this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2024

524 points (98.5% liked)

News

23634 readers

3585 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

rjc@lemmy.world

Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

jeffw@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

524

Boeing: Dead whistleblower warned of safety breaches (www.bbc.com)

submitted 8 months ago by girlfreddy@lemmy.ca to c/news@lemmy.world

50 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A former Boeing employee, who was found dead in March, accused the company of "countless" violations of US law in testimony given just before his death.

John Barnett claimed the firm tried to "eliminate" quality inspections at a plant that makes 787 planes.

The former quality control manager had been giving a formal legal deposition against the plane manufacturer.

The transcript of Mr Barnett's deposition has now been released by his lawyers. The lengthy document runs to more than 140 pages.

The bulk of Mr Barnett's deposition focuses on the period from 2010 onwards, after he had moved from Boeing's facility in Everett, Washington to what was then a brand-new factory in North Charleston.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 122 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Is he the one that said "if anything happens, it's not suicide" before he was found dead from "self-Inflicted" gunshots?

[–] Count042@lemmy.ml 51 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Don't forget that he wanted to drove home that night, but was forced to stay one more night by Boeing's lawyers to give an response in court in the morning.

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 20 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I didn't even know about that, thank you for being terrifying

Did he "kill himself" at a Boeing office?

[–] RadicalCandour@startrek.website 33 points 8 months ago

Yep, that’s the one.

[–] AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works 23 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Well that's sketch as fuck.

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 12 points 8 months ago

Right on the edge of suspicious, wouldn' you say?

[–] teamevil@lemmy.world -3 points 8 months ago

I mean that and the third bullet that news isn't reporting....(Kidding about 3rd but his ☠️ is 100% on Boeing)

[–] Crackhappy@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago

Indeed, he did.

[–] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 75 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Murdered whistleblower. Murdered. Barnett is a martyr and a patriot.

[–] InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Careful, you might get two tickets to paradise (so it looks like an accident)

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago

Maybe they'll get two chicks and a pair of dice instead?

[+] westyvw@lemm.ee -43 points 7 months ago (5 children)

This makes no sense.

Tell me who did it: The CEO? The share holders? A disgruntled co-worker?

Then give me motive. Nothing got stopped from coming out. And even if he had testified, no one is ever going to be punished. Money will smooth over problems as always.

So unless you can make a convincing argument, this seems very unlikely.

[–] acetanilide@lemmy.world 24 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Tbh it doesn't even have to be boeing who did it. Boeing is important to the government (actually multiple governments) and it's not exactly a stretch to consider said governments are involved.

Also if we go with thinking boeing did do it, look at almost any organized crime related murder.

Or some combination of the two.

People have been killed for far, far less. And there are a lot of people who will hurt other people purely for revenge, regardless of any other factor.

The point is, I don't think it's as much of a stretch as you seem to think.

[+] westyvw@lemm.ee -13 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I just don't see it.

Any wealthy person simply uses wealth. If this was not America, I would think maybe. But this is America. It is easier to buy and sell favors then bother with messy killings.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Killing someone is a favor than can be purchased. I don't think anyone is saying the CEO of Boeing went there and killed him himself. People are saying they had him killed, as in paid someone to kill him. That is something you can do, especially if you have as much money as these people do. Hell, you hear about it occasionally with people who have normal amounts of wealth.

[–] westyvw@lemm.ee 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That is something you can do, especially if you have as much money as these people do

But then there is a trail of money, and people to keep quiet. Most wealthy people can afford NOT to go around killing people. Because what is going to happen to them if they don't? NOTHING.

[–] acetanilide@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

Yes, yet people get away with this all the time. Even if the killer gets caught, loyalty can be enough to keep them quiet.

Think about all the people that Putin has "probably" had killed. And the assassinations by the CIA and other intelligence agencies throughout the world.

Here are the notable hitmen that we know about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_contract_killers_and_hitmen

[+] westyvw@lemm.ee -21 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

Ok people have been killed for things. So who did it. And more importantly, why? There is zero gain here.

Unless it a reverse ploy, where the threat is against Boeing.... if they don't get their shit together .....

[–] CMLVI@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

There are $105.6 billion in reasons. Public knowledge of safety measures and quality control directly effects stock price. That's billions of dollars tied up in knowledge not becoming public. Who benefits? Shareholders. Not knowing who did it doesn't mean it wasn't murder. Plenty of murders happen without knowing the culprit or even specific motive. The guy outright said "if I die, I was killed". And then he kills himself for the memes? What's his motive for suicide, especially given his quotes regarding it?

[+] westyvw@lemm.ee -10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

So now it might be a shareholder? I am beginning to think it is just as likely that the Union did it, as opposed to the CEO or Board. Maintain power, keep benefits for the employees, keep the eyes off of just how bad the drug problems had been on the lines.

Think about it, Barnetts death doesnt even benefit Boeing. It only causes more controversy, and everything he was going to testify about gets even more scrutiny. Public opinion is even worse. Boeing is going to be found negligent, they are going to pay fines, and those things really will have no major effect on the company or the people with money.

[–] CMLVI@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

It's the exact same argument for the company. Protect the money. Benefits for the Union? It's money via benefits. If stock price isn't motivation for the company, it isn't motivation for the Union. If keeping the negatove publicity of a drug problem on the lines a secret is motivation for the Union, keeping the negative publicity of a corner cutting secret is motivation for the company (ESPECIALLY amid previous negative publicity with the 737 Max fiasco). If maintaining power is motivation for the Union, keeping power via Boeings 42% market share is motivation for the company. Unless Boeing is not motivated by money, or it's not motivated to keep a positive public appearance, or it's not motivated by keeping power, which I'd argue are ALL motivations of a publicly international corporation worth hundreds of billions of dollars, then I fail to see why these are motivations that preclude Boeing Co.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 4 points 7 months ago

Are you asking who killed him specifically, like in-person killed him? Probably someone unrelated if I had to guess. You can hire actual hitmen. That's a real thing that exists if you go to the right (or rather wrong for most people) places on the internet.

