Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Notre Dame fire conspiracies

Options
1356789

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    If this was ISIS they would have come out and said so. I think it was an accident personally. If it was done deliberate, then their investigation team has not found the evidence.


    The investigation has only begun tbh.

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/17/europe/notre-dame-fire-investigation-intl/index.html

    As of yet they have not ruled out other scenarios afaik


  • Options
    #63
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,405 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    Sure, but we don't have any such proof, and cctv would not prove anything re arson or not anyway, yet we have every reason to be suspicious, as I said not least in the light of recent events in France...

    The reason the damage wasnt as baf as feared was because the fire started in the roof. You can see from the pictures that there is very little damage down on the main area and it's mostly confined to the roof area.

    Now, you're an arsonist and you're about to burn down one of the worlds most iconic buildings... do you start the fire on the ground level to do the most damage and also to have a chance to escape? Or do you climb to the roof and start a fire to do a half assed job and possibly die in the process?


  • Options
    #64
    CosmicFool
    Registered Users Posts: 492 ✭✭CosmicFool


    It's was most likely an accident. That wood is 100's of years old. Extremely dry so it wouldn't take much for it to go up in flames.


  • Options
    #65
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,453 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    CosmicFool wrote: »
    It's was most likely an accident. That wood is 100's of years old. Extremely dry so it wouldn't take much for it to go up in flames.

    Oooh interesting, the Muslims would've known this.

    Only Luciferian Marxist globalists would deny that.


  • Options
    #66
    GinAndBitter
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 746 ✭✭✭GinAndBitter


    gozunda wrote: »
    Tbh I can see why some may have their suspicions following this

    This just 5 days ago ...
    https://www.thejournal.ie/france-jails-jihadist-woman-accused-over-foiled-terror-attack-in-paris-4590216-Apr2019/

    Afaik theres been two prior attempted attacks in the vicinity of the church ...

    That said the building work is the most likely culprit. On the news tonight they were detailing that they were starting to interview the workers

    It's racist to point out that there have been attacks on churches in France commited by Muslims, apparently it shouldn't be mentioned at all.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,405 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    GinAndBitter wrote: »
    It's racist to point out that there have been attacks on churches in France commited by Muslims, apparently it shouldn't be mentioned at all.

    Do your arms not get tired banging that same old drum every day? :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #68
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    The reason the damage wasnt as baf as feared was because the fire started in the roof. You can see from the pictures that there is very little damage down on the main area and it's mostly confined to the roof area.

    Now, you're an arsonist and you're about to burn down one of the worlds most iconic buildings... do you start the fire on the ground level to do the most damage and also to have a chance to escape? Or do you climb to the roof and start a fire to do a half assed job and possibly die in the process?


    Yes, I know that, good point, surely the easiest way would be to walk inside with all the tourists and toss a firebomb on some wooden stuff…though with the construction going on up on the roof, whatever exactly they were doing there, it could also have been done by one of the construction crew, an arsonist masquerading as one of the crew maybe…just speculating wildly here, but stranger things have happened…and we have seen numerous attacks on French churches lately, so there definitely are those who would torch the main one if they could, and for shock and terror rather than complete destruction…with that said, an accident (i.e. neglect) does seem most likely, though such a construction site on a building of that importance would normally have maximum fire safety in place with a 24/7 fire watch and all, and a contingency plan on part of the fire brigade…oh, and cui bono anyway? though who knows, maybe really just laissez-faire…


  • Options
    #69
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    GinAndBitter wrote: »
    It's racist to point out that there have been attacks on churches in France commited by Muslims, apparently it shouldn't be mentioned at all.

    It not racist, never mind them. Each event is different and you have to be objective though. I seen some of the threads already on conspiracy forums, and evidence is weak this was deliberate.

    The investigation is not over- gozunda link confirms this. Right now though the evidence suggests it was not deliberate, it was an accident.


  • Options
    #70
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    The Nal wrote: »
    Oooh interesting, the Muslims would've known this.

    Only Luciferian Marxist globalists would deny that.


    Well according to the other thread it was obviously a bunch of extreme Christians because the cathedral and / or it's rebuilding is the same as Worshiping the golden calf etc and is therefore not Christian!

    Bet no one else came up with that one eh :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #71
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    The reason the damage wasnt as baf as feared was because the fire started in the roof. You can see from the pictures that there is very little damage down on the main area and it's mostly confined to the roof area.

    Now, you're an arsonist and you're about to burn down one of the worlds most iconic buildings... do you start the fire on the ground level to do the most damage and also to have a chance to escape? Or do you climb to the roof and start a fire to do a half assed job and possibly die in the process?

