One death is coincidental, two is suspicious, any more and it’s gonna become plainly obvious, and now there’s 10. That’s just delicious. They can’t silence them all.
sadfsdfasfasf
So in other words, very plausible deniability.
https://allthatsinteresting.com/heart-attack-gun
We had that tech in 1968. I’m pretty sure it would be a matter of a phone call and some change from the couch cushions for Boeing to create the recent outcome.
Does this mean they did it? No.
Does it warrant the reaction folks are having about it? Absolutely yes. (Edit - In light of their current troubles and the fate of the prior whistleblower.)
which could cause death in minutes without leaving a trace.
Aside from the puncture wound.
From the article:
All that would be left behind was a tiny red dot where the dart entered the body, undetectable to those who didn’t know to look for it.
Which can be missed by an examiner
sadfsdfasfasf
Well that’s it. Case closed. The existence of a heart attack gun in 1968 proves Boeing killed 2 whistleblowers in 2024. Good job gang.
Literally no one has made that statement, including me, the guy who brought up the heart attack gun. Take a breath man.
sadfsdfasfasf
Plonk.
They may have ironed that out, this article is talking about tech that is more than half a century old. We got from first aeroplane to man on the moon in less than that.
sadfsdfasfasf
Does this mean they did it? No.
Does it warrant the reaction folks are having about it? Absolutely yes. (Edit - In light of their current troubles and the fate of the prior whistleblower.)
I stand by that statement, and don’t feel like trying again to connect the dots on the relevancy of my example for you. Whatever you are arguing about is - not the same.
sadfsdfasfasf
And it is suspected that thousand of elderly people are murdered every year, but it is ruled as a natural death, because the demographic is prone to natural deaths and nobody bothers to check further.
At the very least demanding a throughout investigation in both cases is absolutely reasonable.
sadfsdfasfasf
The first wasn’t coincidental. He said “hey they might murder me” then he died right before testifying.
Well, iirc he didn’t show for his deposition, or the day after, or the day after that, at which point the lawyers sent people to find him and found he “committed suicide”.
This is after he said “I am absolutely not going to commit suicide over this. If I die and people say it was suicide, I was killed.”
1 dead whistleblower is a tragedy. 10 dead whistleblowers are a statistic.
nice reference 10/10
deleted by creator
2/12
2/12 so far
I give it a perfect 5/7
With rice?
10/10 survive yes?
Even one death under these circumstances is not a coincidence, and that ought to be coded into law. You’d better fucking well hope the person who blows a whistle on you is healthy - that’s the world we should move towards. Not that that couldn’t also be abused, but the pendulum is way too fucking far this way.
Any serious issue should have a paper trail of some sort. Emails, meetings, part rejections, that sort of thing. There are processes in place to allow anonymous reporting of some of these things.
Can’t or won’t?
Seriously, though, I wouldn’t be surprised, if a bunch of suicides or “retractions” are happening soon.
How about 2 million if you shut up? No? How about we publish this dirt on you? Would be a shame, if some nameless robber orphans your children.
Planely obvious
How is your polonium tea comrade?
But you wont argue that 10 dead whistblowers can still be a tremendous coincidence, right?
I still don’t see why they can’t.
