I feel like when there is financial malfeasance, we find enough cases of it in the wild to document that it has really happened. Whether it's Enron, or stories of lobbyists and politicians acting in self interest in ways that break the law, or even just municipal officials embezzling, we have known cases of that. So if you ever have the feeling that big financial transactions might be ethically questionable, you can at least know that such things have happened in the wild.<p>I think the same is true of war crimes in wars - enough of the worst type of things have really happened, and been documented, so there's nothing on the face of it that is outlandish if you heard a new report of such a thing.<p>But how about deaths in suspicious circumstances like this one? Is there a historical record of these kinds of things being carried out, especially in the western world, in circumstances where the motive is corporate self-interest? What's the most clear cut case we have of something falling in that falls into (for lack of a better term) the Michael Clayton category?
Might be a good idea to make these kinds of statements in a more public manner on the socials. @ing the company your commenting against as well as any local police, FBI, or other pertinent TLAs. Let the opposition know they are no longer operating in the shadows. Of course the TLAs won't actively do anything about it proactively, but maybe it'll give more credence than the grieving friend's say-so later??? Have it in writing notarized, and on display in the video you post. This isn't a Grisham novel from the 90s. It's much easier to document things today.
These kinds of things happen and the waters immediately get murky. Even those closest to the person in question are never really 100% sure.<p>Reminds me of the death of journalist Michael Hastings in 2013.<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hastings_(journalist)#Death" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hastings_(journalist)#...</a><p>Richard Clarke's assessment seemed to carry the weight of truth. But only to a point. Just enough to engage the suspicions of family and friends, but no more.<p>Same for John Barnett.
While I can't see "Boeing" (as a whole command structure) can be blamed for his death I do see the possibility of some corrupt person in a high position fearing what he had on him personally and ordered a strike against him.
Yea...<p>SO if you really feel this way you say this to every reporter you see. You write it down and give it to your lawyer. Your wife. Your kids. You put copies in the safety deposit box. You give notarized copies to every 3rd homeless person you meet.<p>You don't just tell one friend.
Whenever people say about someone “they would never kill themselves” it reminds me of a deeply disturbing depression episode I had, thankfully only once, that lasted about 8 hours. It was the blackest morass of misery, I couldn’t bear to be in my own skin. After experiencing that I came to understand how people can do it, and the sudden onset also made me understand how inexplicable it can be.
The Onion's take <a href="https://www.theonion.com/boeing-promotes-mysterious-employee-known-only-as-the-1851333169" rel="nofollow">https://www.theonion.com/boeing-promotes-mysterious-employee...</a>
This happens way too often, and I'm genuinely curious why.<p>The easy answer is that paranoid people with a vendetta say exactly this to throw guilt onto the other party.<p>The hard answer is harder to swallow. What can we do about it?
I am incredibly skeptical of the hypothesis that this might be a murder. Asking a few key questions makes it clear how dubious it is:<p>Most importantly, who's gun was it? If it was someone else's gun, sure, it's a murder, but I think we'll find that the gun was Barnett's. And if so, we have to ask, how did the murderer manage to kill Barnett with his own gun?<p>How did the killer get into the truck? We can assume the killer had to be in the truck, since the alternative (killing Barnett elsewhere and dragging the body through a Holiday Inn parking lot into the driver's seat) is absurd. Did they get lucky and try the door, finding it to be open? If so, wouldn't there be signs of a struggle when a stranger enters your vehicle? Or did they get in because they know Barnett, and he let them in (in which case, they won't have an alibi)?<p>Why commit a murder in a public location? I won't be surprised if the Holiday Inn parking lot was being surveilled.<p>The fact that the gun was found in his hand, and the timing of the murder, do seem like pretty big coincidences. But I think it's easier to chalk these up to coincidences than it is to answer the above questions. Additionally, per his Wikipedia page, he suffered from PTSD and anxiety attacks. These don't guarantee that he's suicidal, but it's not the picture of perfect mental health either.<p>I'm very interested if anyone thinks they have a good explanation of how this could have taken place as a murder.
