Paris: Notre-Dame Cathedral Burns, Charred Timbers of Medieval Spire Collapse

[madfranks]

‘Allah Akbar’: As Notre Dame burned, muslims celebrated on social media

[Horn]

That expert said there were two people at all times on 24-hour fire watch, which is both standard for repair/maintenance of buildings while the fire suppression/alarm systems are down. I've worked on projects where the local fire dept required buildings to be on 24-hour fire watch until we were done repairing the building. If they provided even bare-minimum standard fire watch, there's no way this was an accident. And in fire investigations (which I do know a thing or two about), the very first thing you work to rule out is arson/intentional burning. And yet in this case the authorities were assuring us all that no foul play was involved before an investigation could even have started!

Yeah with 2 fireman onsite the chances of it being accidental are a snowball's chance in hell.

Unless the French somehow restore churches like Satan would.

[Amanda]

anyone here speak German??

found this comment over at zerohedge:

Bunga Bunga

26 minutes ago

remove
link
flag

When does an oak beam burn? I guy in Germany tried to set an old dried oak beam from the 1700s on fire. He tries a barbecue fire starter, welding, gasoline, making a little camp fire and a torch. All with very little success. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxlnilfLitI

video is in German

[madfranks]

If any event would ever warrant an extremely detailed and thorough investigation, the burning of an 800+ year old icon of Western Civilization would be it. However, there will be no such investigation, because obviously it would point to the moslems, and they are a protected class in France (as they are throughout the Western world), so much so that it's more important not to hurt their feelings than it is to bring the destroyers to justice. If we won't even push back when they burn our most significant and iconic relics of our civilization, we truly are toast.

[madfranks]

anyone here speak German??

found this comment over at zerohedge:

Bunga Bunga

26 minutes ago

remove
link
flag

When does an oak beam burn? I guy in Germany tried to set an old dried oak beam from the 1700s on fire. He tries a barbecue fire starter, welding, gasoline, making a little camp fire and a torch. All with very little success. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxlnilfLitI

video is in German

I don't speak German, but like the chief architect of Notre Dame said, you'd have to start with a smaller fire to build and maintain the heat to levels that can ignite such large heavy timbers, or use a significant accelerant. You don't hold a match to a heavy timber beam and expect it to ignite.

[Bigjon]

If any event would ever warrant an extremely detailed and thorough investigation, the burning of an 800+ year old icon of Western Civilization would be it. However, there will be no such investigation, because obviously it would point to the moslems, and they are a protected class in France (as they are throughout the Western world), so much so that it's more important not to hurt their feelings than it is to bring the destroyers to justice. If we won't even push back when they burn our most significant and iconic relics of our civilization, we truly are toast.

Really!!

BS

It would point to Macron and the Mossad.

Or to whoever they want to point it at. There are no cops, govts or anyone who does anything honest on the up and up.

This Muslim thing is arranged by the Jews. Witness Babs spector and her bs about multi-cult. She knew who was going to be the multi.

Got to clear out greater Israel and send them to whitey.

[Amanda]

Reposting...


https://www.sott.net/article/411326-...ts-complicated

Are Jews required to burn churches? After Notre Dame, Israeli rabbi says, "It's complicated"

Yossi Gurvitz
Mondoweiss
Tue, 16 Apr 2019 16:57 UTC


https://www.sott.net/image/s25/518520/large/758989.jpg
Prominent settler rabbi, Shlomo Aviner, ruled today (Tuesday) that burning churches outside of the Land of Yisrael "isn't our job for now", but as for the Holy Land, "the issue is more complicated". Aviner seemed to leave the question of burning churches in the Holy Land to the questioner.

Aviner, who draws a public salary as the rabbi of the major settlement Beit El and is also the rabbi of a prestigious yeshiva (Ateret Yerushaliam, formerly Ateret Cohanim), is considered to be one most important rabbis of the religious nationalist sector. He is a prolific writer, having published more than 200 books in several languages. Aviner is also considered a pioneer of the SHUT-SMS phenomenon, by which fans send the rabbi a question via SMS message (and more recently, Facebook Messenger and Whatsup), and Aviner gives back a short reply. Aviner is one of the more popular SHUT-SMS rabbis because he tends to answer every question, even trollish ones (I'm speaking from experience here).

Today, after the fire in Notre Dame Cathedral, Aviner was asked the following question:

"The great Christian Church in Paris is on fire. Should we feel sorry for that, or should we rejoice, as it [the cathedral] is idolatry, which is a mitzvah to burn?"

The questioner is here referring to the Halachic ruling that churches are considered idolatry, and should be destroyed.

Aviner replied as follows:

"This isn't our job for now. There is no mitzvah to seek out churches abroad and burn them down. In our holy land, however, the issue is more complicated. Indeed, the Satmar Rabbi noted one of his arguments against immigrating to Israel, that here it is indeed a mitzvah to burn churches; and by not doing so, those [immigrating to Israel] are committing a sin. Yet Rabbi Menachem Mendel Kasher, in his book 'The Great Period', rejected the Satmar Rabbi's words, citing a midrash, forbidding burning [churches], since if we burn, we'll have to rebuild, and it's a greater sin to rebuild [a church] than leave it standing. [Here Aviner cites his own book vs. the Satmar Rabbi] That church in Paris, too, will surely be rebuilt."

