French unwilling to work past 6 PM. Notre Dame cathedral burnt down as a result.

[master.on]

A fire alarm first wailed inside the Notre Dame Cathedral at 6:20 p.m. Monday, but for 23 critical minutes cathedral staff "searched" for a blaze, "unable" to find the cause.
It wasn't until a second alarm went off at 6:43 p.m. that a fire was detected in the attic of the centuries-old religious landmark, French officials said Tuesday.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/skbaer/notre-dame-fire-alarm-23-minutes

The problem is that the lazy French feel wrongly entitled to refuse work past 6:00 P.M.
even if the law doesn't mention 6 PM or any specific time at all:

As Buzzfeed speculated, that specific 6 p.m. time was likely an assumption based on the French labor law's limit to a 35-hour work week, which forces many to end their work day at 6 p.m.
In France, it's now illegal to work after 6 p.m.

So, not only restoration workers left the church before 6 PM, possibly leaving come electrical equipment (or even a torch) on
but the cathedral guards and fire brigades (if they actually have any) ignored the alarm for 23 minutes.
After all for them working past 6 PM is "exploitative", "capitalistic" and even American.

Now the French will do what they're better at: play victim and ask for handouts.

Bring back the hunchback. At least he works harder than modern day French.

The Hunchback of Notre-Dame - Wikipedia

 

[flenser]

So... 800+ churches in France were burned or vandalized last year, even more the year before that. Then a prime target is being renovated by a "diverse" work force, and the place catches fire just after most of them go home. And the reason for the fire is assumed to be... lazy french people. Brilliant.

 

[TANGO.ECHO.KILO]

So... 800+ churches in France were burned or vandalized last year, even more the year before that. Then a prime target is being renovated by a "diverse" work force, and the place catches fire just after most of them go home. And the reason for the fire is assumed to be... lazy french people. Brilliant.

Don't feed the troll...once you leave milk they never leave.

 

[flenser]

Don't feed the troll...once you leave milk they never leave.

More like a mascot than a troll. Wouldn't want him to starve..

 

[master.on]

Notre Dame cathedral renovators 'were regularly smoking illegally before fire'

A strict ban on smoking on the scaffolding of the world famous cathedral in the heart of Paris was regularly flouted, according to French media

Renovators working on Notre Dame cathedral were regularly smoking illegally before the fire that almost destroyed the famous Paris landmark, it has been reported.

Extensive interviews carried out by detectives since last week’s horrific blaze has led to a number of confessions, according to French media.

"In the hearings, some workers admitted that they were smoking on the scaffolding, despite the strict ban," says a shock report in the Canard Enchaine (The Chained Duck), France’s leading investigative news outlet.

Police have also found seven discarded cigarette butts on the scene, the publication adds.

While the cause of the fire is still considered accidental, any proof that a discarded cigarette butt led to the fire could result in a prison sentence.

A criminal enquiry has been on going since April 15 – the day the fire started in the medieval cathedral’s roof.

The main suspects are the renovators working for Le Bras Freres (The Bras Brothers) – a company based in eastern France which has had won a contract to restore the spire.

It was lost in the blaze, along with most of the roof, although the Bras workers have insisted they were not on site when it started.

Company spokesman Marc Eskenazi said: "Yes, there are some people who, from time to time, have ignored the ban and we regret this."

Mr Estenazi added: "Under no circumstances can a poorly extinguished butt be the cause of the Notre Dame fire."

In fact, investigators have made it clear that the fire could have started at least a full day before emergency services knew about it.

Forensics experts have told those leading the criminal enquiry that a discarded cigarette could have started carbonising tinder-dry wood without anyone noticing.

"This is very common in the old buildings around central Paris,’ said a source close to the enquiry.

"There would not have been much energy in the fire to begin with, and certainly not enough to trigger alarms.

"This would have changed as the combustion intensified and sparked a full blown fire on the roof of the building."

In a further twist, it has emerged that Le Bras Brothers were involved in another site fire earlier this month.

On April 1, a blaze broke at a listed building being used as a youth centre in Belleville-sur-Meuse, in eastern France.
Notre Dame cathedral renovators 'were regularly smoking illegally before fire'

 

[Jspd]

Any indication the “diverse workforce”, or as you mean it- non white workers- were the cause? Or is that just more racist fear mongering by a coward who’s too big of a chickenshit and has to hide his bullshit behind dog whistle terms like “diverse workforce”
I bet you’re the first one to cite some biased fact for race based malevolence caused by non whites but then cry like a bitch when people think that “white males” are statistically accurate profile for mass shooters.

Thank god the workers weren’t white Americans because the place woulda been shot up.

 

[MindlessWork]

Figured it may well been a stray cigarette or an ash that started the fire.

 

[LeoTC]

I thought the prevailing theory was faulty wiring?

I mean, it's a hundreds of years old building. I'm sure they update the electric from time to time, but I've also seen some way outdated stuff here in the states.

Shit always sketches me out.

 

[flenser]

Any indication the “diverse workforce”, or as you mean it- non white workers- were the cause? Or is that just more racist fear mongering by a coward who’s too big of a chickenshit and has to hide his bullshit behind dog whistle terms like “diverse workforce”
I bet you’re the first one to cite some biased fact for race based malevolence caused by non whites but then cry like a bitch when people think that “white males” are statistically accurate profile for mass shooters.

Thank god the workers weren’t white Americans because the place woulda been shot up.

Assuming you're replying to me, I think your reading comprehension is somewhat lacking. Clearly you have a strong bias against "white males" and "white Americans", but that aside, my response was a counter to the assumption that the place caught fire because "french workers are lazy". I didn't blame anyone, because I have no idea what happened.