There would be revolution in the streets tomorrow if the average person understood where money comes from and how it works. Once a group of people is wired into the free money pipeline they will do ANYTHING to make sure their supply is not cut off.<p>The USA has been printing and giving away free money for 30+ years now. The recipients of those funds have proven again and again, they will and do commit heinous crimes to maintain their position.<p>1) The legislature - Law makers have been captured through campaign contributions. In MOST cases a law maker has no say in how they vote, they are told by their campaign managers.<p>2) The judicial - Similarly judges tend to run for their seat every 4 years. In family court any divorce attorney worth their salt is donating the maximum amount to every judge every time they run. Then when they are in front of the judge in court just a thumbs up and a nod is enough to remind the judge who REALLY got them elected.<p>3) Corporations are DONE paying taxes and have been for a long time. Successful corporations have figured out how to siphon money from not only their customers but their employees and the federal government as well.<p>4) The money supply and system in general is fucked beyond repair and anyone willing or able to point that out is going to be on the "kill list".
Everybody understands that corporations use cartels to do their dirty work, right? Go work high level at an international commodities company and you’ll find that doing business with “the underworld” is required and that comes with connections to other capabilities<p>I often see people say corporations arent as big of a problem compared to government because government has the ability to arrest and kill people.<p>The idea that corporations are some gentle thing that don’t have murderous coercive capacities is beyond outdated<p>Go and look at how corporations have co-opted local police forces to protect their businesses as the first order requirement of the police force. Best Buy, Walmart etc all have hired “off duty” cops for decades.<p>The goal of the existing global economic and political structure is to protect business - full stop.<p><a href="https://money.cnn.com/2015/12/09/news/shell-companies-crime/index.html" rel="nofollow">https://money.cnn.com/2015/12/09/news/shell-companies-crime/...</a><p><a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/philmatier/article/Businesses-hiring-real-SF-cops-on-OT-to-keep-14365181.php" rel="nofollow">https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/philmatier/article/Busin...</a>
Every single person in the previous thread who ridiculed others for saying that suicide was _not_ the most likely explanation needs a serious re-evaluation of their priors.
The OP link <a href="https://abcnews4.com/news/local/if-anything-happens-its-not-suicide-boeing-whistleblowers-prediction-before-death-south-carolina-abc-news-4-2024" rel="nofollow">https://abcnews4.com/news/local/if-anything-happens-its-not-...</a> has two different cookie consent banners on top of each other and on iPhone using Safari I can’t scroll down to click any buttons to dismiss the banners which cover the screen.<p>Screenshot of unreadable page:<p><a href="https://i.imgur.com/LNjbgK5.png" rel="nofollow">https://i.imgur.com/LNjbgK5.png</a><p>I’m in Europe, maybe that’s why they are serving me the page with these overlays.<p>Thankfully however, archive.today is able to identify those kinds of overlays in many cases and remove them, including for this page.<p>Readable archive link:<p><a href="https://archive.is/lgFFJ" rel="nofollow">https://archive.is/lgFFJ</a>
Reading the comments here is now making me even more skeptical about society.<p>It really looks like;<p>It is a waste of time to take risk yourself and expose unethical practices conducted by the powerful.<p>Because,<p>A) The masses don't really care (I expected riots and protest).<p>B) You may mysteriously die.<p>C) Your death instead of sparking an outrage will mostly be labeled a "conspiracy theory".<p>Given these three items, I can very confidently predict this in the future.<p>0. We shall have less exposés.<p>1. Corporations and other powerful entities will engage in more unethical behaviour.<p>Due to majority of worker being spinless and complicit to corner cutting and other unethical practices.<p>2. Powerful entities will know they can get away with evil if they leave enough blanks in the engagement.<p>Since the masses will label these as conspiracy theories. And they will be stuck in these academic "plausible deniability" kind of foggy minds.<p>With this, I expect powerful entities to get away with more evil deeds.<p><i>In a crowd of a hundred, 50 percent of the wealth, 90 percent of the imagination, and 100 percent of the intellectual courage will reside in a single person—not necessarily the same one.</i><p>— Bed of Procrustes
I'm not saying one thing or another happened, I don't know. But surely we know enough about suicide to not use 'he seemed so happy and full of life' to support a murder argument.<p>If it was an assassination, this is some Michael Clayton level stuff.
Definitely not a Boeing apologist, but as a paramedic, I'd take this with a grain of salt, too.<p>I have been on calls for a non-trivial number of patients who've sworn black and blue that they're "no longer suicidal", "no longer a threat", "if anything happens to me, it wasn't suicide" who, you guessed it, went on to attempt or commit suicide in very short order.
