A fire has broken out at the famous Notre-Dame cathedral in Paris, firefighters say.

The cause is not yet clear, but officials say it could be linked to renovation work.

Images on social media show plumes of smoke billowing into the air above the the 850-year-old Gothic building.

Last year, the Catholic Church in France launched an urgent appeal for funds to save the cathedral, which was starting to crumble.

A major operation is under way to tackle the blaze, which broke out on Monday afternoon, and an area surrounding the building in central Paris has been cleared, officials said.

Source



It would be such a shame if they aren't able to save it. Bonne change!

I was just visited it in November last year. What a horrible situation.

https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/not ... index.html

It appears it is based an area with workers' scaffolding near the transcript. It further appears to have consumed significant parts of the roof and underlying structure near the center of the 'cross' of the wings and main body of the cathedral. Likely it will close it for an indefinite length of time, hopefully there will be no major structural damage.

The scaffolding makes me suspect a repeat of what happened to Roskilde Cathedral in 1968, where casual use of open flame (a blowtorch iirc) in an area that was filled with bone-dry wooden structure set part of the cathedral on fire.

Did Quasimodo escape with his life or forever lie with the ashes of doom?

Okie

Trump just tweeted: "Perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out. Must act quickly!"

I'm sure that will work! And it will work wonders for all the fragile manuscripts and the priceless artwork in the edifice...

Fox News is reporting that the roof and central spire have collapsed.

This is a very sad day, and I hope that nobody is seriously injured or killed.


https://www.foxnews.com/world/massive-f ... l-in-paris

Marc

Per CNN Spire has collapsed and cause is (not surprisingly) still not known

alfa164 wrote:

Trump just tweeted: "Perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out. Must act quickly!"

I'm sure that will work! And it will work wonders for all the fragile manuscripts in the edifice...

Nope, this would me more on Ian Musk turf.

alfa164 wrote:

Trump just tweeted: "Perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out. Must act quickly!"

I'm sure that will work! And it will work wonders for all the fragile manuscripts in the edifice...

Back when I was on the fire department, we were doing a walk-through and updating our pre-plan of a large synagogue. We were discussing certain aspects of the structure and contents when the head custodian told us that our priority HAD to be the Torah and other manuscripts that were present. Apparently old, rare, ancient, whatever. The captain told him that life preservation had a higher priority than property protection/preservation. I still remember the custodian's response, as though it was yesterday: "children can be replaced, those manuscripts can not."

You put out a fire as quickly and efficiently as possible, in accordance with sound practices balancing the risks vs. the reward.

If Trump did in fact tweet what you say he tweeted, it was simply from ignorance, because a water bomb attack would be, almost certainly, ineffective. But preservation of the "fragile manuscripts" come after life preservation and structural preservation. So, if the fire officials on scene decided that an aerial attack would be effective and relatively safe, then that's what should be done.

There was an elaborate plan in place to protect works of art inside it, I hope it worked out.

The spire was from the 19th century, I didn't like it personally.

Tragic. A sad day indeed.

"Thoughts and prayers"...interesting. A place where "thoughts and prayers" are given daily couldn't prevent the fire.

The entire roof has now collapsed.

fr8mech wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

Trump just tweeted: "Perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out. Must act quickly!"

I'm sure that will work! And it will work wonders for all the fragile manuscripts in the edifice...

Back when I was on the fire department, we were doing a walk-through and updating our pre-plan of a large synagogue. We were discussing certain aspects of the structure and contents when the head custodian told us that our priority HAD to be the Torah and other manuscripts that were present. Apparently old, rare, ancient, whatever. The captain told him that life preservation had a higher priority than property protection/preservation. I still remember the custodian's response, as though it was yesterday: "children can be replaced, those manuscripts can not."

You put out a fire as quickly and efficiently as possible, in accordance with sound practices balancing the risks vs. the reward.

If Trump did in fact tweet what you say he tweeted, it was simply from ignorance, because a water bomb attack would be, almost certainly, ineffective. But preservation of the "fragile manuscripts" come after life preservation and structural preservation. So, if the fire officials on scene decided that an aerial attack would be effective and relatively safe, then that's what should be done.

Putting any sort of artifact over human life seems backwards to me but ok...

einsteinboricua wrote:

"Thoughts and prayers"...interesting. A place where "thoughts and prayers" are given daily couldn't prevent the fire.

too soon, man, too soon

fr8mech wrote:

But preservation of the "fragile manuscripts" come after life preservation and structural preservation.