    Username fits ;)

    Tbh the damage is fairly bad all the same - they reckon it could take up to 1 billion to restore. The roof seems to have been the most flammable part with a 'forest' of nearly 1000 year old roof beams. Certainly setting it on fire would be one way off p*ssingn of the neighbours if anyone had a mind too. Thats said it was the area most likley to go up in flames anyway - same has happened to many old buildings whilst being restored.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    Ipso wrote: »
    Because creating conspiracy theories about how everyone is out to get us does wonders for the fabric of society.


    Sure, so let’s impose full speech and thought control, stifle free thought and keep things quiet to preserve the fabric of society...


  • Options
    #73
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,453 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    Sure, so let’s impose full speech and thought control, stifle free thought and keep things quiet to preserve the fabric of society...

    There has to be evidence for a theory. Assuming it was Muslims (or anyone else for that matter) while the building was still burning is the absolute height of stupidity.

    The only thing that should be stifled here is stupidity.


  • Options
    #74
    Ipso
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    Sure, so let’s impose full speech and thought control, stifle free thought and keep things quiet to preserve the fabric of society...

    Yes. That’s the blindingly obvious solution I was implying. Solidarity brother. :D


  • Options
    #75
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,638 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    oh, and, as some around here seem to be experts in putting out cathedral fires, what should they have done?

    You're the one claiming to be a cathedral fire expert?


  • Options
    #76
    SoundsRight
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 408 ✭✭SoundsRight


    Rooves don't just accidentally catch fire by themselves. Someone started it, either maliciously or through negligence.

    The images of one of our most beautiful buildings in flames was very powerful, akin to the twin towers burning. We know these images embolden our enemies.


  • Options
    #77
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,638 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    SoundsRight wrote: »
    Rooves don't just accidentally catch fire by themselves. Someone started it, either maliciously or through negligence.

    https://valleycentral.com/news/local/rio-hondo-isd-issues-early-release-after-high-school-roof-catches-fire

    https://www.firerescue1.com/fire-attack/articles/285541018-Carousel-roof-catches-fire-at-amusement-park/

    https://www.dailydispatch.com/StateNews/IL/2019/March/13/Roof.Catches.Fire.At.Elk.Grove.Industrial.Building.aspx

    https://fox6now.com/2019/01/30/rooftop-heating-unit-catches-fire-at-mercury-marine-plant-in-30-wind-chills/

    https://www.wahoo-ashland-waverly.com/news/barn-roof-catches-fire/article_78beeb04-d92a-11e2-8b1d-0019bb2963f4.html

    https://chicago.cbslocal.com/video/3863091-ikea-roof-catches-fire/

    Just so many false flags


  • Options
    #78
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Who knew that there was so many experts on cathedrals and fire safety on boards?
    Makes you wonder why the Shadowy They bothered trying to fake it when apparently half the internet are qualified to spot the fake immediately.


  • Options
    #79
    partyguinness
    Registered Users Posts: 8,207 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    King Mob wrote: »
    Who knew that there was so many experts on cathedrals and fire safety on boards?
    Makes you wonder why the Shadowy They bothered trying to fake it when apparently half the internet are qualified to spot the fake immediately.


    Indeed.

    Like when it comes to 9/11 I am still deeply impressed at the sheer number of experts in metallurgy and aviation out there.


  • Options
    #80
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    The Nal wrote: »
    There has to be evidence for a theory. Assuming it was Muslims (or anyone else for that matter) while the building was still burning is the absolute height of stupidity.

    The only thing that should be stifled here is stupidity.

    yeah, just as stupid as declaring "it was an accident", as though anyone knew for sure...oh, and that could also be politically motivated, of course...


  • Options
    #81
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    yeah, just as stupid as declaring "it was an accident", as though anyone knew for sure...
    But maybe actual experts with actual experience and qualifications in such things who are actually on the scene and actually looking at the actual evidence might be in a better position to make declarations than keyboard detectives with no expertise who might not have even been in a medieval cathedral.

    It's a bit mad to suggest the two are on equal footing... :confused:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    King Mob wrote: »
    But maybe actual experts with actual experience and qualifications in such things who are actually on the scene and actually looking at the actual evidence might be in a better position to make declarations than keyboard detectives with no expertise who might not have even been in a medieval cathedral.

    It's a bit mad to suggest the two are on equal footing... :confused:

    Of course, but I seem to remember the accident was declared even during the blaze...


