Brooklyn landlord Rafiqul Islam faces arson and attempted murder charges

    • Heresy_generator@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      But they only have the most business-relevant of all business news! Like this crime where the accused is not white! Very businessy; much finance.

  • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This never happened. Or did it?

    Fox News has testified in court multiple times that their “news” is not fact-based and that no reasonable person could confuse their stories as factual. So… It’s a fairly safe bet that this story is bullshit, based on Fox News’ own sworn statements.

    Fuck these Fox News affiliate links.

    • Hildegarde@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      No.

      Companies don’t make sweeping, damaging admissions in a court defense. No broadcaster would admit that all of their news is not news. They only make statements about the facts at issue. It’s a bad idea to admit anything beyond the scope of the case at issue. Anyone saying that a news agency admits they aren’t news has a bridge to sell.

      The arguments made by fox were that their pundit, Tucker Carlson made exaggerated statements during his punditry show. And the courts agreed that those false statements were not defamatory, because reasonable viewers would not expect a political pundit to be factual, because dishonest exaggeration is what political punditry is.

      MSNBC made very similar arguments in court. Rachel Maddow got a lawsuit from One America News Network dismissed under very similar circumstances. You don’t get factual information from pundits. Doesn’t matter what political leanings the network claims to have. Pundits are all liars, that’s what they do.

      Fox does awful journalism. You probably shouldn’t trust their reporting, but not because they admitted in court that their pundit did punditry before they fired him.

        • Hildegarde@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          They are both political pundits who work(ed) for advertisement funded national broadcasters. They both made statements in court that they do not make factual statements as a defense against defamation cases, both of which were winning arguments.

          They have a lot more in common than you would think.

          Fox and CNN and MSNBC will claim to be left or right wing. They do so to cater to specific audiences. But they are all funded by largely the same advertisers which have the same interests. Don’t trust any enormous media corporation.

      • SoleInvictus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You have accurately communicated the facts and I believe adherence to truth, even if you don’t like that truth, is the only way to be better than the typical OANN and Fox News crowd. I even found a corroborating article for the skeptics.

        https://thedispatch.com/article/fact-checking-a-claim-that-fox-news/

        When people disparage facts they don’t like based simply on the fact they don’t like them, they’re furthering a post-truth society.

    • Unaware7013@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      109
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hot take: people are more important than property, and anyone who thinks not paying for a basic human right is worth murdering over is a piece of shit who should be shunned from society.

      • thefartographer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        43
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hotter take: Anyone should be allowed to set things they own on fire*. Being a landlord is thing here that should be outlawed.

        *Property fires cannot contain other people or their possessions. Fire must not spread to other properties.

          • Gnugit@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            25
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think they are trying to say “there is no such thing as a free lunch”

            • Duranie@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I work in hospice and see all kinds of family situations. I see elderly parents that have to move in with their children because of medical and end of life care expenses, children who have to make decisions that will impact their current and future financial stability to care for their parents, and parents who’s children either can’t or won’t blow their futures to put the parents in a safe, clean facility.

              While I don’t wish any of those circumstances on you, I might imagine that should you find yourself there one day you might appreciate some compassion or empathy that you’re denying others.

            • Unaware7013@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              13
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m not sure what you’re saying, considering the person I replied to said the dude was right to try to murder a bunch of people, and I said property is not worth more than human life. I never said the world was free to live in, just that people who think that this behavior is acceptable over something that should be a human right are pieces of shit.

              What are you trying to say?

    • FireTower@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      71
      ·
      1 year ago

      Dude arson endangers not just the lives of the residents of that building but those of adjacent buildings. Fires spread. Even if you could justify the death of the squatters arson is far from any justifiable mechanism.

      • jopepa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 year ago

        Everyone’s trying to explain the value of human life to this comment but you’re explaining the hazard to other objects. You’re reaching people where they are; I think just might change a heart tonight. Good job.

        • HauntedCupcake@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It makes them impoverished and desperate in an economy that increasingly funnels wealth towards the idle rich

          • dlpkl@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            1 year ago

            Whew jumping to conclusions much? Did you imagine all that just to justify theft?

            • orrk@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              considering the rest of you guys are trying to justify murder, I think he has to do way less conclusion jumping

              • dlpkl@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                10
                ·
                1 year ago

                The rest of who? Where did I even start to sympathize with the guy in the article. Y’all are streeeeetching

                • orrk@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  your the guy trying to defend the person who is of the opinion that squatters are best dealt with by fire, if they stop providing rent income to the privileged

      • Kevnyon@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        And they had not paid rent since January? I will never understand the notion that some people, regular people, not billionaires, deserve to lose income while some people deserve free housing because of “family”. While he obviously went a bit overboard, I can’t imagine there wasn’t some desperation in his actions because he had not been paid rent for months on end.

        • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          If they kept their rent the same, they would still get paid.

          But they were greedy, so they didn’t.

          They only have themselves to blame.

    • Eezyville@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      While I can try and understand your position. These people basically stole his investment. Arson and murder is not the correct solution.