In most cases, I am sure that would be true. In this case, the manuscripts and artwork are priceless and irreplaceable, but the building could be reproduced. I agree that life preservation should always come first, but material priorities might be different. I hope the program to save those items was effective.

fr8mech wrote:

If Trump did in fact tweet what you say he tweeted, it was simply from ignorance,

I think that is a given whenever the American President tweets anything.

I guess it is hard for some to respect a building which has been here for nearly 900 years. Such a shame that this beautiful world heritage site isn't appreciated. Hopefully it isn't completely destroyed.

alfa164 wrote:

Trump just tweeted: "Perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out. Must act quickly!"

I'm sure that will work! And it will work wonders for all the fragile manuscripts and the priceless artwork in the edifice...

Unfortunately they will be burned or waterlogged, neither a desirable outcome

dmg626 wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

Trump just tweeted: "Perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out. Must act quickly!"

I'm sure that will work! And it will work wonders for all the fragile manuscripts and the priceless artwork in the edifice...

Unfortunately they will be burned or waterlogged, neither a desirable outcome

They’re using helicopters now which are normally used in Forrest fires, so it isn’t as crazy as it seems.

alfa164 wrote:

Trump just tweeted: "Perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out. Must act quickly!"

I'm sure that will work! And it will work wonders for all the fragile manuscripts and the priceless artwork in the edifice...

Considering they don't appear to have equipment to reach the blaze, aerial fire bombing isn't a bad idea. I don't know if Notre Dame had retrofitted life safety and fire suppression systems in it, but external apparatus just isn't reaching it well. You figure the towers are 70m high, that's out of reach of the largest firetruck pumping abilities I think.

There are a lot of Tweets right now about arson...evidently, several other old churches in France have burned recently.

OA940 wrote:

fr8mech wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

Trump just tweeted: "Perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out. Must act quickly!"

I'm sure that will work! And it will work wonders for all the fragile manuscripts in the edifice...

Back when I was on the fire department, we were doing a walk-through and updating our pre-plan of a large synagogue. We were discussing certain aspects of the structure and contents when the head custodian told us that our priority HAD to be the Torah and other manuscripts that were present. Apparently old, rare, ancient, whatever. The captain told him that life preservation had a higher priority than property protection/preservation. I still remember the custodian's response, as though it was yesterday: "children can be replaced, those manuscripts can not."

You put out a fire as quickly and efficiently as possible, in accordance with sound practices balancing the risks vs. the reward.

If Trump did in fact tweet what you say he tweeted, it was simply from ignorance, because a water bomb attack would be, almost certainly, ineffective. But preservation of the "fragile manuscripts" come after life preservation and structural preservation. So, if the fire officials on scene decided that an aerial attack would be effective and relatively safe, then that's what should be done.

Putting any sort of artifact over human life seems backwards to me but ok...

Some of that art took lifetimes to make.

This is a loss of what 50,000 people years of work?

I don't follow a certain person's tweets, but I could understand someone sacrificing themselves for that art. It is history. It is religion.

A sad sad day.

Lightsaber

Dutchy wrote:

I guess it is hard for some to respect a building which has been here for nearly 900 years. Such a shame that this beautiful world heritage site isn't appreciated. Hopefully it isn't completely destroyed.

WTH are you talking about? No one is "disrespecting" the building. Good grief. Get over yourself...the universal outpouring of this horrible event is from all corners. This is the most visited tourist and heritage site in Europe, actually.

slider wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

Trump just tweeted: "Perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out. Must act quickly!"

I'm sure that will work! And it will work wonders for all the fragile manuscripts and the priceless artwork in the edifice...

Considering they don't appear to have equipment to reach the blaze, aerial fire bombing isn't a bad idea. I don't know if Notre Dame had retrofitted life safety and fire suppression systems in it, but external apparatus just isn't reaching it well. You figure the towers are 70m high, that's out of reach of the largest firetruck pumping abilities I think.

There are a lot of Tweets right now about arson...evidently, several other old churches in France have burned recently.

The weight of water from aerial water dumps could cause the structure to collapse.

IWMBH wrote:

They’re using helicopters now which are normally used in Forrest fires, so it isn’t as crazy as it seems.

The force of water dropping from a helicopter pales in comparison to water dropped from a jet. That's not to mention the precision of the helicopters (they can hover before dropping the water as opposed to fixed wing aircraft) and the logistics of having jets fly low over Paris.

flyingclrs727 wrote:

slider wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

Trump just tweeted: "Perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out. Must act quickly!"