Playing devil’s advocate - even if this is related to a Boeing executive, it needs to be proved in court.<p>Allegations and heresay is easy. Pricing in court with evidence is a much steeper climb.<p>Don’t see much talk of evidence in the article.
I would think that if you were concerned about this sort of thing and proving it wasn't suicide, you would have some sort of measures in place - hidden video, hidden audio, trace powders, etc.
These statements would only be meaningful if suicidal people couldn't say them.<p>No one ever seems to invest in a security system, or a gun, when they make these statements. Why?
Many people become wealthy because of their willingness to engage in criminal behavior, but once they make it they want to be seen as legitimate business people. They go to great lengths to launder both their money and reputation. Their money, willingness to engage in criminal behavior, and the other malintents they picked up along the way make them particularly dangerous to expose.
Gary Webb vibes<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb</a><p>> Webb is best known for his "Dark Alliance" series, which appeared in The Mercury News in 1996. The series examined the origins of the crack cocaine trade in Los Angeles and claimed that members of the anti-communist Contra rebels in Nicaragua had played a major role in creating the trade, using cocaine profits to finance their fight against the government in Nicaragua. It also stated that the Contras may have acted with the knowledge and protection of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The series provoked outrage, particularly in the Los Angeles African-American community, and led to four major investigations of its charges.<p>> Webb was found dead in his Carmichael home on December 10, 2004, with <i>two gunshot wounds to the head. His death was ruled a suicide</i>.
Honestly, if I was going to off myself and I was in a semi-newsworthy situation I'd tell everyone I knew if I die it's not suicide... just to mess with everyone.
Managing complexity is complex. I can't imagine how complicated building an airplane is. If the top people are not being retained, then problems will follow. Sometimes it's just one genius (Von Braun) that moves an entire field forward.
At some level it is hard to contemplate a conspiracy to silence a whistleblower, but on the other hand:<p><a href="https://www.wcvb.com/article/ebay-employees-who-sent-live-spiders-cockroaches-to-natick-couple-massachusetts/46353042" rel="nofollow">https://www.wcvb.com/article/ebay-employees-who-sent-live-sp...</a>
This is kind of mind-blowing to me. First case in my lifetime where a US corporation appears to have murdered someone for political reasons. Has this happened before? I assume it has but it's very rare.
It's pretty brutal if nobody cares about the optics of this anymore, just kill off whoever is inconvenient. I guess after Epstein's "two cameras malfunction" nobody cares about any public backlash and there is "normal day in Russia" to be inspired from...
Considering how many deaths Boeing are responsible for through their blatant ineptitude, I wonder how far a stretch it would be that this one was indeed intended.
Ok there are conspiracy theories, making claims about things that are unlikely. And then there is the key witness that dies in a parking lot by gunshot wound the day before he is to testify on the case he spent decades building. And then there is his friends who swears that he wouldn’t commit suicide.<p>Call me crazy all you want, but murder is the most probable theory here.<p>The money interests are massive. People kill for tens of thousands of dollars. We’re talking millions of dollars here.
Perhaps:<p>A. Most people dismiss an actual conspiracy to murder a whistleblower witness as a conspiracy theory automatically. Such a cliché seems possible. Remember, Boeing is run by MD dickhead bros who traded in camel fucking magazine covers.<p>B. He wanted additional scrutiny on Boeing, and was willing to die for it.<p>C. Friend is seeking attention.<p>It will require honest and diligent investigation to be sure it was truly suicide because none of us know from afar. C seems most likely.
Maybe he was killed by the agents of whoever. I have no non-public knowledge about this.<p>On the other hand, if you were obsessed with some conspiracy theory, were feeling suicidal, and wanted to create maximum effect with your death ... "it's not suicide" is exactly what you'd say.
No. If you’re concerned that you might get murdered, and want to make it clear that you have no intention of killing yourself, telling your one friend about it in a conversation in the midst of moving a sofa with no records to prove it whatsoever is the worst possible way of doing it.<p>Tweet it, send it in a message, leave a note in your home. But, “hey push that side, and let’s lift this in 3..2…. oh by the way I have no intention of killing myself… 1… go! There you go”. No. That doesn’t check out. Even if that conversation actually took place, it’s not helpful at all because it’s so easy to dismiss as hearsay. That’s actually a curse you put on your friend if it really happened.<p>EDIT: Apparently, the aforementioned help in the article was being a pallbearer at the friend’s father’s funeral. That turns out to be a less and less proper conversation for the occasion.