231–240 of 505 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe the authorities do know and it's simply not published/released? After all, assuming he shot himself and the gun is right there, it seems fairly reasonable to tentatively presume it's self inflicted.
How did he get the gun? Didn't he have to travel for the proceedings?
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.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my view, almost all of these are accidents or suicides and people watch way too many hollywood films. The Hastings thing is classic mania for those of us who know people who have experienced that.
But people _do_ die when exposing corruption of the rich. Such as Daphne Caruana Galizia and Ján Kuciak for the Panama papers. Would you call their deaths "hollywood films"? And it'd be natural to think killers would try to hide their traces, such that most such deaths would look like an accident or suicide.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He was shot and there aren't any double blind studies that prove that police are capable of reliably distinguishing self inflicted wounds from non-self inflicted wounds.
It’s a bit dark, but the idea of trying to get ethics approval for a study of this sort had me laugh.
For example, "body farms".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that plausible, though? Why would he not have used that leverage to prevent captivity?
I don't know. He never talked about a captivity switch. Perhaps he is an object lesson that one should create a "switch escalator". Perhaps a dead man's switch used in captivity could also potentially make captivity worse and remove what last remnants of hope he has. I suspect if he pulled the switch now then a lot of the sympathy he got for exposing a war crime might go out the window.
Reading the comments here is now making me even more skeptical about society. It really looks like; It is a waste of time to take risk yourself and expose unethical practices conducted by the powerful. Because, A) The masses don't really care (I expected riots and protest). B) You may mysteriously die. C) Your death instead of sparking an outrage will mostly be labeled a "conspiracy theory". Given these three items,…
Are you seriously accusing most employees of being pions?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a poor take. People don't find themselves in this situation normally and we should not be expecting them to have TV-murder-mystery style hypervigilance.
>> TV-murder-mystery style hypervigilance. The tv-murder-mystery plot where Boeing killed him and he told ONE friend is much more likely? Anxiety, PTSD, and a hand gun. This is a recipe for a suicide attempt that succeeds from a purely statistical point of view.
Also, it is of course possible, to plan suicide and still tell people it won't be suicide. We all lack the details here. But since Boeing is involved with military and intelligence work who do not like traitors(whistleblowers) in general and have the expertise in covert murder, I think murder is a valid theory that should be really investigated by a neutral agency.
Oh so in Russia its jumping out a window and in the USA its some random method of suicide? Why not be specific, and consistent, like Russia?
Because in Russia it is an open message to the public 'don't mess with the KGB or we kill you and maybe your children'. Everybody knows and understands who is the sender and the message. Classic mafia move of intimidation. It is a message to the living. In the Western World the secret services kill to silence people, not to broadcast messages to the public. Quite the opposite PR strategy.
There are some high profile cases were the west (or the deep state) very clearly went "full Russian" on some figures to send a "don't mess with us" message.
David Kelly and Epstein come to mind. As also noted in this thread Assange is arguably being given a fate worse than death, rotting in a dungeon an example to terrify whistleblowers around the world.
Granted, it is only used much more sparingly than the KGB, but it is there.
This happens way too often, and I'm genuinely curious why. The easy answer is that paranoid people with a vendetta say exactly this to throw guilt onto the other party. The hard answer is harder to swallow. What can we do about it?
Not saying that's what happened here, of course.