Curiouser and curiouser
Second Boeing Whistleblower Dies Suddenly
Joshua Dean, a former Spirit AeroSystems employee, had accused the aircraft manufacturer of ignoring defects in the production of 737 MAX planes.
.
If they fall out of a Boeing aircraft because a door fell off, does it still count as defenstration? Or does it have to be a window?Curiouser and curiouser
Second Boeing Whistleblower Dies Suddenly
Joshua Dean, a former Spirit AeroSystems employee, had accused the aircraft manufacturer of ignoring defects in the production of 737 MAX planes.
.
1) Boeing Supplier, not Boeing.Curiouser and curiouser
Second Boeing Whistleblower Dies Suddenly
Joshua Dean, a former Spirit AeroSystems employee, had accused the aircraft manufacturer of ignoring defects in the production of 737 MAX planes.
.
Curiouser and curiouser
Second Boeing Whistleblower Dies Suddenly
Joshua Dean, a former Spirit AeroSystems employee, had accused the aircraft manufacturer of ignoring defects in the production of 737 MAX planes.
.
He was still a whistleblower. You have to admit it's strange as fuck considering how blatant they were about the first guy.1) Boeing Supplier, not Boeing.
2) He died of pneumonia.
3) I wasn't aware Hillary now worked for Boeing?
1) Boeing Supplier, not Boeing.
2) He died of pneumonia.
3) I wasn't aware Hillary now worked for Boeing?
So the idea is Boeing knocked off a guy that reported a supplier was delivering shitty product to them? Why exactly would Boeing want a supplier to deliver poor quality products to them? Reworking travelled supplier problems is very expensive and disruptive to the final assembly line. Of course, all of this to silence a guy that's been talking for multiple years. If he had any major data that would have resulted in a fleet action, there would've already been a fleet action from the FAA.He was still a whistleblower. You have to admit it's strange as fuck considering how blatant they were about the first guy.
Not Boeing but maybe the supplier bribed a bunch of people at Boeing to look the other way?Why exactly would Boeing want a supplier to deliver poor quality products to them?
I mean, tinfoil answer is because they're cheap, and the cost to rework sounds like a motive to me, frankly.Why exactly would Boeing want a supplier to deliver poor quality products to them?
Boeing likes spending money on rework so they knock off someone ratting out their key supplier because they want more rework? What?I mean, tinfoil answer is because they're cheap, and the cost to rework sounds like a motive to me, frankly.
Indeed, there is another thread that got started just for this brand of horse shit.It's amazing how easily thinking progressives fall for the same conspiracy bullshit as Alex Jones followers.
If the whistleblower with the deets is a corpse, you may not have to rework anything. 'The allegations turned out to be unfounded' or some such.Boeing likes spending money on rework so they knock off someone ratting out their key supplier because they want more rework? What?
I didn't address the Hilary comment for a reason. I didn't claim that nor am I backing it up. I specifically referenced just two points.So the idea is Boeing knocked off a guy that reported a supplier was delivering shitty product to them? Why exactly would Boeing want a supplier to deliver poor quality products to them? Reworking travelled supplier problems is very expensive and disruptive to the final assembly line. Of course, all of this to silence a guy that's been talking for multiple years. If he had any major data that would have resulted in a fleet action, there would've already been a fleet action from the FAA.
Again when did Hillary join the board?
It's amazing how easily thinking progressives fall for the same conspiracy bullshit as Alex Jones followers.
Any aircraft he knew anything about has long since been delivered. He left 2 years ago.If the whistleblower with the deets is a corpse, you may not have to rework anything. 'The allegations turned out to be unfounded' or some such.
I don't know enough about this to make any kind of educated opinion though, just throwing some chum into the water.
The Hillary point wasn't serious, it's to illustration how ridiculous the idea is that Boeing is going around offing people that have years old information that they've already shared. Right up there with the Clinton death list BS.I didn't address the Hilary comment for a reason. I didn't claim that nor am I backing it up. I specifically referenced just two points.
I thought the first guy was in the middle of his depositions actuallyThe Hillary point wasn't serious, it's to illustration how ridiculous the idea is that Boeing is going around offing people that have years old information that they've already shared. Right up there with the Clinton death list BS.
As part of his lawsuit against them, he had already shared the information with the FAA.I thought the first guy was in the middle of his depositions actually
That's why hypochondriacs that like getting unnecessary surgery are idiots. I know, I worked in the Biomedical Engineering department at Evanston Hospital for 2 and a half years. You are so, vulnerable while you are patient.MRSA, not pneumonia.
....this definitely happens in a hospital (I believe hospitals are, by far, the most prominent source for contracting MRSA)...but ah, /puts on conspiracy hat/ is definitely something that could be easily introduced during recovery, by some nefarious actor, and easily written off as poor medical practices.
So being in the middle of the depositions was meaningless? I mean those are kind of important in the legal process, for it to proceed. Methinks you are downplaying that a bit.As part of his lawsuit against them, he had already shared the information with the FAA.
For the legal process of him sueing Boeing for retaliation, not in the legal process of fixing aircraft. But I'm sure a few executives risked their freedom to save a few million dollars of Boeing's money by killing one dude that was sueing them.So being in the middle of the depositions was meaningless? I mean those are kind of important in the legal process, for it to proceed. Methinks you are downplaying that a bit.
So you think in the history of American Capitalism, nobody has ever been offed when they threatened big corp/business?For the legal process of him sueing Boeing for retaliation, not in the legal process of fixing aircraft. But I'm sure a few executives risked their freedom to save a few million dollars of Boeing's money by killing one dude that was sueing them.
Anything to do with aircraft was already shared with the FAA.
I don't think this small potatoes guy that had already spilled the beans to the regulators and the media was killed to protect a hundred billion dollar company from a relatively tiny lawsuit. Boeing isn't ran by the mob.So you think in the history of American Capitalism, nobody has ever been offed when they threatened big corp/business?
I don't think this small potatoes guy that had already spilled the beans to the regulators and the media was killed to protect a hundred billion dollar company from a relatively tiny lawsuit. Boeing isn't ran by the mob.