Posted on 04/16/2019 8:41:43 AM PDT by Leaning Right
Investigators are treating the fire that engulfed Paris' Notre Dame Cathedral as an accident for now, the local prosecutor's office said Monday evening.
Paris police will investigate the disaster as "involuntary destruction caused by fire" and have ruled out arson and potential terror-related motives for starting the blaze, officials said.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
A. Some worker has already admitted that he screwed up.
B. It might be arson. But the French cops don't want to tip their hand.
C. They want it to be an accident. So it's going to be an accident.
In the same manner that President Kennedy’s suicide was investigated?
Accident? Yeah, sure.
12 vandalism of French Churches in a week, indicates an “accident”?
No matter how it happened, it will be an accident.
The West has surrendered.
Mrs. O’Muhammad’s camel kicked over a lantern.
Has England chimed in with, “Hey, it’s all part and parcel.”
Even if it was not arson or terrorism it was no “accident”. There are no accidents. Someone is to blame.
It’ll be ruled an accident no matter what the evidence shows.
It’s the same with any terrorist attack these days. Can’t have the msm or politicians saying anything other than it was an accident and not terrorism within 5 minutes.
becoming more and more disappointed with Fox news
Some good reasons to be suspicious—
1. The fire took place during holy week.
2. No workers were there today and the church was closed.
3. ISIS tried to blow up a car outside the church in 2016.
4. Vandalism and desecration of french churches (and synagogues) has been on the rise.
if it ends up being Muslim arson will the french reveal that truth or cover it up?
Prosecutors: “We are going into this investigation with some very specific assumptions and biases and will consider carefully all evidence which either directly or indirectly confirm those biases and assumptions or can be construed to do so. This will become our best evidence available. Any evidence which is not aligned with our biases and assumptions is most likely going to be found to be contradictory, coincidental, or circumstantial and will be treated accordingly. Thank you.”
https://barenakedislam.com/2019/04/16/clearly-nothing-to-see-here-folks-so-what-was-that-guy-in-white-muslim-attire-doing-at-notre-dame-cathedral-when-it-went-up-in-flames/ this needs to be explained
I choose C.
It’s sort of like when a black guy throws a 5-year-old white kid over a rail, and the cops and media are busily scratching their heads wondering what the motive was.
They said this yesterday while the building was still on fire. That tells me they already suspect muslims.
I am NOT disappointed with Fox News reporting this story without, as of now, speculation as to the cause and sticking to what is being released by the French authorities. Speculation during what are suppose to be the ‘straight news’ period of the day I leave to CNN/MSNBC & their ilk that think their speculation is actual news. I want the daytime Fox News to stick to facts as we know. And I expect to see conjecture about the cause, whether accident/arson/terrorist/anti-Christian hate left to the evening Fox News commentary shows that begin with Tucker Carlson.
another news source is reporting that there was an alarm sounded before the big fire... a fire team came to look but found no fire and left......
could this be a confusion of “two fires”?
or did they actually find a second fire in one of the towers too?
Shouldnt you just investigate and let the facts determine the cause?
At this point it seems to be “speculation” that the fire was caused by an accident, before an investigation. And that is Fox News’s stance, along with all the others.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.