Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Notre Dame
Comments
-
Was he the one who earmarked £100m to invest in a SE London football club......?stackitsteve said:6 -
8 -
Whoosh.AddicksAddict said:
Very few Nazi bombs dropped on Paris, more British and American ones, and most of both were on working-class, industrial areas. Certainly, Hitler wanted his general in charge of the city in '44 to burn it before leaving it for the advancing allies but the bloke had too much good sense and didn't.Addickted said:Awful pictures. After surviving unscathed from all those Nazi bombs during WWII, it's now destroyed by fire.2 -
I thought it might have been DelboyUboat said:0 -
The spire was not part of the original structure and was only added in the 19thC. The Cathedral itself was not always as popular with the people of France as it is today according to the BBC correspondent on 5Live last night, it was Victor Hugo’s book that apparently endeared it to the Parisians.2
-
Hearing this on the radio, it fleetingly crossed my mind that, following his unsuccessful demand that the EFL take over Charlton, here is another opportunity for Roland to make an arse of himself - offer Charlton to the Vatican to sell to raise funds for the renovations. 2 birds with one stone - rids himself of a headache & buys protection for his immortal soul at the same time?stackitsteve said:
On a more serious level, it has just been stated on the BBC that oaks of the size needed to replace the roof like-for-like simply no longer exist in sufficient numbers, so if that is the case I wonder if they will opt for modern materials inside the roof while recreating the original external appearance?0 -
I hadn't realised the spire was relatively recentRiviera said:The spire was not part of the original structure and was only added in the 19thC. The Cathedral itself was not always as popular with the people of France as it is today according to the BBC correspondent on 5Live last night, it was Victor Hugo’s book that apparently endeared it to the Parisians.
Looking at the fire damage, it's terrible BUT it could have been a lot worse. The main structure is intact and many of the treasures saved. Frightening though when you look how quickly and fiercely it burned, and now difficult it is to put out the fire.1 -
This is a terrible shame, that is one impressive building.
For their antiquity the stained glass windows were truly wonderful.
The local outpouring of emotion and the wordless horror of the onlookers signifies the deep rooted affection held for the gothic monolith.
None of which should distract from the complacent neglect into which the structure had been allowed to deteriorate. To allow the stone itself to have disintegrated is tantamount to vandalism and speaks loudly of the parsimonious complacency at the highest levels of the catholic church.
Be that as it may, there can be no need for outside money to restore it. Everybody's free to donate if they so wish of course, but that organisation is one of the planet's few wealthiest entities and the cost of a painstaking stone by stone, beam by beam, pane by pane restoration is barely a drop in a bucket.4 -
It is a miracle that the rose window has survived.
0 -
awful shame as it is a building but as for the "uk in mourning with france" - behave nobody died its a building that can be replaced i think the media reaction is way OTT, yes its a religious building but it can be replaced and most of the internals were saved. it was an accident - may of been preventable but i am not a fire expert.7
-
Sponsored links:
-
It's a wonderful stunning building but " in morning for it" do fuck off9
-
It's worth pointing out that Notre Dame is owned by the French State, not by the Catholic Church. The "operations" are run by the church, but the freehold and beneficial ownership resides with France.StigThundercock said:This is a terrible shame, that is one impressive building.
For their antiquity the stained glass windows were truly wonderful.
The local outpouring of emotion and the wordless horror of the onlookers signifies the deep rooted affection held for the gothic monolith.
None of which should distract from the complacent neglect into which the structure had been allowed to deteriorate. To allow the stone itself to have disintegrated is tantamount to vandalism and speaks loudly of the parsimonious complacency at the highest levels of the catholic church.
Be that as it may, there can be no need for outside money to restore it. Everybody's free to donate if they so wish of course, but that organisation is one of the planet's few wealthiest entities and the cost of a painstaking stone by stone, beam by beam, pane by pane restoration is barely a drop in a bucket.1 -
Before I score some cheap Atheist points, can I say that it's sad that an iconic building has been so ravaged by fire, But I don't think anyone has died (unlike Grenville towers) so like most fires they are not discerning and don't care if palace or slum.
