441–450 of 505 posts
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps the death of Jeffrey Epstein shows that this sort of thing does happen in the West. I know the case is not of the same kind, but the perpetrator was very likely a corporate type trying to protect their reputation, which is at least close.
All joking aside, was there anything in the Epstein case to indicate foul play or is it just a meme? I can't find anything reputable.
But that said, it's still important to keep it clear dividing line between what we think and what we know for sure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Insider poll Sorry but lol at Insider being your source for robust polling of the American zeitgeist. In 2019 Certus put the figure of Americans believing he was murdered at 35%, with the remainder believing it to be suicide or "don't know". "Don't know" is the critical thing here: there aren't too many more crazy conspiracists who could be shown the overwhelming evidence of suicide and conclude that it was murder.…
I used it as an example of polling, as I thought it was merely an interesting poll result, but I never said I had any given opinion of the source. I looked up the Certus Insights poll you've mentioned, which also had interesting results. The results were that 37% believed it was likely suicide and 35% believed it was likely murder. That is a 51.3% vs 48.6% split for those who did not respond that they were unsure. Th…
> Certus poll found that over 30% each of Democrats, Independents and Republicans believed it to be murder.
I believe the Certus poll found that of those who believed him to be murdered, that was the split along political lines.
> That is not a tiny fringe as you claimed it to be.
Three in ten is a tiny minority – winning a vote with 70% would be considered a landslide – but you're right it's a scarily high number of loudmouthed imbeciles.
The good news is that you don't have to worry! Adults are in charge! Hundreds of thousands of smart, capable people are employed to investigate things like this, and will cheerfully tell you that it's far more likely that the unmonitored and illicit phone call made by Epstein directly before his suicide was him being told to have another go or risk the lives of friends or loved ones. (What with that being fucking orders of magnitude easier to do than having a hitman break into solitary confinement in a prison.)
> just as was your unnecessary projection of opinion of using an Insider poll.
Business Insider is right up there with Yahoo Answers for robust, disinterested polling data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder why they wouldn't give a last name... Half the "news" articles nowadays are "sources familiar with the matter". Now that Boeing is in the hot seat we want to identify journalist sources? And I don't think there's a rule that we can only talk about things that have been fully investigated. It's on ongoing current event and a development in it. It can be talked about if people want to talk about it and can do…
What I'm realizing now is that I needed to do some educating as part of that comment - I'm surprised that so many people are interpreting those statements from the family as evidence of suicidal feelings, ideation, and planning.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Once in another company, the CEO told the legal counsel in a meeting, don't send me emails, do what is needed.
There is a scene in Antitrust (@8:40) where Gates says something similar while planning a murder: >The cold, hard facts are that anything is possible. >Anything, anything. You're just not thinking creatively. >I have every confidence that you can do that, Phil.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He was suing the company for defamation. He was not some witness in a proceeding against Boeing and the government or something. This isn’t a criminal proceeding. With his death, it essentially goes away regardless.
I believe his successor could take over the case. From the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 32: (8) Deposition Taken in an Earlier Action. A deposition lawfully taken and, if required, filed in any federal- or state-court action may be used in a later action involving the same subject matter between the same parties, or their representatives or successors in interest, to the same extent as if taken in the later…
I never suggested otherwise. Having a vested interest does not indicate murder, motive sure.
> If they lose this case, the FAA is going to notice, and they're going to be pissed. It's one thing to be negligent, Boeing could probably paper over that with the FAA and some small regulatory changes because they're defense contractor and vital to national security. It is another thing entirely to not only be aware of the problems due to whistleblowers but to both ignore the issues and attempt to silence the whistleblowers.
The FAA already started an investigation years ago when he first made the claims they are being sued for retaliating against.
> We're talking about a clusterfuck of proportions most of us can only have nightmares about. Boeing would spend the next 50 years with the FAA's hand jammed so far up their ass Kermit would feel bad for them. I wouldn't be surprised to see the SEC filing indictments for securities fraud for not disclosing known, material defects in their planes.
Yeah, as if the widely publicized major incidents weren’t enough already.
You may very well be right, but you may also very well be letting your imagination get far ahead of the facts.
Allegations and heresay is easy. Pricing in court with evidence is a much steeper climb.
Don’t see much talk of evidence in the article.
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…
It reminds me closely of Gary Webb's death, though the circumstances are different: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb#Death But more to your question, I think a great example of corporate self-interest leading to serious crimes is the Ebay stalking scandal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EBay_stalking_scandal
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…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Cor...