatican have anything to do with it?

originally posted by: Mover3
a reply to: RMFX1

"French people donating money to French problems..." yeah that's what they're doing. Notre dame suffering damage is one of the greatest problems the French people face.

"I support the French people", no.... no you don't.

"Haiti's a # hole and itll remain a #hole ni matter how much money you pump into it. Its their problem. Quite literally." Where did I say Haiti was our problem? The comparison was to do with humans receiving aid vs a building. French people barely living on a couple hundred euros a month yet Notre Dame is damaged and all the billionaires are rolling about with their cheque-books.

You sound like a narrow minded bigot, not gonna lie.

Youre right. The French are suffering other issues and the vast majority of them are not borne of the French people themselves. And Im sure that you know that...

GTFO with your socialist bull#. Rich private individuals can back and prop up whatever they want. Notre Dame us a fine example of deciding whats deserving and worthy of that. I'd personally rather donate to the restoration of such an important symbol of Western culture and achievement than some backwards beyond repair hell hole any day of the week.

Let them eat mud. People have already tried and failed to show thay particular group of people the way.

Those people ran their own country into the ground. Not the French, nor the Dominicans. They did it themselves.

You brought up Haiti, not me.

The state has to pay for the rebuild because the state owns the building , any Church or Cathedral built before 1905 in France belongs to the French state following a law passed in 1905 , the clergy are allowed use of the building.

The requirements of organised religion and the needs of France’s architectural heritage are far from identical. The stakes are similar, however. In a census taken in 1987 the Ministry of Culture counted 32,000 churches and about 6,000 chapels in France; there are eighty-seven cathedrals, all classified monuments. Only churches built after 1905 fall outside public ownership; they belong to the diocese of which the bishop is the head.

Under French law, the parish council owns the building itself and its furnishings and puts these at the disposal of the clergy for acts of worship. The parish council is responsible for the maintenance and restoration of the building but does not pay for lighting, heating or expenses connected with religious observances, which are the responsibility of the clergy. No building works can be undertaken without the agreement of the parish council, and the parish priest may not sell objects or remove them from the church without the permission of the mayor. If the church is listed, or classified as a monument of particular historical interest, the permission of the Commission on Historical Buildings must also be sought.
www.theartnewspaper.com...

originally posted by: gortex
The state has to pay for the rebuild because the state owns the building , any Church or Cathedral built before 1905 in France belongs to the French state following a law passed in 1905 , the clergy are allowed use of the building.

The requirements of organised religion and the needs of France’s architectural heritage are far from identical. The stakes are similar, however. In a census taken in 1987 the Ministry of Culture counted 32,000 churches and about 6,000 chapels in France; there are eighty-seven cathedrals, all classified monuments. Only churches built after 1905 fall outside public ownership; they belong to the diocese of which the bishop is the head.

Under French law, the parish council owns the building itself and its furnishings and puts these at the disposal of the clergy for acts of worship. The parish council is responsible for the maintenance and restoration of the building but does not pay for lighting, heating or expenses connected with religious observances, which are the responsibility of the clergy. No building works can be undertaken without the agreement of the parish council, and the parish priest may not sell objects or remove them from the church without the permission of the mayor. If the church is listed, or classified as a monument of particular historical interest, the permission of the Commission on Historical Buildings must also be sought.
www.theartnewspaper.com...

Exactly. And it doesn't even look like the state need to pay anyway because private individuals and entities who are entirely within their own right to decide what they spend their money on, are paying for it for them.

I personally can't see the problem here.