You may have heard, and probably did hear by now, that yet another old French cathedral has caught fire and burned, this time the 15th century cathedral of Saints Pierre et Paul in Nantes, destroying a priceless Cavaille-Coll organ, built by the 19th century French master organ builder, Aristide Cavaille-Coll, and ruining the cathedral's stained glass window. Yes, you can go ahead and color me very suspicious on this one. In fact, you can color me suspicious on the fire at Notre Dame as well.
As I said yesterday, "One is an accident; two is a coincidence; and three is a pattern." So far, French President Emanuel Macron has not come out with any kooky plans for turning the structure in Nantes into a greenhouse or some other nutty monument to secularism and globalism, but give him time; after all, according to him, there's no such thing as French culture. (Perhaps he's already burning the telephone wires in consultation with Nuttyfornia Governor Gavin Gruesome on what to do with the structure. I say that only half in jest, because the insanity of these people just keeps getting more and more bizarre.)
So far, if we're following that rather simplistic aphorism, we're in "coincidence" territory.
Except this time we may not be talking about a mere coincidence or accident, according to this article shared by V.T:
A local prosecutor said three fires were started at the St Peter and St Paul Cathedral and authorities were treating the incident as a criminal act. An investigation has been opened.
Firefighters brought the blaze under control after several hours, but smoke was still coming out of the Gothic structure late on Saturday morning.
The blaze comes just over a year after a massive fire at the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris destroyed its roof and main spire.
“After Notre Dame, the St Peter and St Paul Cathedral is in flames. Support to the firemen who are taking all the risks to save the Gothic jewel,” the French president, Emmanuel Macron, tweeted from Brussels where he was attending an EU summit.
Jean-Yves Burban, who runs a newsagent facing the cathedral, said he had opened his business and heard a bang at around 7.30am. He went outside to see huge flames coming from the building.
“I am shook up because I’ve been here eight years and I see the cathedral every morning and evening,” he said. “It’s our cathedral and I’ve got tears in my eyes.” (Emphasis added)
A bang, and then flames, indicates that a pyro-technic device may have started the fires, and that implies of course not only deliberate action, but two more important things besides: (1) a basic knowledge of how to construct them, and (2) the possibility of money and organization behind it. It could, of course, have been the sort of foul deed done by a "lone nut," a kind of Lee Harvey Oswald of church-blower-uppers. But I have to wonder if even that explanation - if and when it is offered - will take into account the possibility of mind manipulation. After all, we've already seen similar actions in recent days in the USA of individuals driving cars into churches full of worshippers, and trying to start fires. All of that said, I don't think we're looking at a "copy-cat" crime, nor at someone who took last year's fire at Notre Dame as inspiration. I think we're looking at organization, and intention, and if one considers this deplorable action together with what is going on in the USA, I think that case surpasses coincidence and is into pattern territory...
...which brings me back to Notre Dame, because, yes, I am still very suspicious about that one too, for I've found no good explanation yet how the fire burned hotly enough to melt and twist the steel scaffolding around the structure, while it was not hot enough to burn the metal lead and tin, or the wooden, pipes of the organ. Granted, the fire was concentrated toward the altar end of the structure, away from the organ loft. But no heat or smoke damage to the instrument whatsoever? Sorry, I'm not buying. And we're still not being told very much how the fire started, especially with the security in the structure.
So, color me skeptical... we're not quite all the way to "3", to "pattern," but I strongly suspect we're at least at a 2.5...
But, what do you think?
See you on the flip side...