I'm sure that will work! And it will work wonders for all the fragile manuscripts and the priceless artwork in the edifice...

Considering they don't appear to have equipment to reach the blaze, aerial fire bombing isn't a bad idea. I don't know if Notre Dame had retrofitted life safety and fire suppression systems in it, but external apparatus just isn't reaching it well. You figure the towers are 70m high, that's out of reach of the largest firetruck pumping abilities I think.

There are a lot of Tweets right now about arson...evidently, several other old churches in France have burned recently.

The weight of water from aerial water dumps could cause the structure to collapse.

Possibly--aerial dropping has variable release control, however.

slider wrote:

flyingclrs727 wrote:

slider wrote:

Considering they don't appear to have equipment to reach the blaze, aerial fire bombing isn't a bad idea. I don't know if Notre Dame had retrofitted life safety and fire suppression systems in it, but external apparatus just isn't reaching it well. You figure the towers are 70m high, that's out of reach of the largest firetruck pumping abilities I think.

There are a lot of Tweets right now about arson...evidently, several other old churches in France have burned recently.

The weight of water from aerial water dumps could cause the structure to collapse.

Possibly--aerial dropping has variable release control, however.

Over such a small area? I doubt it. Water bombers aren't designed to fight fires of this small a scale. Anyway it was mentioned on one of the news channels I'm flipping through that it was ruled out by the fire fighters.

Dutchy wrote:

I guess it is hard for some to respect a building which has been here for nearly 900 years. Such a shame that this beautiful world heritage site isn't appreciated. Hopefully it isn't completely destroyed.

I respect Notre Dame, the structure. I respect Notre Dame, the architectural work of art. I don't respect Notre Dame, the church.

I can appreciate the structure and the tourist/historical icon it is while refusing to admire the fact that it's a church.

There are firefighters inside right now, that`s really scary.

Even if the reason of this tragedy had just been negligence, this will be one of the most iconic dramas of recent history.

lightsaber wrote:

OA940 wrote:

fr8mech wrote:

Back when I was on the fire department, we were doing a walk-through and updating our pre-plan of a large synagogue. We were discussing certain aspects of the structure and contents when the head custodian told us that our priority HAD to be the Torah and other manuscripts that were present. Apparently old, rare, ancient, whatever. The captain told him that life preservation had a higher priority than property protection/preservation. I still remember the custodian's response, as though it was yesterday: "children can be replaced, those manuscripts can not."

You put out a fire as quickly and efficiently as possible, in accordance with sound practices balancing the risks vs. the reward.

If Trump did in fact tweet what you say he tweeted, it was simply from ignorance, because a water bomb attack would be, almost certainly, ineffective. But preservation of the "fragile manuscripts" come after life preservation and structural preservation. So, if the fire officials on scene decided that an aerial attack would be effective and relatively safe, then that's what should be done.

Putting any sort of artifact over human life seems backwards to me but ok...

Some of that art took lifetimes to make.

This is a loss of what 50,000 people years of work?

I don't follow a certain person's tweets, but I could understand someone sacrificing themselves for that art. It is history. It is religion.

A sad sad day.

Lightsaber

Not saying that this is anything but tragic. It is a dark day for humanity and culture. Let's hope that anything survives. But in general I feel like we should prioritise human lives.

Kilopond wrote:

There are firefighters inside right now, that`s really scary.

I can not answer that they are inside but the news I was watching indicated there were 400 firefighters on scene.
From the appearance of the low number of apparatus around the structure that there is definitely a shortage of equipment that can deal with the height of the structure.
Obviously located on an island there should not be any shortage of water available.

fr8mech wrote:

Back when I was on the fire department, we were doing a walk-through and updating our pre-plan of a large synagogue.

Years ago I worked for an Industrial Manufacturing Company.
The annual walk through with the Fire Dept. was basically where are the outside fuel, gas and electric shut offs.
Once everyone present inside the structure was accounted then the Fire Dept. would not enter/re-enter and attack from outside.
They were not remotely interested in dealing with a fire within the confines of the structure.
Once a fire propagated past a bad lighting ballast or someone's popcorn in the microwave in the employee welfare area, you were on your own.

Okie

According to Dutch media the fire brigade mentioned that a “important part of the structure will be saved”.
Also, “many pieces of art and relics where secured”.
Unfortunately, one fire fighter was badly injured, but no further details.

