Whoever actually did the crime is almost irrelevant as long as it was on behalf of Boeing.
Well for a start you'd have to know who was behind it in order to prevent it happening again or to have them see any consequences at all.
If the company didn't care about something like this I'd be shocked and given the previous retaliation they were already taking, an escalation to violence already seems logical.
It seems logical the company would go from $100 million fine directly to let's murder somebody, frame ourselves for it, cover up the trail? The top brass are typically psychopaths so would have no problem whacking somebody, except that they are coldly logical; the personal risk v reward favors them spending other people's money to make the problem go away in court rather than cover up a murder.
If it's pure geopolitics then there would at least have been more entities that would have wanted him alive and he would have been given more resources and publicity by Boeing's enemies/competitors.
Like Airbus would have put out a press release saying "look how bad Boeing is buy from us instead?" That would just make themselves look bad and be counter-productive. Or hand a brown paper bag of money to some lawyers to represent him? What do you think they would do?
No either "the company" did it, it was some low-level employee he as going to name and get fired (and will be caught), or he just killed himself for whatever reason. There's no chance the company was behind it.
No one with a brain will look at a dude who gets killed in the middle of a fucking deposition for a retaliation lawsuit for whistleblowing and think "Wow the company had nothing to do with this".
Great motive for somebody unstable who hasn't been believed to take their own life; it's "impossible" according to you to question his claims if "everybody knows" the company killed him for it.
This is just pathetic. ... impossible to take you seriously with such an asinine argument. At this point I wouldn't be surprised if you were a shill yourself.
Here's the thing, when you go off on psychotic tirades like this you're just saying you don't have a counterargument. What I've said makes sense, you have no counter, and so you get hysterical. Or you could remain calm, say "you've raised some good points but I disagree for these reasons", and have real conversations with people.
Your argument is "I'm right and anybody else is a stupid idiot". You even manufacture quotes that the person you're talking to didn't say, like a Harvard professor. And then you get mad when your reasoning is torn apart.
Well for a start you'd have to know who was behind it in order to prevent it happening again or to have them see any consequences at all.
It seems logical the company would go from $100 million fine directly to let's murder somebody, frame ourselves for it, cover up the trail? The top brass are typically psychopaths so would have no problem whacking somebody, except that they are coldly logical; the personal risk v reward favors them spending other people's money to make the problem go away in court rather than cover up a murder.
Like Airbus would have put out a press release saying "look how bad Boeing is buy from us instead?" That would just make themselves look bad and be counter-productive. Or hand a brown paper bag of money to some lawyers to represent him? What do you think they would do?
No either "the company" did it, it was some low-level employee he as going to name and get fired (and will be caught), or he just killed himself for whatever reason. There's no chance the company was behind it.
Great motive for somebody unstable who hasn't been believed to take their own life; it's "impossible" according to you to question his claims if "everybody knows" the company killed him for it.
Here's the thing, when you go off on psychotic tirades like this you're just saying you don't have a counterargument. What I've said makes sense, you have no counter, and so you get hysterical. Or you could remain calm, say "you've raised some good points but I disagree for these reasons", and have real conversations with people.
Your argument is "I'm right and anybody else is a stupid idiot". You even manufacture quotes that the person you're talking to didn't say, like a Harvard professor. And then you get mad when your reasoning is torn apart.
That's you.