A statement, signed by the chief prosecutor of Paris, Remy Heitz, said no evidence had been found to suggest any "criminal origin" to the fire.
No Sign of Criminal Cause to Notre Dame Fire
- Thread starter USCBatgirl21
- Start date
A statement, signed by the chief prosecutor of Paris, Remy Heitz, said no evidence had been found to suggest any "criminal origin" to the fire.
Well if that's the story it must be true!
Wonder how many accidental fires occur on 800 years old oak treated with flame retardant. Maybe it rained gasoline and the roof leaked.
Wonder how many accidental fires occur on 800 years old oak treated with flame retardant. Maybe it rained gasoline and the roof leaked.
Eight hundred years and all of a sudden one day it burst into flames. They should have rewired it in 1618 like they wanted to do. Terrible decision not to.
Last edited:
Eight Hundred years of treatment? Didn't even have chemical treatment for wood until the 19th century...long after Notre Dame was built. Prior to that they used alum, but the great fire of London which used it more than other areas proved how ineffective that was.Well if that's the story it must be true!
Wonder how many accidental fires occur on 800 years old oak treated with flame retardant. Maybe it rained gasoline and the roof leaked.
Gee wiz man. I never claimed they treated it for 800 years. You can read. Just cut the crap. There is no way that fire was an accident. They can spin any yarn they choose to cover the crime.
Let me guess.
Because it's all a big conspiracy to advance the cause of perverts and commies and those who want all our women to wear hoods, or something. You got to watch them French peoples. They don't speak English.
LOL, but I'm hoping for one a bit more creative but just as logically fallacious.
In a Newsweek article, Snopes checked, in 2017 and 2018 there were over 2000 acts of vandalism against Catholic Churches in France. It’s not paranoia it’s reality.
While most assume this was targeted, I could see someone just being a moron and causing it. Like one of those Southwest Airlines “want to get away” commercials.
Yes. And those were not "covered up." Most, if not all, were due to the church's stances on particular issues. Which begs my original question....why would they cover it up? Makes no logical sense.
If they did cover it up it would be to avoid the world outrage and all the drama that comes with it. Whatever happened shouldn't have happened. I guess they figured what's done is done just fix it and move on. I heard yesterday they claimed it was probably from a cigarette butt from a worker but who smokes around 800 yr old wood? Who knows?
Seems like I see a few hundred idiots that would daily. I honestly think this happened but no one wants to believe Joe Moron ruined one of the most historical buildings on Earth and the church doesn’t want to put Joe Moron’s life in danger. It has to be rebuilt regardless of who did it and why.
France does have a reputation of being Europe’s chimney.
Of course they don't. It doesn't feed their conspiracy theories that any and every instance like this that happens must have some kind of nefarious reason behind it.
Sometimes these things just happen.
Last edited:
Well said. Kinda reminds me of the JFK assassination. Some people just want to believe it’s more complicated than it really is. It’s not like they hired Nostradamus and Einstein to do the labor.
It's the Paris chief prosecutor not the Catholic Church that has stated there was no criminal origin. So that would eliminate the theory of a church coverup, unless of course one is predetermined regardless of evidence to believe in the "it has to be a conspiracy".
Apparently hundreds of witness's were interviewed and investigators are now looking into negligence.
https://www.10news.com/news/world/n...arette-or-an-electrical-fault-prosecutors-say
this suggestion is to one of my favorite posters. Engage your intellectual curiosity. That fire could not have happened the way reported within the time frame without the presense of an accelerant! Not possible. We are being lied to. My guess is to prevent a backlash against the parties busy burning church the past two years in France.
Please for the love of God..... when you post the truth at least supply tin foil hats and links to crazy conspiracy websites for those who believe: the earth is flat, we didn’t land on the moon, fluoride in drinking water is a communist plot, and Alex Jones tells the truth.
Now that's funny.
I've asked since the beginning. If it was intentional, why has no one claimed responsibility for nearly destroying the most recognizable Catholic Church in the World, outside of Vatican City? You can't tell me not one organization on this green Earth wouldn't jump at the chance, regardless if they were responsible.
I am by no means into conspiracy theories, but to think one of the most powerful organizations in the world (the catholic church) couldn't get the Paris Chief Prosecutor on board with a cover-up is just silly. That said, I still think it was negligence or an accident on someone's part.
How would you like to be the owner of the general contractor, or sub-contractor, company. No doubt they had built their company into one of the most respected construction companies in the world just to be awarded a job like that. No doubt, it's the type of thing that would have been used in all of their marketing materials forever. "If we're good enough for Notre Dame cathedral, we're good enough for anything of yours."
Then, in one afternoon, it all went up, literally, in flames, forever to be remembered as the company that burned down Notre Dame.
Then, in one afternoon, it all went up, literally, in flames, forever to be remembered as the company that burned down Notre Dame.
Last edited:
I actually thought a few contracting companies admitted that their crew tended to smoke while working even though it was prohibited. I know the contracting companies said none of their crews were working that day, but then others said there may have been workers in the roof structure. Why is this a conspiracy?!?