An overhead photo, supposedly taken from a police drone, showing how the vaults are holding up the burning wreckage:

Kilopond wrote:

There are firefighters inside right now, that`s really scary.

Even if the reason of this tragedy had just been negligence, this will be one of the most iconic dramas of recent history.

I remember reading about the civil defense's work in saving the inventory Roskilde Cathedral back in the day, especially the choir as numerous priceless artifacts were housed there and it was directly under the spire that was burning. Most of it was impossible to move (the altar piece, sarcophagi etc.), so they had to cover the whole lot in fire blankets and hope for the best.

einsteinboricua wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

I guess it is hard for some to respect a building which has been here for nearly 900 years. Such a shame that this beautiful world heritage site isn't appreciated. Hopefully it isn't completely destroyed.

I respect Notre Dame, the structure. I respect Notre Dame, the architectural work of art. I don't respect Notre Dame, the church.

I can appreciate the structure and the tourist/historical icon it is while refusing to admire the fact that it's a church.

It would be nice then if you could at least show a modicum of respect and empathy towards those to who do regard Notre Dame as one of the most important religious sites in christendom instead of delighting in their despair in pronouncing that their prayers are useless.

Last word I have heard, fire is under control, rose windows may not have survived. Painful.

flyguy89 wrote:

It would be nice then if you could at least show a modicum of respect and empathy towards those to who do regard Notre Dame as one of the most important religious sites in christendom instead of delighting in their despair in pronouncing that their prayers are useless.

Don't know where you get that I'm "delighted" about this. As far as I'm concerned, it's not a crime to state an observation. We can open another thread on this, but go to all comment sections in social media and news sites, and "T&P" is the main comment.

I'm not delighted that an iconic and world-renowned structure has been considerably damaged. I count myself lucky to have been able to see it in person. I regret that I was not able to see it again in more recent times (and depending on the damage, probably never will). But that doesn't take away the fact that if there is an omnipotent force, that such force would have spared this structure from a blaze in the first place, especially one erected to worship it, for which I then ask: what is the purpose of T&Ps?

And while I'm being criticized for making an observation, your bigger concern should be others who are likely to use this as a rallying cry to say that Christianity is under attack (oh yes...you'll find a few folks out there in social media, and I would not be the least bit surprised if this ended up in right-wing media in some form, either immediately or after conspiracy websites start posting it).

This makes me sick in the stomach. It was such a beautiful cathedral. It was my favorite place in Paris along with Sacre-Coeur. Hopefully it can be rebuilt, byt it won't be the same.

einsteinboricua wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

It would be nice then if you could at least show a modicum of respect and empathy towards those to who do regard Notre Dame as one of the most important religious sites in christendom instead of delighting in their despair in pronouncing that their prayers are useless.

Don't know where you get that I'm "delighted" about this.

Could have fooled me by how quick you were to point out your perceived irony.

Oh good grief. Can we just mourn the damage to a beautiful, historical building? Leave religion and anti-religious comments out of here. The bar gets lowered every day on this forum. I swear some people aren't happy unless they are "stirring the pot."

BN747 wrote:

a portion of Notre Dame than no non-Paris visitor has ever seen - those people (maybe including you) are weeping over a a section you never knew about until today. But that’s me. Not you.

I think you might not fully grasp the extent of the damage. It’s not just a bit of the attic where no tourists were ever allowed. The entire roof has burned of.

The damage inside the cathedral is obviously as yet unknown, but likely to be significant. At least some of the iconic stained glass windows are destroyed, judging from photos this includes at least one of the huge circular windows at the midship.

As I noted previously, I visited inside and walked around outside Notre Dame last fall, perhaps seeing it with more attention vs. 2 previous visits in 1984 and 1997. I am glad I took to time to see this before its terrible major destruction today.

I would suspect the contractors doing maintenance and repairs on Notre Dame had to put up insurance for any damage they may cause in their work. The structure is basically owned by the French Government and 'leased' to the Roman Catholic Church Archdioceses of Paris. Problem is that insurance it may be limited to maybe a fraction of the eventual costs (likely Euro 100 Million+) of repairs so the taxpayers of France and the RCC will be stuck with parts of the costs. I suspect there will be an extensive investigation, already the local Prosecutor has announced earlier today there will be one.

Over the next 2-3 months, stabilization of the existing structures, removal and sorting through of debris and some kind of covering of the damaged structure will have to happen. I suspect that it will take a number of years to get the money to rebuild, to figure out how and materials to be used. Some original materials, like massive oak wood beams, are just not available. There will also have to be newer and more fire resistant materials used It is possible that some features, like the 19th century tower will not be in the rebuilt structure.

