Do you know what caused the fire in the Notre Dame Cathedral? Or did you just hear some rumour?
Within hours, even before investigations could even begin, while the fire was still burning, the establishment had their explanation: no terrorism.
It was an accident. The New York Times said so:
Glenn Corbett, an associate professor of fire science at John Jay College in New York, said construction work and renovations had long been a dangerous combination.
“There’s a history of churches and synagogues and other houses of worship falling victim to construction fires,” he said, adding that one of the reasons for the peril was the proximity of open flames on torches, sparks from welders and other hazards on scaffolding to other flammable materials.”
The fact that more than 700 churches a year in France are torched or vandalized? That Notre Dame was the target of a foiled ISIS plot? That’s not what’s going on here. Glenn Corbett knows.
But here's a reputable newspaper interviewing one of the construction companies.
“All I can tell you right now is that at the start of the fire, absolutely none of the employees of my company was present on site,” said Julien Le Bras, adding that all employees of his company, Europe Echafaudage, participated in the inquiry “without any reservation”.
Hang on. I thought it was a construction fire. But it wasn’t just one fire, I guess. It was two?
"The fire started up near the roof top, while another fire started in the north bell tower," Picaud told NBC News.
Here’s a man who was the chief architect at the church for 13 years. In charge of structural integrity; fire detection; who knows every timber and stone in the building:
Now I have no idea what happened. But I don’t think that you do either. And I would normally not be a skeptic about something like this, other than how freighted it is with politics. It’s the symbol of Christendom. In France, a city besieged by Islamic terror, that has specifically be targeted before by terror. And maybe that construction boss is lying; or maybe he didn’t know his men were there, or maybe it was someone else. Welding at night. In two different places. Who managed to get mighty oaks blazing without anyone noticing. Without the two, on-location fire wardens seeing it.
It’s bad enough that France’s greatest treasure burned on Macrons watch by “accident." But if it were a terrorist, and if that terrorist were known to authorities, are being "watched" by them — as most terrorists in Europe seem to be -- that would finish Macron, wouldn’t it?
It would question immigration and policing in France in general. Macron would do anything to avoid that. Anything in the world. Don’t you think?
Maybe there will be a convincing report — one written after all the facts are in, not before. One that clears up what facts I’ve mentioned above were rumours and gossip, and outright lies, and what are true.
I hope it was just an “accidental fire.” Not that any fire there was acceptable. The fire was a horror and a tragedy and a loss.
But if Macron has covered up its true nature, that is far worse for us. Because it proves what every conspiracy theorist thinks — that you cannot trust your own government; that it is your enemy, and you must doubt everything they say.
That is not healthy. We need a few good journalists to ask a few good questions. Trouble is, they’ve all been chasing imaginary Russians around the world these past two years. While France burns...
FINALLY: Your messages to me!