On the aside, and not that I have a dog in this race, but I do find your bias and naivety (due I assume to selective reading) rather tiresome. So here are the stats I picked up from a google search on "mass shootings" by race and ethnicity. ANd here are some reasonable stats on the percentage of "white people" in America by year. Do you see anything wrong with your assumptions? No? Let me do the math for you..

62 / (62 + 18 + 10 + 8 + 5 + 4 + 3) * 100 = (Oh, look) just 56% of the mass shooters since 1980 where white, and even in 2019 white people represent at least 60% of the population (80% in 1980).

Now do you see anything wrong with your biased assumptions/reading? If not, I can't help you.

On a side note, I will be traveling through the weekend, so it's likely I won't respond to anything you post before Monday.

 

[Demondosage]

It's pretty simple, build or renovate your shit to code and update your detection system to give a zone location of initiated detector.

 

[Jspd]

Assuming you're replying to me, I think your reading comprehension is somewhat lacking. Clearly you have a strong bias against "white males" and "white Americans", but that aside, my response was a counter to the assumption that the place caught fire because "french workers are lazy". I didn't blame anyone, because I have no idea what happened.

On the aside, and not that I have a dog in this race, but I do find your bias and naivety (due I assume to selective reading) rather tiresome. So here are the stats I picked up from a google search on "mass shootings" by race and ethnicity. ANd here are some reasonable stats on the percentage of "white people" in America by year. Do you see anything wrong with your assumptions? No? Let me do the math for you..

62 / (62 + 18 + 10 + 8 + 5 + 4 + 3) * 100 = (Oh, look) just 56% of the mass shooters since 1980 where white, and even in 2019 white people represent at least 60% of the population (80% in 1980).

Now do you see anything wrong with your biased assumptions/reading? If not, I can't help you.

this may be misleading. Are the number of gang shootings included in those numbers? That isn’t by any means to dismiss gang violence, of which a large majority are not whites. Still not an excusable fact that this is. Gang shootings are vile but usually discriminate compared to the indiscriminate killing by white extremists or white school shooters done in settings to get the biggest fatality count. So would the number of victims by mass shootings not count? If we looked at the number of dead individuals by the hands of whites, latinos, blacks and do on- how confident are you that the difference between that number and the population stat would be so marginal?

Also statistically speaking if you’re going to tie two stats together: whites are probably statistically more affluent than most other races (I’ll try to find a stat if you need that to be proven) and their black counterparts who have second place in that list of shooters by race. They probably have better health plans and access to medical health professionals more often than most other races. So it’s either that they’re not performing at a level in society that correlates to the privileges they’re born into or they have inherently violent characteristics and it’s the nature of them as an animal. Or is explaining the violent tendencies and lack of societal performance standards and civilities of individuals based on race unfair when it’s whites?

It’s fine to pin deprecating stats to other races for accountability as a way to rectify an underlying cause. as long as you’re willing to do so to your own.

On a side note, I will be traveling through the weekend, so it's likely I won't respond to anything you post before Monday.

make sure you pack your tiki torches

 

[flenser]

this may be misleading. Are the number of gang shootings included in those numbers? That isn’t by any means to dismiss gang violence, of which a large majority are not whites. Still not an excusable fact that this is. Gang shootings are vile but usually discriminate compared to the indiscriminate killing by white extremists or white school shooters done in settings to get the biggest fatality count. So would the number of victims by mass shootings not count? If we looked at the number of dead individuals by the hands of whites, latinos, blacks and do on- how confident are you that the difference between that number and the population stat would be so marginal?

I provided some pretty basic stats, more or less universally accepted, to counter your racist fucking drivel about white americans shooting up the place. Your response is to inject more racist BS into the equation because you are unhappy with the clear and obvious results. To answer your question, I have no opinion on which race is the better murderer. The best murderers tend to become politicians. Maybe you can dig up some racial statistics on that.

Also statistically speaking if you’re going to tie two stats together: whites are probably statistically more affluent than most other races (I’ll try to find a stat if you need that to be proven) and their black counterparts who have second place in that list of shooters by race. They probably have better health plans and access to medical health professionals more often than most other races. So it’s either that they’re not performing at a level in society that correlates to the privileges they’re born into or they have inherently violent characteristics and it’s the nature of them as an animal. Or is explaining the violent tendencies and lack of societal performance standards and civilities of individuals based on race unfair when it’s whites?

It’s fine to pin deprecating stats to other races for accountability as a way to rectify an underlying cause. as long as you’re willing to do so to your own.

We're discussing a sample set exceeding 200 million, and you are assigning violent characteristics to this set based on the one time actions of 62 individuals. I don't want to hurt your feelings, but do you understand what that makes you?

make sure you pack your tiki torches

Attending my daughter's college graduation. They won't let us bring water bottles, but I didn't see anything abouot tiki torches..

 

[T-Bagger]

I provided some pretty basic stats, more or less universally accepted, to counter your racist fucking drivel about white americans shooting up the place. Your response is to inject more racist BS into the equation because you are unhappy with the clear and obvious results. To answer your question, I have no opinion on which race is the better murderer. The best murderers tend to become politicians. Maybe you can dig up some racial statistics on that.



We're discussing a sample set exceeding 200 million, and you are assigning violent characteristics to this set based on the one time actions of 62 individuals. I don't want to hurt your feelings, but do you understand what that makes you?



Attending my daughter's college graduation. They won't let us bring water bottles, but I didn't see anything abouot tiki torches..

Don’t even waste your time brother. There’s a saying that holds true: don’t feed the trolls.