If you consider it, the state prosecutor was telling the truth. There was no evidence of a deliberate act the day after the fire. No one had looked for any so there wasn't any.

The elephant in the room is elephants; firstly, there have been Islamic attacks on Christian sites. I believe there was a heightened official threat issued in Europe. I suppose it is possible.

There have also been widespread, protests, demonstrations and riots from the yellow vests. They have, in cases, used fire as a weapon. However, it would be hard to see any point in burning down the cathedral.

The third area of France that has caused civil problems and violent clashes has been homelessness and illegal immigration. This has produced widespread tent accommodation in Paris. It so happens that many camp around religious sites. There do seem to have been encampments around Notre Dame.

I must say though, that with Notre Dame, the most likely cause seems accidental; it's an old building with nooks and crannies, poor electrics and plenty of old wood. I should think they will eventually explain the cause. Or will they?

If you consider it, the state prosecutor was telling the truth. There was no evidence of a deliberate act the day after the fire. No one had looked for any so there wasn't any.

The elephant in the room is elephants; firstly, there have been Islamic attacks on Christian sites. I believe there was a heightened official threat issued in Europe. I suppose it is possible.

There have also been widespread, protests, demonstrations and riots from the yellow vests. They have, in cases, used fire as a weapon. However, it would be hard to see any point in burning down the cathedral.

The third area of France that has caused civil problems and violent clashes has been homelessness and illegal immigration. This has produced widespread tent accommodation in Paris. It so happens that many camp around religious sites. There do seem to have been encampments around Notre Dame.

I must say though, that with Notre Dame, the most likely cause seems accidental; it's an old building with nooks and crannies, poor electrics and plenty of old wood. I should think they will eventually explain the cause. Or will they?

So you are suggesting there may be a conspiracy, let's call that suggestion a theory.

When Dan implied that you are incorrect when you state you are not one for conspiracy theories, it does appear to me that was relevant to the thread innit. We can then read the thread in the knowledge that you are somewhat suspicious, almost superstitious.

Perhaps, perhaps not.

Besides this doesn't even address the issues I've stated.,,,didn't you even read the post?

Edited by Stirlingsays (12 Aug 2019 3.23pm)

You create your own non-issues which don't warrant addressing.

See my post above. The first wasn’t even 4 months ago.