This week is the holiest of the Christian calendar with Easter on Sunday. I suspect some kind of service will be held outside the cathedral with common folk and politicians in attendance, especially on Sunday, to begin the healing period.

What a shame, was one of the nicest places i liked to visit while in Paris.

Huge thank you to the firefighters for saving as much as they did. Better to have some of the building survive than none at all.

petertenthije wrote:

BN747 wrote:

a portion of Notre Dame than no non-Paris visitor has ever seen - those people (maybe including you) are weeping over a a section you never knew about until today. But that’s me. Not you.

I think you might not fully grasp the extent of the damage. It’s not just a bit of the attic where no tourists were ever allowed. The entire roof has burned of.

The damage inside the cathedral is obviously as yet unknown, but likely to be significant. At least some of the iconic stained glass windows are destroyed, judging from photos this includes at least one of the huge circular windows at the midship.

No, my assessment is correct and as you posted earlier above "According to Dutch media the fire brigade mentioned that a “important part of the structure will be saved”.
Also, “many pieces of art and relics where secured”...

That being the case, my take on it is right on point. Only a single firefighter injured.

All these woefully melodramatic types complaining and attacking us 'good lord, it's just a wooden structure NOT the famed towers destroyed' crowd, are the first ones who would suddenly be silent or cheer and at best offer very very dialed-down support to Muslims if the Kaaba (that big black square structure which crowds of Muslim circle while praying) crumbed or burnt down.

Would any of you attackers here be as defensive if that occurred???

Answer ->NO!

So back off and use a little perspective, you people aren't children, stop acting like it.

BN747

BN747 wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

BN747 wrote:

a portion of Notre Dame than no non-Paris visitor has ever seen - those people (maybe including you) are weeping over a a section you never knew about until today. But that’s me. Not you.

I think you might not fully grasp the extent of the damage. It’s not just a bit of the attic where no tourists were ever allowed. The entire roof has burned of.

The damage inside the cathedral is obviously as yet unknown, but likely to be significant. At least some of the iconic stained glass windows are destroyed, judging from photos this includes at least one of the huge circular windows at the midship.

No, my assessment is correct and as you posted earlier above "According to Dutch media the fire brigade mentioned that a “important part of the structure will be saved”.
Also, “many pieces of art and relics where secured”...

That being the case, my take on it is right on point. Only a single firefighter injured.

All these woefully melodramatic types complaining and attacking us 'good lord, it's just a wooden structure NOT the famed towers destroyed' crowd, are the first ones who would suddenly be silent or cheer and at best offer very very dialed-down support to Muslims if the Kaaba (that big black square structure which crowds of Muslim circle while praying) crumbed or burnt down.

Would any of you attackers here be as defensive if that occurred???

Answer ->NO!

So back off and use a little perspective, you people aren't children, stop acting like it.

BN747

Because the Kaaba is NOT part of Christendom’s history while Cathedral de Notre Dame is a 900-year old symbol of our shared history. I’d doubt any Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist are mourning the fire, justifiably so.

GF

Okie wrote:

Kilopond wrote:

There are firefighters inside right now, that`s really scary.

I can not answer that they are inside but the news I was watching indicated there were 400 firefighters on scene.
From the appearance of the low number of apparatus around the structure that there is definitely a shortage of equipment that can deal with the height of the structure.
Obviously located on an island there should not be any shortage of water available.

fr8mech wrote:

Back when I was on the fire department, we were doing a walk-through and updating our pre-plan of a large synagogue.

Years ago I worked for an Industrial Manufacturing Company.
The annual walk through with the Fire Dept. was basically where are the outside fuel, gas and electric shut offs.
Once everyone present inside the structure was accounted then the Fire Dept. would not enter/re-enter and attack from outside.
They were not remotely interested in dealing with a fire within the confines of the structure.
Once a fire propagated past a bad lighting ballast or someone's popcorn in the microwave in the employee welfare area, you were on your own.

Okie

I was struck also by the obvious lack of high tower trucks to fight the fire at more points. One video showed one crew with two lines on one side or corner of the building. A tragic happening for sure.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

BN747 wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

I think you might not fully grasp the extent of the damage. It’s not just a bit of the attic where no tourists were ever allowed. The entire roof has burned of.