Why doesn't God do a better job of looking after his own ?3 -
16 April
2007 - Virginia Tech shooting: 32 killed
2008 - trial of Anders Breivik (murdered 77 people) commences
2013 - earthquake in Iran - 35 people killed
2013 - Boko Harem massacre in Nigeria, killing 200 civilians
2014 - South Korean ferry capsizes, killing 304 passengers
And Theresa May decides to commemorate fire, which killed no-one. This seems utterly bizarre. But, on a day in which several more important tragedies could be remembered quietly, the Prime Minster decides to remember something from yesterday, noisily.0 -
which one?soapboxsam said:Before I score some cheap Atheist points, can I say that it's sad that an iconic building has been so ravaged by fire, But I don't think anyone has died (unlike Grenville towers) so like most fires they are not discerning and don't care if palace or slum.
Why doesn't God do a better job of looking after his own ?2 -
Ffs.
This ain't a terrorist attack.
Nobody has died.
A building has caught fire.
This happens every day of the week in pretty much every country in the world.
I fully understand what this building means to a lot of people but it's only a building and it will be rebuilt.2 -
This is why you shouldn't separate the club from the stadium.Chizz said:
It's worth pointing out that Notre Dame is owned by the French State, not by the Catholic Church. The "operations" are run by the church, but the freehold and beneficial ownership resides with France.StigThundercock said:This is a terrible shame, that is one impressive building.
For their antiquity the stained glass windows were truly wonderful.
The local outpouring of emotion and the wordless horror of the onlookers signifies the deep rooted affection held for the gothic monolith.
None of which should distract from the complacent neglect into which the structure had been allowed to deteriorate. To allow the stone itself to have disintegrated is tantamount to vandalism and speaks loudly of the parsimonious complacency at the highest levels of the catholic church.
Be that as it may, there can be no need for outside money to restore it. Everybody's free to donate if they so wish of course, but that organisation is one of the planet's few wealthiest entities and the cost of a painstaking stone by stone, beam by beam, pane by pane restoration is barely a drop in a bucket.1 -
Fire risk?Uboat said:
This is why you shouldn't separate the club from the stadium.Chizz said:
It's worth pointing out that Notre Dame is owned by the French State, not by the Catholic Church. The "operations" are run by the church, but the freehold and beneficial ownership resides with France.StigThundercock said:This is a terrible shame, that is one impressive building.
For their antiquity the stained glass windows were truly wonderful.
The local outpouring of emotion and the wordless horror of the onlookers signifies the deep rooted affection held for the gothic monolith.
None of which should distract from the complacent neglect into which the structure had been allowed to deteriorate. To allow the stone itself to have disintegrated is tantamount to vandalism and speaks loudly of the parsimonious complacency at the highest levels of the catholic church.
Be that as it may, there can be no need for outside money to restore it. Everybody's free to donate if they so wish of course, but that organisation is one of the planet's few wealthiest entities and the cost of a painstaking stone by stone, beam by beam, pane by pane restoration is barely a drop in a bucket.1 -
The Valley is only a football stadium but if it burned down, I would be upset. Yes, it could be rebuilt but it wouldn't be the same. And it matters more to me, rightly or wrongly, than countless other buildings that burn down 'every day of the week'. Old buildings matter - they connect us with our heritage and all those who came before us.blackpool72 said:Ffs.
This ain't a terrorist attack.
Nobody has died.
A building has caught fire.
This happens every day of the week in pretty much every country in the world.
I fully understand what this building means to a lot of people but it's only a building and it will be rebuilt.6 -
i agree regarding buildings being important BUT the media headlines from pretty much every british paper is " we mourn with paris " i have also just heard that we are ringing the bells of westminster abbey at 5.43pm to mark the moment the fire started, when you compare this to grenfell where people died it seems extremely ott.
