I'm very touched by this event, it's devastating to see a place so familiar burnt down, my parents almost lost their house in a fire last year and I had the same kind of sense of loss nagging me all night. I know we will rebuild it and move on but many original pieces are lost for good, which is very hard to accept.
I'm happy that I forced myself to visit this place with the kids early this year. Since it's easter I hope they hold a public mass next to the burnt building or at the chapel exceptionnally. I'm not parisian but phuck, it's hard to watch the place burning
I don't have any patience for people who support France's colonialism in any shape or form, but celebrating the destruction of a 800 year old church not shapped by any of the current french abusers is just a blank empty statement of intellectual mediocrity.
We did mourn the destruction of Palmyra. I'm sad that you feel that any kind of historical destruction is a motive of celebration, but more power to you I guess.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Napoleon was a jerk and caused a bunch of death and dispair, but he did modernized France and was one of the first european rules to escape the dogma of kingship. Sadly history is full of those ambivalent situations because lasting peace is a relative novelty in modern history.
Seems a mod deleted the off-topic whiny rants of certain posters.
What did you write though?
Update: Seems the building is still structurally sound, so that will make the rebuilding process easier. Fire seems to have started in the attic and is being deemed accidental; not deliberate. All good news, considering.
I'm sure the milleniums worth of child rape victims of the Catholic Church, one of the longest lasting terrorist organizations in history, are just apoplectic at the thought of a building burning. Oh the humanity.
How are my prices off? I literally just looked up their last selling prices at auction.
Lives are more valuable than property to what extent? Is deadly force justified to stop a potential bomber from detonating the Notre Dame? Worthless property, sure, can easily be replaced but those with historical meaning, like this church or a car that won Le Mans, serve as a relic to be passed down to generations.
D-type jaguar is not "a very nice car" like some contemporary Ferrari. It has historical accolades of its own, hence why it is worth 60 million.
I don't remember the ISIS thing getting the same amount of attention as this fire (which fortunately didn't destroy the church beyond repair), whereas the ISIS turned statues to rubble.
Just looked, the last time a 55 Jag D sold was for 21.78mil, which set a record. But whatever, irrelevant.
In that scenario, yes, setting off a bomb is very dangerous to others and an act of terror and terrorist should be stopped with lethal force if need be. Killing someone because they want to steal a Plymouth? Not so much.
The 1955 Jag doesn't compare to Notre-Dame in historical accolades and value. Sorry.
I specifically mentioned that ISIS destroying these ancient relics was a very great loss to human history and I was not happy about it. I can only speak for myself.
wtf not? It's a clear cut representation of how far human engineering had developed for the time.
Notre Dame has what going for it again exactly? Joan of Arc wasn't even real, and Bonaparte was nothing more than your average dictator. The architecture is cool, so what?