The damage inside the cathedral is obviously as yet unknown, but likely to be significant. At least some of the iconic stained glass windows are destroyed, judging from photos this includes at least one of the huge circular windows at the midship.

No, my assessment is correct and as you posted earlier above "According to Dutch media the fire brigade mentioned that a “important part of the structure will be saved”.
Also, “many pieces of art and relics where secured”...

That being the case, my take on it is right on point. Only a single firefighter injured.

All these woefully melodramatic types complaining and attacking us 'good lord, it's just a wooden structure NOT the famed towers destroyed' crowd, are the first ones who would suddenly be silent or cheer and at best offer very very dialed-down support to Muslims if the Kaaba (that big black square structure which crowds of Muslim circle while praying) crumbed or burnt down.

Would any of you attackers here be as defensive if that occurred???

Answer ->NO!

So back off and use a little perspective, you people aren't children, stop acting like it.

BN747

Because the Kaaba is NOT part of Christendom’s history while Cathedral de Notre Dame is a 900-year old symbol of our shared history. I’d doubt any Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist are mourning the fire, justifiably so.

GF

Exactly right.

And my point precisely, as I've largely dismissed all the maudlin crying here over a part of Notre Dame MOST people couldn't recognize if their life depended on it (in other words - remove the towers and you just took a photo [prior to the fire that is] and the only people recognizing it are those who have actually seen it) - that is the section that went up in flames.

The truly sad part is it's iconography of it as far as French History goes. Like if the Eiffel Tower fell..a cultural devastation. Or the Statue of Liberty destroyed - same demoralizing scale.

If the Walling Wall in Jerusalem fell or the Kaaba crumbled - my take on those would be the exact same as this.

BN747

It's a (very large) roof fire. The structure is still standing. It will get a new roof. The President of France has vowed to repair the Cathedral, which is owned by the state, with the Catholic Church given rights to use it in perpetuity.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

It's a (very large) roof fire. The structure is still standing. It will get a new roof. The President of France has vowed to repair the Cathedral, which is owned by the state, with the Catholic Church given rights to use it in perpetuity.

Certainly no fan of yours (Im certain the feelings mutual), but thanks for posting that...it provides perspective.

All the wailing and crying above is worse than woman trashing a starlet on TV wearing a horrendous outfit.

As far as 'If the Wailing Wall OR the Kaaba crumbled...that's a much more devastating blow to their faithful ...than what occurred at Notre Dame today.
And even then, our faithful 'others' would show little concern for both of those faiths...so much their love of fellow man.

Same goes for 'no Muslims' on the board expressing sorrow to 'their fellow man -Christians. But then I not sure the Quran labels them as such.

BN747

BN747 wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

It's a (very large) roof fire. The structure is still standing. It will get a new roof. The President of France has vowed to repair the Cathedral, which is owned by the state, with the Catholic Church given rights to use it in perpetuity.

Certainly no fan of yours (Im certain the feelings mutual), but thanks for posting that...it provides perspective.

All the wailing and crying above is worse than woman trashing a starlet on TV wearing a horrendous outfit.

As far as 'If the Wailing Wall OR the Kaaba crumbled...that's a much more devastating blow to their faithful ...than what occurred at Notre Dame today.
And even then, our faithful 'others' would show little concern for both of those faiths...so much their love of fellow man.

Same goes for 'no Muslims' on the board expressing sorrow to 'their fellow man -Christians. But then I not sure the Quran labels them as such.

BN747

Have to say the only melodrama and hysterics I've seen in this thread have come from you.

flyguy89 wrote:

BN747 wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

It's a (very large) roof fire. The structure is still standing. It will get a new roof. The President of France has vowed to repair the Cathedral, which is owned by the state, with the Catholic Church given rights to use it in perpetuity.

Certainly no fan of yours (Im certain the feelings mutual), but thanks for posting that...it provides perspective.

All the wailing and crying above is worse than woman trashing a starlet on TV wearing a horrendous outfit.

As far as 'If the Wailing Wall OR the Kaaba crumbled...that's a much more devastating blow to their faithful ...than what occurred at Notre Dame today.
And even then, our faithful 'others' would show little concern for both of those faiths...so much their love of fellow man.

Same goes for 'no Muslims' on the board expressing sorrow to 'their fellow man -Christians. But then I not sure the Quran labels them as such.

BN747

Have to say the only melodrama and hysterics I've seen in this thread have come from you.

If that's how you see..I can't stop you. Free Speech brah...free speech.

BN747