The Notre Dame Cathedral...

[Tickford.]

Originally Posted by roddy1960

No , not head in the sand but how about giving the investigators a chance to sort through the mess first . If it turns out to be found a deliberate act , chase the mongrels down and punish them but it could just as easily been a monumental renovator blunder or a simple accident too just at the minute.

The investigation is still ongoing. As of today, the investigations are still circulating around the probability of a cigarette butt, or an electrical issue to be the cause. Still plausible yes, but I am not too sure. As said above, the two most probable causes have been knocked on the head by the opposing representatives. The fact of the matter still remains that an electrical fault was blamed within a couple of hours of the blaze starting. While the fire was still spreading. That to me still is a contentious issue.

France is a country that is on the brink of a civil war almost. A country that has a very publicised race relations issues in the recent years. So Roddy, I have to ask you this. Of those two scenarios you posted (1. A deliberate act, 2. A renovator blunder), which one of those scenarios would you prefer if you were in charge of the country? Which of those two scenarios would cause the least damage to your country, and stop a potential internal fire from erupting? (pardon the pun)

[hawke]

Does anyone know or heard of the insurance on the building, and why it hasn't been mentioned?

[Tickford.]

Originally Posted by hawke

Does anyone know or heard of the insurance on the building, and why it hasn't been mentioned?

Without getting into specifics, technically the cathedral (the building itself) has no "insurance". Being owned by the French state, essentially the state acts as it's insurer.
The two companies contracted to the rebuild however, do have insurance cover for civil liability.


edit: aussieblue beat me to it.

[roddy1960]

Originally Posted by Trickford

The investigation is still ongoing. As of today, the investigations are still circulating around the probability of a cigarette butt, or an electrical issue to be the cause. Still plausible yes, but I am not too sure. As said above, the two most probable causes have been knocked on the head by the opposing representatives. The fact of the matter still remains that an electrical fault was blamed within a couple of hours of the blaze starting. While the fire was still spreading. That to me still is a contentious issue.

France is a country that is on the brink of a civil war almost. A country that has a very publicised race relations issues in the recent years. So Roddy, I have to ask you this. Of those two scenarios you posted (1. A deliberate act, 2. A renovator blunder), which one of those scenarios would you prefer if you were in charge of the country? Which of those two scenarios would cause the least damage to your country, and stop a potential internal fire from erupting? (pardon the pun)

Easy , I'd prefer to know what really took place ...even if it turned out to be arson and/or terrorism.

All I'm saying is how can we be judge and jury yet without knowing all the stuff that went on that day. . I'd like as idealistic as it might sound that somehow the truth actually gets told , like it or lump it but realistically IF it is deliberate it will be covered up like Governments do .

No winners here . Whether it indeed was some sort of stupid accident , carelessness or if it turns out to be arson/terrorism the millions of people who cherish Notre Dame have lost it for a fair few years I reckon . At least nobody died out of it all ...Got to be thankful for that.