(Oh, yes: American Jewish readers, I probably need to stress this - this is not a parody or a satire. This is actual rabbinical discourse in 2019 Israel.)

Aviner is touching here gingerly on a hot issue (pardon the pun) in his sector: Should churches be burned? Several churches have been burnt in Israel in the last few years, and the police have been spectacularly useless in capturing the arsonists. In several cases, the arson was accompanied by slogans familiar from 'price tag' attacks in the West Bank (mostly along the lines of Jewish vengeance). Four years ago, Lehava leader Benzi Gopstein, asked whether he supported church burnings, said "of course, what's the question?" His words caused uproar. Later Gopstein was indicted on incitement to violence charges, but church burning wasn't one of them.

Aviner, and other Orthodox rabbis, are in a bind here. Several immensely important rabbinic rulers, most prominent among them Maimonides, ruled that churches are places of idolatry and ought to be destroyed. The rulings are very clear. However, to support those rulings today would lead to violence, probably to a rise in anti-Semitism, and will jeopardize the alliance between the settler movement and the evangelical movement. There is also a chance of getting prosecuted for incitement for hatred, which is a crime in Israel - but then again, the law has a special exemption for "religious studies", and the prosecution has been very leery of prosecuting rabbis for hate speech, making "religious discussions" the prime way of legally-protected incitement.

Note that Aviner is walking a very tight rope here. He is dismissing out hand the burning of churches abroad, but when it comes to burning churches in Israel, he quotes two sources, not giving his own ruling. The fact that he has to walk this tightrope says volumes about the discourse among his followers and students.

Yossi Gurvitz is a journalist and a blogger, and has covered the occupation extensively.

[Bigjon]

https://twitter.com/GiladAtzmon/status/1118884291784642560

Never to forgive, never to forget...Radical rabbi says Notre Dame fire retribution for 13th-century Talmud burning | The Times of Israel

Same guy as above story

Radical rabbi says Notre Dame fire retribution for 13th century Talmud burning

Shlomo Aviner, who moved to Israel from France in the 1960s, suggests fire that gutted iconic church may have been divine retribution for burning of Je

[Horn]

When does an oak beam burn?

Not sure that was a very good example of Notre Dame.

Though any competent city fire department would have had a foolproof solution to extinguish a Main attraction 800yr. old structure within 20 minutes, Not just let it roast all day due it being "kinda tall"

"We Oui we hadn't thought about that roof (we call the forest) catching fire in 800yrs.. its kind of tall"

[Bigjon]

CONFIRMED: Notre Dame was virtually unhurt by the fire, and any claims that it has to be "rebuilt" are hoaxes with a motive

The hoax of Notre Dame:

This hoax involved burning a wooden facade "roof" that probably kept water off a secondary roof and prevented freezing problems with the second roof, and NOTHING MORE. Unlike what you have been told by the scamming MSM, the cathedral would never have collapsed because the actual support for the cathedral was provided by the side arches, and the arches of an interior brick and concrete roof three feet thick. This secondary interior roof prevented damage to the inside of the cathedral, except where the spire (questionably, it likely had help) "fell through" it.The hoax about the cathedral being "destroyed" is now confirmed. Let's get this party started.

Here is how the wooden roof was attached. You can clearly see the concrete dome roof under it was supporting it, and now has less weight to hold with it gone and it would actually be less likely to collapse now provided the heat of the fire did not significantly damage it:http://82.221.129.208/pages/notredamewood.jpg
Here is a picture of that burned wooden roof laying on top of the concrete and brick roof under it. Notre Dame was built a LOT better than anything the Romans ever did. With the Roman stuff, once the wooden roof was gone, all that remained was pillars. Clearly here, the real roof consisted of a series of concrete and brick domes.
Here's why the cathedral was, except for where the spire fell through, unscathed:

http://82.221.129.208/pages/notredameconcrete.jpgWhen you consider the scale of the above picture, the concrete and brick were at least three feet thick on the interior roof. There's no way this cathedral got significantly hurt, to the tune of a billion dollars.
Let's take a look at the inside after the fire

http://82.221.129.208/pages/notredameinterior.jpg
Clearly, from the aftermath photo of the interior, they could turn the lights back on if they wanted to. The concrete roof held up so well for so long that there's not even significant smoke damage.

Conclusion: The cathedral is not destroyed, and any stories about how it got devastated are only cover for bilking cash for pork barrel projects and excuses to delay, delay, AND DELAY re-opening it. The cash is there to fix this PRONTO. If the desire is there to fix it (by the people in control), it ought to be open before the end of August with money obviously being no object.

There's no excuse to delay re-opening this cathedral. It was clearly designed to get through a worst case scenario, for the purpose of protecting the priceless antiquities it contained, and the plan worked. Not a single antiquity was lost. None of the candles in the cathedral melted. It got through this that well. If this cathedral does not open STAT, it is because someone (who is importing hordes of Muslims to overtake and destroy Europe) does not want it to open.