But then, the Taliban did destroy monumental statues of Buddha in Afghanistan. Which were about twice as old as Notre Dame. So maybe I am deluding myself :(
And OK, I take it back. Nothing is "too shocking" to be all that unlikely.
But still, wouldn't you think that a terrorist attack on Notre Dame would involve something more like a hijacked gasoline tanker than a fire that perhaps started in the attic?
But it survived. And to be burned out by some idiot with an agenda would be so sad and pointless. Indeed, whatever cause the idiot was supporting.
But of course, it'd also be sad if it was totally an "accident". An electrical fire. Someone who left a heater running. Or didn't fully extinguish a cigarette.
Anyway, I'd be very suspicious if someone claimed responsibility. If for no other reason, because if it had been a terrorist attack, we would know by now. A key point in terrorist attacks is having them be obvious. Not looking like accidents.
But I can't -- really can't -- imagine how any Islamic fundamentalist group could claim responsibility for this. What would be the point?
So if anyone does claim responsibility, it's ~100% sure that they're just trying to incite Islamophobia.
Edit: OK, not ~100% sure. But it's either that, or they're crazy. And yes, I suppose that it's arguable that all terrorists are crazy. I still maintain that it's an obvious possibility, however. Not at all likely, but still obvious.