Scaffolding firm says workers smoked at Paris´ Notre-Dame
Reuters,
by
Julie Carriat
&
Emmanuel Jarry
Original Article
Posted By: earlybird,
4/24/2019 4:45:47 PM
PARIS - A scaffolding firm that has worked on the roof of Notre-Dame said some of its workers had smoked on the site, but ruled out that a cigarette butt might have started the fire that destroyed the cathedral’s oak-framed roof last week.A spokesman for family-owned Le Bras Freres, confirming a report in French weekly Le Canard Enchaine, told Reuters that some workers of its Europe Echafaudage scaffolding unit had informed police that they had “sometimes” smoked on the scaffolding, despite a smoking ban on the site. “We condemn it. But the fire started inside the building...
Reply 1 - Posted by:
earlybird 4/24/2019 4:49:06 PM (No. 44237)
FTA:
The Canard Enchaine also reported that electrical wiring ran through the roof of the cathedral, but the church administration denied that safety norms had not been respected.
Little by little, cracks in the original story(ies)...
17 people like this.
Not buying this. Anything out of the French government or Reuters is questionable. I want to see a full, nothing-held-back, transparent investigation of this fire.
20 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
Michaelus 4/24/2019 5:06:12 PM (No. 44238)
Everyone knows that the original electrical wiring from the 12th century was in bad shape and suddenly two gigantic short circuits happened during Holy Week. Also the circuit breakers were probably from 1450 or so and they malfunctioned. Why can´t you people trust the smart people that rule us?
24 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
DVC 4/24/2019 5:18:37 PM (No. 44245)
Unlikely this was an accident.
20 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
Newtsche 4/24/2019 5:28:28 PM (No. 44228)
I got your smokescreen right here.
9 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
JunkYardDog 4/24/2019 5:31:26 PM (No. 44239)
A cigarette did that? What do they smoke in France that burns with the heat of an electric-arc welder´s torch? Surely the heat of an ordinary cigarette could not have ignited bare wood? Or were they so careless that they ´accidentally´ spilled some volatile accelerants while they were smoking?
Enough with the lies already.
15 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
john56 4/24/2019 5:39:27 PM (No. 44230)
12th century wiring?
1450´s breakers?
Hah, hah!
16 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Blue-Z-Anna 4/24/2019 5:45:01 PM (No. 44242)
30 litres of diesel.
1 enflamador du BIC.
2 Jihadis
Vooooowaaaalaaahh !!!!
20 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
maninthearea 4/24/2019 5:48:03 PM (No. 44235)
Let´s see . . . smoking was not allowed, but sometimes people smoked anyway, although the fire was not started by anyone smoking. What a waste of ink. Reuters could have said "eating pizza was not allowed, but sometimes people ate pizza anyway, although the fire was not started by anyone eating pizza." I know I feel better informed. Not.
13 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Clinger 4/24/2019 5:53:52 PM (No. 44231)
Great show me how to set an ancient oak beam on fire with a cigarette and I´ll consider careless smoking to be a potential cause.
Good luck with that by the way.
16 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
MFM 4/24/2019 6:06:40 PM (No. 44244)
Bull Hockey, it would take an idiot to not figure out the animals responsible. Every time a church or cathedra is torched push back twice as hard..
14 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
mc squared 4/24/2019 6:17:39 PM (No. 44243)
Oh, look over there - a squirrel!
10 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
coldoc 4/24/2019 6:26:48 PM (No. 44240)
The french government is practicing up for being the new caliphate.
18 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
NorthernDog 4/24/2019 7:35:27 PM (No. 44236)
It´s hard to start a fire without some kind of accelerate or pile of combustible materials. Kindling, some type of fuel, oily old rags, or a big pile of sawdust would be needed to ignite heavy and thick timbers, no matter how dry they were.
8 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
chumley 4/24/2019 8:30:44 PM (No. 44232)
Just another attempt to scapegoat smokers for the evils of the world. Why not? Nobody will defend them.
Their best bet is to look toward Mecca if they want the true answer. But they probably don´t.
8 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
Tianne 4/24/2019 8:47:28 PM (No. 44227)
Stack a few pieces of 13th century timber in a fire pit in your backyard - now flip a cigarette butt into the pile. Does anyone actually believe that an inferno will result?
11 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
anonymous 4/24/2019 8:53:10 PM (No. 44241)
You only need one cigarette to start a massive blaze. If it were terrorism, those responsible would have shouted it from the rooftops by now.
6 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
Pepper Tree 4/24/2019 9:16:54 PM (No. 44229)
Uh-huh. Did they also bring their own flare guns?
5 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
Faldo 4/25/2019 1:35:21 AM (No. 44233)
Those ´old growth´ beams were not flammable, they were combustible. This had to be a DEW strike from a drone, or something along that confab, especially if accelerants are not found.
Reuters is plainly mocking the entire affair with this header...which tells me this was a planned event.
6 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "earlybird"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
Comments:
Banned on the site but some did it anyway?