top | item 39839717

(no title)

ctrl-j | 1 year ago

There's about two sentences in the article that say "it's suspicious, but nobody's going to look into it harder than they have."

The rest of it goes over how he was justified in being a whistleblower. The article is fine IMO.

discuss

order

zer00eyz|1 year ago

The whole first half of the article is a veiled implication that he was killed.

"he was upbeat about his testimony, feeling he was finally able to tell the story of his efforts to get the company to take safety more seriously"

The police said it was “a self-inflicted wound.” (Are those quotes or air quotes? cause they feel like the latter).

" No one can believe it."

"A family friend told ABC News that he had told her, “I ain’t scared, but if anything happens to me, it’s not suicide.” "

"The internet lit up. It was an “alleged suicide,” or “an apparent suicide.”"

and then... "it's suspicious, but nobody's going to look into it harder than they have."

At no point did the author of the article cover what the actual family said. That the man was ready to be a statistic from stress. Boeing was the source of that stress.

By opening up the article leaning into the conspiracy theory side of things, it only serves to discredit the rest of the content.

The narrative of "his doctor told him to quit the dam job or have a heart attack" ... "the situation gave him anxiety and PTSD" is another strike against Boeing in all this. He becomes a man pushed to, and over the brink by a corporate giant. Considering the circumstances that sounds awful and reasonable.