608
Boeing whistleblower John Barnett was spied on, harassed by managers, lawsuit claims
(www.foxbusiness.com)
this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
608 points (99.0% liked)
News
23533 readers
3944 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Boeing's hit job must have been well planned.
The killer would have had to kill him in his car, wrap his hands around the gun to establish fingerprint marks. A company like Boeing that's part of the Military-Industrial Complex wouldn't have an issue finding a highly trained contract killer.
Bribes at the local authority level (maybe higher too) to have them rule it a suicide with no further investigation needed. No need for further pesky questions.
Now all I'm waiting on is for the judge to toss out his incomplete testimony since it isn't complete.
Then just wait a few weeks until the media focuses on other things.
Then the execs can have martinis while stock number go up.
They don't need to do that, they could have just called him on a burner phone and threatened to kill his family if he didn't kill himself. Forensically indistinguishable from suicide, but absolutely murder by coercion.
Didn’t have to have been Boeing. Must be plenty of investors.
Fucking disgusting we’ll never know*, RIP heroic whistleblower who lost everything.
(*I acknowledge there’s a non-zero chance it was suicide)
Has it ever happened to check the previous call logs of a suicide victim? Of course Boeing can bribe the telcom to keep shut / delete the info. But i'm curious wether it's ever been done.
Michelle Carter was convicted of manslaughter for encouraging her boyfriend to commit suicide by text
Of course it's been done.
Regardless of if they actually hired a hitman, it's very clear that Boeing harassed and psychologically attacked this man to the point of him ending up dead.
Whether they actually hired a man to pull that trigger or convinced him to pull it himself, legally his murder would be on their hands and they damn well need charged for it.
As it happened with Khashoggi and the same with Daphne and the list will always keep going on & on while we imagine hearing the clink of more glasses after.
Jeffery Epstein...
I didn't want to mention him as he wasn't a heroic whistle blower but a criminal with a testimonial, but yes I agree even he wasn't spared by his fellow posh.
Why did they wait so long to off him then?
Being willing to kill someone as a "last option" and wanting to kill everyone who poses the slightest threat are not the same motivations.
Also thinking about it, how many people at a company the size of Boeing become a threat by being bothered with criminal practices violating safety and other law and ethic standards? How many do we not hear about because the "normal" coercion tactics work?
Having half your engineering department wind up dead because they raised concerns about issues with the production could backfire much more to begin with, but also it would make every engineer look for a different employer quickly. So trying to destroy someones reputation first, ousting him, creating a "him vs. us" mentality is preferential. It also makes it easier for the company to move on after killing him, if the need arises.
So both from a emotionally crippled, but not fully devoid point of view and from an completely psychopathic cold blooded strategy point of view it makes sense to not pull the trigger on everyone right away.
I can't think of a bigger chilling effect on employees than making it clear to them that if you speak out, you'll be dead.
I'm pretty sure there are rules that govern how to handle a witness dying in the middle of testimony
"Look the other way or you're next"
If people won't hold corporations accountable no one will.