520
Boeing: Dead whistleblower warned of safety breaches
(www.bbc.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2024
520 points (100.0% liked)
News
23627 readers
2116 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
BOEING KILLED JOHN BARNETT
OK, so Boeing cannot be a murder, there has to be someone who actually did it. So who would that be? The CEO? A hired hitman? Who?
And WHY? It would make no difference, the testimony is already out there. It would be cheaper and easier to simply lawyer up and fight, then to hire and then have to pay off somebody. Because that somebody would always have dirt on whoever did the hiring.
Maybe I am wrong, but this really makes no sense.
his testimony was not over, he had another round the next day
he said that he was not suicidal. He saw it coming.
Until someone confesses, the group with the most motive is Boeing. Bag them all and make them squeal.
What is the motive? and exactly who cares when money can make this go away? But no, murder will make everyone not care, really? This is absolutely silly.
Why are you acting like this is some impossible mystery that we'll never understand? The motive is either "silencing him so he can't reveal more", "intimidating other potential whistleblowers", or a combination of both. Is this some grand revelation to you, or are you deliberately acting like you've been dropped on your head every day since birth?
Yeah, we're actively seeing how money has made all of Boeing's problems go away. No investigations are happening, there could not be any issues if further whistleblowers step forward 🙄
Again, think about the motives for more than half a second, and you'll see that the idea isn't to "make everyone not care".
No need for personal attacks. You did not answer the question. What is the motive? You describe actions that can be taken, but to what end? More money? More power? Simply a fuck you? Worried they are culpable and might go to jail?
Now tell me exactly WHO this person is, or are you suggesting that is a group of people? Board of Directors? The more people who know the more people will need hush money, the more complicated it gets.
And for what? Nobody is going to lose money, nobody is going to jail. Not if there are more whistleblowers, not if their are fines, nothing. The company will bear the weight of the problem, the government will socialize the solution to fix the problem, and the people with money will walk away or somehow get wealthier in the process.
So excuse me for thinking a bit critically about this conspiracy.
Have you tried reading the sentence I wrote that starts with "the motive is"? Please explain to me why you consider that question to be valid, when I literally explicitly answer the question?
I genuinely don't think you have the intelligence required to understand the answer, since you didn't understand it when I first gave it to you. You didn't ask a clarifying question, you didn't give a counter argument - you simply act like no answer was provided, even though you must have seen it the whole time you wrote your reply. Why? Why would someone ever choose to behave the way you do?
These are not motives. If you read what I wrote, you get to the true motive. These are actions, they do things, but who cares if they reveal more? Who cares if more people are whistle blowers? That is where you will find motive. Which I talked about, and which demonstrates that the consequences of this action serve no purpose. It is always about money.
It is disappointing you cannot seem to have a discussion without personal attacks, like calling me stupid. But to take it right back to you: do you always believe in conspiracy?
Edit: Hell I would be more likely to believe that the Union did it, because they have used lax rules at the plant to smuggle drugs or some other illicit substance. Which is what I am trying to get at: WHO is responsible, and WHY. Boeing the company is going to be investigated by the FAA either way, so is there some dirty secret that we dont know about? After all a Union chief (and 23 others) pleaded guilty in 2012 to drug trafficking.... https://www.inquirer.com/philly/news/breaking/20120816_Ex-union_chief_caught_in_Boeing_drug_sting_gets_6_months.html
If they were wealthy people (CEO, Board of Directors) like I said before, none of this would be worth murder. They make money either way.
These are in fact, Motives.
Unlike you, Not everyone is for sale.
So you agree with me? Or did someone name a price to whack this guy, so they were for sale....
I’m saying you’re a corporate shill.