Of note: the whistleblower we're talking about had already given testimony, which is to say the conspiracy theory requires you to believe Boeing was willing to kill a whistleblower, but only after they testified.
(Not that it could possibly have mattered, but he also never worked on the 737; several still-living current and former Boeing employees have filed complaints about 737 production processes).
Yes, 1/3rd of all people murdered in Seattle that year were murdered by Boeing too, as a warning to others not to whistleblow. Strange that it didn't work to prevent more whistleblowing!
1/3rd of all people murdered in Seattle didn't have damaging testimony against Boeing. Obviously you're being sarcastic but I'm not sure what point you're making.
That there is nothing more to this conspiracy theory other than "someone with a previous whistleblower case against Boeing died, ergo Boeing killed him".
Correct, your mistake is assuming you need more than that to find the theory plausible. The types of people who stand to lose big from a company like Boeing going down would sell their own grandmothers for $5. At best you’re naive about how the world works.
If you have evidence to the contrary, by all means let us know.