UnitedHealthcare CEO shot to death in Manhattan

[Alma.Innovadora]

the same crowd that posted videos complaining at how Trump's would be assassins missed their shot. Another part of me understands why someone would, perhaps not celebrate, but at least hold not that much empathy, or any.

Like those who celebrate the death penalty in China and want it to be applied in their countries too as a feasible means to end corruption in their countries without taking into account that it could be used to clean up according to the psychopath on duty.

What does this mean? that Elon Musk can also receive an attempt on his life?... it is practically the parallel business profile as an objective.

An interesting objective, it seems that it is important to show the level of objective to be able to attack and not the person himself or his work, is the position of the person and his impact on public opinion that in this case, they support and shout "thumbs down" by networks and leaving aside the total respect for life without giving space to any clarification of anything.

And lovers of psychopaths are never left behind... like when in my country there were women wishing to have children as Marines in case of invading the country:

“I don't see enough discussion about how sexy the killer is and that's the real crime in this whole thing,” one X user wrote.

Another user indicated: "UnitedHealthcare CEO shooter copycat contest in my room at 8pm tonight” and another cheekily added: "Babe, wake up, the alleged CEO shooter is discreet and sexy."

According to the Daily Beast, “In a 2018 interview with Cosmopolitan, a professor of forensic psychology at DeSales University described a type of attraction that occurs when a person “becomes sexually aroused because another person commits an offensive or violent act.” The public's recent fascination with the Menendez brothers, Ted Bundy and other disreputable men over the years seems to back this up."

“Are those photos really of the shooter? Please, I hope so. America needs a sexy killer" one X user wrote.

The Killer Hot (Spanish)

El asesino hot, la tendencia tras la muerte del CEO de UnitedHealthcare | El Universal

En internet surgieron mensajes tras difundirse imágenes del asesino

www.eluniversal.com.mx

 

[Neil]

No evidence to back up your bolded statement, nor does it take into account the possibility that the killer was programmed and just went off. Why did he go sit in a McDonald's after murdering someone in broad daylight on a New York city street? Why did he start screaming at the media when he was being taken into the holding facility? Seems like you're assuming motive when it's not clear.

I think California just had an experiment with that recently when they basically decriminalized retail theft, turning portions of the state into a free for all. Yes, we're talking about street crime vs white collar crime which isn't exactly the same thing, but it's similar enough to make my point: once accountability was removed crime skyrocketed. Is there really that much difference between robbing a store at gunpoint and presiding over an elaborate scam which steals millions of dollars? The second instance is far more serious, I would think. If there were more fear of retribution it would send a message that the sheep will not allow themselves to be so compliantly fleeced, and give the elites more cause to consider keeping their corruption within certain bounds lest something happen to them. Now let me stop right here and say I much prefer rule of law to vigilante justice, but when rule of law no longer works, well...

This goes beyond insurance companies treating people badly and implicates the fraudulent nature of the entire US medical system. I've seen some estimates that almost 20% of GDP is tied up in the medical system in some way when it used to be like 4% in the early 70s, and medical care didn't get 5x better. Also, hospitals don't have posted prices for procedures and seem to make it up as they go along depending on whether or not you have insurance and which insurance you have, subject to all kinds of back-room chicanery to settle on whatever the final price is. Furthermore, the price of the exact same prescription drug in the US is multiples of what it would be in Canada or Europe. The uninsured price is so high you are almost back to 1800s level of care without insurance. All of this is like a subtle form of extortion and violates price fixing laws and the Sherman antitrust act I believe, but has been normalized in the US over a period of decades because the medical industry is well-connected with the federal government pouring huge amounts of money into it. Like the dalliances of Hillary Clinton and Hunter Biden, it doesn't matter if what they do is illegal or not. The fact that Mr. Thompson seemed to profiting from this so handsomely gives me no sympathy whatsoever for how his story ended, and seemed to be a case of what goes around comes around.

It's entirely possible that the shooter in this instance was some kind of agent provocateur, but even so, I think he still represents a lot of legitimate anger people have with the medical system. The slippery slope aspect comes into play regarding how far down the roster of employees you assign such a degree of culpability, to which I don't have a precise answer and perhaps the PTB are hoping that everyone will lose their head and start shooting at everyone else, but the leader is definitely responsible for what the organization does or making strong efforts to fix it. Mr. Thompson seems very much complicit.

As for those arguing along the line that murder is never justified, I think such people who truly believe that live in a very barren moral universe, as most of the great heroes of history and mythology, Putin, Caesar, Charles de Gaulle, George Washington, Odysseus, and so forth were murderers of some persuasion. In my opinion, there is a lot of pearl-clutching in an effort to appear educated or morally superior regarding the sanctity of life, which I'm not sure applies in this case.

 

[Alejo]

Putin, Caesar, Charles de Gaulle, George Washington, Odysseus, and so forth were murderers of some persuasion. In my opinion, there is a lot of pearl-clutching in an effort to appear educated or morally superior regarding the sanctity of life, which I'm not sure applies in this case.

Yeah, but there's a difference between the deaths tied to Putin, let's say, and what this guy did. The nature of the lives taken, because of the motive (and in the case of Thompson isn't even clear) makes both events entirely different. Also, the murders of these great figures all happened in the context of the rules of engagement. This guy shot a man from behind in the street, not in a war, or fending off for his life, he just shot him.