@captainbob yes i would be upset too but i wouldnt mourn for it aslong as nobody was hurt.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Minutes applause in the 856th minute on Saturday?9
-
Please tell me that's a wind up? . What a clown show this modern world is at timespalarsehater said:i agree regarding buildings being important BUT the media headlines from pretty much every british paper is " we mourn with paris " i have also just heard that we are ringing the bells of westminster abbey at 5.43pm to mark the moment the fire started, when you compare this to grenfell where people died it seems extremely ott.
@captainbob yes i would be upset too but i wouldnt mourn for it aslong as nobody was hurt.
Grief- mongering at every opportunity and avoiding getting to grips with the real important issues of our day like apocalyptic climate change, global poverty, teen stabbings and the sanctioning of deluded geriatric fuckwits to unleash their monstrous fuckwittery unabated upon great footballing institutions.
Deary me.1 -
4 -
Last time I checked Dave, Catholics only believe in the one God, so he/she or gender fluid God will do.cafcdave123 said:
which one?soapboxsam said:Before I score some cheap Atheist points, can I say that it's sad that an iconic building has been so ravaged by fire, But I don't think anyone has died (unlike Grenville towers) so like most fires they are not discerning and don't care if palace or slum.
Why doesn't God do a better job of looking after his own ?0 -
2 -
RodneyCharltonTrotta said:
Please tell me that's a wind up? . What a clown show this modern world is at timespalarsehater said:i agree regarding buildings being important BUT the media headlines from pretty much every british paper is " we mourn with paris " i have also just heard that we are ringing the bells of westminster abbey at 5.43pm to mark the moment the fire started, when you compare this to grenfell where people died it seems extremely ott.
@captainbob yes i would be upset too but i wouldnt mourn for it aslong as nobody was hurt.
Grief- mongering at every opportunity and avoiding getting to grips with the real important issues of our day like apocalyptic climate change, global poverty, teen stabbings and the sanctioning of deluded geriatric fuckwits to unleash their monstrous fuckwittery unabated upon great footballing institutions.
Deary me.Westminster Abbey bells to be rung at 5.43pm
Theresa May said the bells at London's landmark Westminster Abbey will be rung Tuesday afternoon to mark 24 hours since the fire broke out at the Notre-Dame.
It will be done "to underline our solidarity with France and her people," the British prime minister said.
Bells at cathedrals and churches will also be rung on Thursday in demonstration for France's loss.1 -
it is a shame, but it is not a tragedy.0
-
palarsehater said:RodneyCharltonTrotta said:
Please tell me that's a wind up? . What a clown show this modern world is at timespalarsehater said:i agree regarding buildings being important BUT the media headlines from pretty much every british paper is " we mourn with paris " i have also just heard that we are ringing the bells of westminster abbey at 5.43pm to mark the moment the fire started, when you compare this to grenfell where people died it seems extremely ott.
@captainbob yes i would be upset too but i wouldnt mourn for it aslong as nobody was hurt.
Grief- mongering at every opportunity and avoiding getting to grips with the real important issues of our day like apocalyptic climate change, global poverty, teen stabbings and the sanctioning of deluded geriatric fuckwits to unleash their monstrous fuckwittery unabated upon great footballing institutions.
Deary me.Westminster Abbey bells to be rung at 5.43pm
Theresa May said the bells at London's landmark Westminster Abbey will be rung Tuesday afternoon to mark 24 hours since the fire broke out at the Notre-Dame.
It will be done "to underline our solidarity with France and her people," the British prime minister said.
Bells at cathedrals and churches will also be rung on Thursday in demonstration for France's loss.
Effing clown show1 -
At a guess, the one thing French people don't need right now, is their neighbours ringing bells on cathedrals to show off how they still can.18
-
The bell towers at ND were undamaged weren't they?Chizz said:At a guess, the one thing French people don't need right now, is their neighbours ringing bells on cathedrals to show off how they still can.0
This discussion has been closed.