  • Options
    #83
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,638 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    yeah, just as stupid as declaring "it was an accident", as though anyone knew for sure...oh, and that could also be politically motivated, of course...

    If politically motivated where is the group claiming responsibility? Can't 'own the libs' unless they know they're being owned.


  • Options
    #84
    partyguinness
    Registered Users Posts: 8,207 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    Of course, but I seem to remember the accident wasdeckared even during thd blaze...


    Perhaps it was just an attempt to nip in the bud any suspicious/mad theories. Come out and declare it an accident straight away before the tin hat brigade jump on the loony mobile.

    So somebody set fire to a cathedral like that:-

    1. In broad daylight
    2. Among one of the busiest tourist attractions in the world not just Paris
    3. The place thronged with people
    4. Oh and up at one of the most inaccessible parts of the building.

    That's ballsy.


  • Options
    #85
    storker
    Registered Users Posts: 5,644 ✭✭✭storker


    King Mob wrote: »
    But maybe actual experts with actual experience and qualifications in such things who are actually on the scene and actually looking at the actual evidence might be in a better position to make declarations than keyboard detectives with no expertise who might not have even been in a medieval cathedral.

    It's a bit mad to suggest the two are on equal footing... :confused:

    Haven't you learned anything from hanging around here? Those "experts" are part of the conspiracy!


  • Options
    #86
    storker
    Registered Users Posts: 5,644 ✭✭✭storker


    partyguinness wrote: »
    Perhaps it was just an attempt to nip in the bud any suspicious/mad theories. Come out and declare it an accident straight away before the tin hat brigade jump on the loony mobile.

    So somebody set fire to a cathedral like that:-

    1. In broad daylight
    2. Among one of the busiest tourist attractions in the world not just Paris
    3. The place thronged with people
    4. Oh and up at one of the most inaccessible parts of the building.

    That's ballsy.

    You misspelled the last word.


  • Options
    #87
    Ipso
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    Of course conspiracy theories are never politically motivated.


  • Options
    #88
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    Of course, but I seem to remember the accident was declared even during thd blaze...
    Well, a lot conspiracy theories are based on a lot of faulty memories.
    So, maybe that's something you should actually check before declaring...

    Regardless, even if that was the case, not seeing why experts couldn't have a fair idea about the cause of a fire even when it's still going. Or at least can have a fair idea that it isn't the result of a firebomb or major arson attack.
    Again, these are actual experts in the field who are there at the scene with access to evidence and information.
    They are not unqualified, politically motivated randos behind a keyboard thousands of miles away.


  • Options
    #89
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,638 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    partyguinness wrote: »
    Perhaps it was just an attempt to nip in the bud any suspicious/mad theories. Come out and declare it an accident straight away before the tin hat brigade jump on the loony mobile.

    So somebody set fire to a cathedral like that:-

    1. In broad daylight
    2. Among one of the busiest tourist attractions in the world not just Paris
    3. The place thronged with people
    4. Oh and up at one of the most inaccessible parts of the building.

    That's ballsy.

    Indeed, cranks wasted no time pointing fingers at groups, like Muslims, without any evidence, just wild speculation. Because it suits their agenda to enflame tensions against mulsims and outside groups. They don't need to wait for evidence, just say 'it COULD be,' and just gaslight the whole situation - no pun intended.


  • Options
    #90
    GinAndBitter
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 746 ✭✭✭GinAndBitter


    Overheal wrote: »
    Indeed, cranks wasted no time pointing fingers at groups, like Muslims, without any evidence, just wild speculation. Because it suits their agenda to enflame tensions against mulsims and outside groups. They don't need to wait for evidence, just say 'it COULD be,' and just gaslight the whole situation - no pun intended.

    Yeah sure it's unbelievable that people are speculating that a church that mysteriously went on fire could be commited by a group of people who have been targeting churches. People speculate, welcpme to the Internet.

    Same happens here when there is a shooting, who done it, was it feud related etc.. Someone heard such and such was involved blah blah blah, That's how things are.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    Augme wrote: »
    They are saying it because the fire services have said it. People in authority will often know before an official investigation is completed and signed off on.

    thing is, the fire services hardly even showed up, certainly not around the roof area, and very late, and knew as little as anyone during the blaze...and people in authority will (almost) always toe the line and keep repeating the official version, no matter what...even the least informed and youngest around here should know that by now...though, as said before, I do not doubt it was an accident, i.e. inexcusable neglect, but am just looking at the bigger picture and trying to keep an open mind...but whatever...


Advertisement