So “it can be done” is now evidence of a grand conspiracy?
So in other words, very plausible deniability.
allthatsinteresting.com/heart-attack-gun
We had that tech in 1968. I’m pretty sure it would be a matter of a phone call and some change from the couch cushions for Boeing to create that outcome.
Does this mean they did it? No.
Does it warrant the reaction folks are having about it? Absolutely yes.
bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 months ago
octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 4 months ago
Does this mean they did it? No.
Does it warrant the reaction folks are having about it? Absolutely yes. (Edit - In light of their current troubles and the fate of the prior whistleblower.)
I stand by that statement, and don’t feel like trying again to connect the dots on the relevancy of my example. Whatever you are arguing about is - not the same.
bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 months ago
I have said multiple times this warrants an investigation. The issue is people here have already decided what the facts are.
MonkderDritte@feddit.de 4 months ago
Aside from the puncture wound.
hark@lemmy.world 4 months ago
From the article:
AtHeartEngineer@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Which can be missed by an examiner
bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 months ago
Well that’s it. Case closed. The existence of a heart attack gun in 1968 proves Boeing killed 2 whistleblowers in 2024. Good job gang.
octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 4 months ago
Literally no one has made that statement, including me, the guy who brought up the heart attack gun. Take a breath man.
maynarkh@feddit.nl 4 months ago
They may have ironed that out, this article is talking about tech that is more than half a century old. We got from first aeroplane to man on the moon in less than that.