The first two links are what happens when we decide to spread false news and give voice to conspiracy theories: Accused is different from charged. Even if the

The first two links are what happens when we decide to spread false news and give voice to conspiracy theories: Accused is different from charged. Even if the person saying it is the head of the fireman fighting the fire. It is not the police job (nor the fireman) to determine who is responsible for a crime. We have courts for that. In Portugal people get preemptively arrested when there is risk of escape among other things. This might have been the case. No mention is made on said person being charged with anything. As can be read on one of the articles: “The suspect’s actions put people’s lives, houses and the forest at risk,” the police said, without explicitly saying that the detained man was responsible for the ongoing wildfire. I am not saying that there are no bad agents at play. I am just pointing out that the public uproar against "fire mafias" and fire starters is so big that it reaches fire chiefs and police officers. It then gets out on the news which propagates it further, just like an avalanche ball. That said: Now is my time for a conspiracy theory. The recent past (cambrige analytica et al) has taught us that most of our rage reactions are being manipulated and abused by higher interests. In this case who might be the big player influencing public opinion through news and propaganda that focus on supposed fire-starters and "fire mafias" ? (cof E cof D cof P) :)