[–] C126@sh.itjust.works 9 points 7 months ago

Maybe to act as a chilling effect on future whistle blowers?

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

And even if he had testified, no one is ever going to be punished. Money will smooth over problems as always.

When you're done with your crystal ball, can we use it too?

[–] westyvw@lemm.ee -3 points 7 months ago

Come on, you know that tye company will take the blame and individuals will not. Simply look how often that is the case in the US.

[–] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago

Lol get out of here

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 71 points 8 months ago (1 children)

BOEING KILLED JOHN BARNETT

[+] westyvw@lemm.ee -20 points 7 months ago (1 children)

OK, so Boeing cannot be a murder, there has to be someone who actually did it. So who would that be? The CEO? A hired hitman? Who?

And WHY? It would make no difference, the testimony is already out there. It would be cheaper and easier to simply lawyer up and fight, then to hire and then have to pay off somebody. Because that somebody would always have dirt on whoever did the hiring.

Maybe I am wrong, but this really makes no sense.

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 17 points 7 months ago (1 children)

his testimony was not over, he had another round the next day
he said that he was not suicidal. He saw it coming.

Until someone confesses, the group with the most motive is Boeing. Bag them all and make them squeal.

[+] westyvw@lemm.ee -17 points 7 months ago (2 children)

What is the motive? and exactly who cares when money can make this go away? But no, murder will make everyone not care, really? This is absolutely silly.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 19 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

What is the motive?

Why are you acting like this is some impossible mystery that we'll never understand? The motive is either "silencing him so he can't reveal more", "intimidating other potential whistleblowers", or a combination of both. Is this some grand revelation to you, or are you deliberately acting like you've been dropped on your head every day since birth?

and exactly who cares when money can make this go away?

Yeah, we're actively seeing how money has made all of Boeing's problems go away. No investigations are happening, there could not be any issues if further whistleblowers step forward 🙄

But no, murder will make everyone not care, really?

Again, think about the motives for more than half a second, and you'll see that the idea isn't to "make everyone not care".

[+] westyvw@lemm.ee -11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No need for personal attacks. You did not answer the question. What is the motive? You describe actions that can be taken, but to what end? More money? More power? Simply a fuck you? Worried they are culpable and might go to jail?

Now tell me exactly WHO this person is, or are you suggesting that is a group of people? Board of Directors? The more people who know the more people will need hush money, the more complicated it gets.

And for what? Nobody is going to lose money, nobody is going to jail. Not if there are more whistleblowers, not if their are fines, nothing. The company will bear the weight of the problem, the government will socialize the solution to fix the problem, and the people with money will walk away or somehow get wealthier in the process.

So excuse me for thinking a bit critically about this conspiracy.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You did not answer the question. What is the motive? You describe actions that can be taken, but to what end?

Have you tried reading the sentence I wrote that starts with "the motive is"? Please explain to me why you consider that question to be valid, when I literally explicitly answer the question?

I genuinely don't think you have the intelligence required to understand the answer, since you didn't understand it when I first gave it to you. You didn't ask a clarifying question, you didn't give a counter argument - you simply act like no answer was provided, even though you must have seen it the whole time you wrote your reply. Why? Why would someone ever choose to behave the way you do?

[+] westyvw@lemm.ee -7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

The motive is either “silencing him so he can’t reveal more”, “intimidating other potential whistleblowers”, or a combination of both.

These are not motives. If you read what I wrote, you get to the true motive. These are actions, they do things, but who cares if they reveal more? Who cares if more people are whistle blowers? That is where you will find motive. Which I talked about, and which demonstrates that the consequences of this action serve no purpose. It is always about money.

It is disappointing you cannot seem to have a discussion without personal attacks, like calling me stupid. But to take it right back to you: do you always believe in conspiracy?

Edit: Hell I would be more likely to believe that the Union did it, because they have used lax rules at the plant to smuggle drugs or some other illicit substance. Which is what I am trying to get at: WHO is responsible, and WHY. Boeing the company is going to be investigated by the FAA either way, so is there some dirty secret that we dont know about? After all a Union chief (and 23 others) pleaded guilty in 2012 to drug trafficking.... https://www.inquirer.com/philly/news/breaking/20120816_Ex-union_chief_caught_in_Boeing_drug_sting_gets_6_months.html

If they were wealthy people (CEO, Board of Directors) like I said before, none of this would be worth murder. They make money either way.

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 7 points 7 months ago

These are not motives.

These are in fact, Motives.

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Unlike you, Not everyone is for sale.

[–] westyvw@lemm.ee -3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

So you agree with me? Or did someone name a price to whack this guy, so they were for sale....

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 6 points 7 months ago

I’m saying you’re a corporate shill.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 45 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This looks bad for Boeing.

They should probably do a stock buyback in response.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Should probably have the reporter whacked.

[–] Crackhappy@lemmy.world 19 points 8 months ago

When I booked a flight in a few months overseas, I made sure it was on all Airbus. Because Boeing is scaring the fuck out of me.

[–] PiratePanPan@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 7 months ago

~~Jeffrey Epstein~~ John Barnett did not kill himself

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Is this a new murdered whistle blower, or the murdered whistleblower from like, last month? its so hard to keep track with boeing.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago

This is the first one.

Well, the recently murdered one.