If you're whistleblowing properly, there's nothing left to expose. You take everything. You drop it all in many places without announcing it. Then you come forward.
They can still kill you as a warning to others, but it won't protect them what's already out there.
If you come forward it's because you want something. So I agree to an extent.
If I wanted to expose someone, I'd do it anon. If I wanted to collect a reward, I'd have to do it publicly. If you then secretly withhold something, that's a bit at odds with what you purport to be doing. You could, but I don't think it would save you.
Absolutely. For example, have a Psychiatrist clear you for mental capacity beforehand, then record a video deposition with your lawyer present. Have your signed statement of evets/ facts notarized with two witnesses, etc. Then make a Torrent of those files and email to WikiLeaks and others.
I'm sure there's other things I'm missing here. I would love to see the online community develop a "protocol" for doing it properly.
Notice: It's not my "job" to steer you to any one news source. If you wish to learn more, look up the victim's name in your search engine of choice and take your pick from the sources reporting on the matter. That's your right of agency to exercise. Thanks.
Ridiculous that you're getting downvoted for this. It takes absolutely minimal effort for the OP to link their source. It's literally just Ctrl + L, Ctrl + C, Ctrl + V.
It takes minimal effort, but they will expend triple that effort calling you lazy if you call them out on it.
But its also usually a sign that they are just reposting an image they found on twitter/pol/elsewhere and haven't read the actual information either. They don't want to admit that so they instead get pissy about it.
Your post is 60 words, 324 characters. You could have just copy/ paste the headline into your browser -- no words typed -- and gotten a hundreds of results. Instead, you wasted 60 words, 324 characters, to bitch about the lack of a hyperlink for your personal convenience.
The event happened. Look up his name. Pick the source that you trust most. It's that simple. But you're right, lazy people -- like yourself -- will waste more energy bitching about the thing than it takes to do the thing. We can agree on that. 🤣
Google steals peoples copyrighted material. A few governments do something about this to protect News companies from getting ripped off. Google complies but has a hissy fit. Suddenly it has an "AI" which is really good at ripping other peoples copyrights off.
If you're whistleblowing properly, there's nothing left to expose. You take everything. You drop it all in many places without announcing it. Then you come forward.
They can still kill you as a warning to others, but it won't protect them what's already out there.
If you come forward it's because you want something. So I agree to an extent.
If I wanted to expose someone, I'd do it anon. If I wanted to collect a reward, I'd have to do it publicly. If you then secretly withhold something, that's a bit at odds with what you purport to be doing. You could, but I don't think it would save you.
Absolutely. For example, have a Psychiatrist clear you for mental capacity beforehand, then record a video deposition with your lawyer present. Have your signed statement of evets/ facts notarized with two witnesses, etc. Then make a Torrent of those files and email to WikiLeaks and others.
I'm sure there's other things I'm missing here. I would love to see the online community develop a "protocol" for doing it properly.
Always carry a gun on your person.
Never eat out.
Always check under your car before getting in.
keep your car in a locked garage.
Only drink your own water, and bring it with you if you have to.
Travel with friends, who are also armed.
Have a protective, barkey dog at home.
Have a decent security system with CO monitoring, door and glass monitors, door cam, and phone alerts.
There is a good number of whistleblowers who suicided this year… especially if they affected the norm.
Boeing had at least two, right?
all right, where did you specifically get this information?
I can look it up, as this is week-old news. what did you bring to the table? or are you just gumming up our feeds?
Ridiculous that you're getting downvoted for this. It takes absolutely minimal effort for the OP to link their source. It's literally just Ctrl + L, Ctrl + C, Ctrl + V.
It takes minimal effort, but they will expend triple that effort calling you lazy if you call them out on it.
But its also usually a sign that they are just reposting an image they found on twitter/pol/elsewhere and haven't read the actual information either. They don't want to admit that so they instead get pissy about it.
Your post is 60 words, 324 characters. You could have just copy/ paste the headline into your browser -- no words typed -- and gotten a hundreds of results. Instead, you wasted 60 words, 324 characters, to bitch about the lack of a hyperlink for your personal convenience.
The event happened. Look up his name. Pick the source that you trust most. It's that simple. But you're right, lazy people -- like yourself -- will waste more energy bitching about the thing than it takes to do the thing. We can agree on that. 🤣
Damn, you sure got me.
Wipe your own ass, clean your room and do you're own research, loser. 👍
You keep putting in triple the effort I do to accomplish less.
my guess is contractors sliding the board
On 12-14-24, ChatGPT had learned enough to copy the Clintons.
"chatgpt IS the virus!"
LOL. wUts uRE sOuRce!?
Google steals peoples copyrighted material. A few governments do something about this to protect News companies from getting ripped off. Google complies but has a hissy fit. Suddenly it has an "AI" which is really good at ripping other peoples copyrights off.
Hard to figure out.
"Death solves all problems. No man, no problem."
I thought this was a well known "what are you going to do about it" scenario. Is this even considered whistle blowing?
It is a well known "what are you going to do about it" scenario. But nobody ever had anything solid to bring a case forward.
It was just an accusation. An insider confirming it in court would implode the whole operation.
Man, there really needs to be a mental health wellbeing PSA informing the public the dangers of whistleblowing.
Technomafia psychotics!
If the 80's were defined by the "Drug Lord," then today we have the "Technomafia," for sure.