I think he still represents a lot of legitimate anger people have with the medical system.

Does he? I mean from what I've read he probably has very little in common with the large majority of the US population. I know it's a technicality but, it's not him but what people assume he must have felt that people relate to, but does it mean it's the right response or expression of said anger (if that's what his motive was at all)? For instance, anyone who's ever been cheated on probably understands the anger that the guy who murders his wife over infidelity expresses, but would anyone really advocate for turning anger into murder, just because it's relatable?

It may sound cliche, and it may be, but I think about it in terms of: if I were a father, how would I teach my boy (or girl) about anger, and the injustice of life. And I think the one thing I would never teach them is "it's ok to kill someone if you really really feel like doing it, because they made you very angry" or "if someone ever cuts you off on the road, it's ok to give in to your feelings of wanting to crash against them". And I'm not advocating for being a pushover, but aggression/assertiveness and murderous anger are not the same

I don't think it's binary, I don't think people have to feel appalled at this murder, tons of people die the world over in worse fashion in far less just manners, however that does't mean celebrating it, and being against celebrating it doesn't mean that you are heartbroken over it. I think one can still feel nothing over this guy, and still hold that murder, under the circumstances this took place, is wrong.

 

[Beau]

In my opinion, there is a lot of pearl-clutching in an effort to appear educated or morally superior regarding the sanctity of life, which I'm not sure applies in this case.

Shooting someone in the back is a cowardly move, there's nothing righteous about it

 

[mkrnhr]

I think one should keep in mind that things are not always what they seem. Imagine a CEO is to be murdered by a rival faction, organized crime, or some financial/political interests. You can always find someone who is dissatisfied with the current system, or more specifically with the CEO's company, and use that someone as a scapegoat. With Trump election and the possible nomination of RFKjr, the pharmaceutical mafia (one my assume they control insurance and medical schools, and policies etc.) might be in turmoil behind the scenes. The usual OP in these cases is suiciding some undesirable individuals, but if linking being anti-bigpharma to murder (even if subconsciously) then murder (or public execution) may serve a double purpose.

 

[Beau]

I think one should keep in mind that things are not always what they seem. Imagine a CEO is to be murdered by a rival faction, organized crime, or some financial/political interests.

Also, the people to be blamed for the healthcare situation in the US are not the CEOs. It's the government, it's Barack Obama and whoever behind him came up with the Affordable Care Act. Going after the private sector, it's basically the idea of "hating the player but not the game." It's tilting at windmills to do what Luigi did as a sort of vigilante justice. Are the insurance companies parasites, preying on the sick and diseased public? Yes. Nothing will change until the system is changed, and that starts with getting rid of Obamacare. Does murdering Brian Thompson accomplish that? Whether a radical change in the system actually happens with Trump/RFK, I'm dubious. There are a lot of things to do, and not all of it can get done in 4 years. Do they really want to tackle a radical reformation of the American health system? It's one thing to Make America Healthy Again, another to turn around the this massive, totally messed up system.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

I think California just had an experiment with that recently when they basically decriminalized retail theft, turning portions of the state into a free for all. Yes, we're talking about street crime vs white collar crime which isn't exactly the same thing, but it's similar enough to make my point: once accountability was removed crime skyrocketed. Is there really that much difference between robbing a store at gunpoint and presiding over an elaborate scam which steals millions of dollars? The second instance is far more serious, I would think. If there were more fear of retribution it would send a message that the sheep will not allow themselves to be so compliantly fleeced, and give the elites more cause to consider keeping their corruption within certain bounds lest something happen to them. Now let me stop right here and say I much prefer rule of law to vigilante justice, but when rule of law no longer works, well...

This goes beyond insurance companies treating people badly and implicates the fraudulent nature of the entire US medical system. I've seen some estimates that almost 20% of GDP is tied up in the medical system in some way when it used to be like 4% in the early 70s, and medical care didn't get 5x better. Also, hospitals don't have posted prices for procedures and seem to make it up as they go along depending on whether or not you have insurance and which insurance you have, subject to all kinds of back-room chicanery to settle on whatever the final price is. Furthermore, the price of the exact same prescription drug in the US is multiples of what it would be in Canada or Europe. The uninsured price is so high you are almost back to 1800s level of care without insurance. All of this is like a subtle form of extortion and violates price fixing laws and the Sherman antitrust act I believe, but has been normalized in the US over a period of decades because the medical industry is well-connected with the federal government pouring huge amounts of money into it. Like the dalliances of Hillary Clinton and Hunter Biden, it doesn't matter if what they do is illegal or not. The fact that Mr. Thompson seemed to profiting from this so handsomely gives me no sympathy whatsoever for how his story ended, and seemed to be a case of what goes around comes around.

It's entirely possible that the shooter in this instance was some kind of agent provocateur, but even so, I think he still represents a lot of legitimate anger people have with the medical system. The slippery slope aspect comes into play regarding how far down the roster of employees you assign such a degree of culpability, to which I don't have a precise answer and perhaps the PTB are hoping that everyone will lose their head and start shooting at everyone else, but the leader is definitely responsible for what the organization does or making strong efforts to fix it. Mr. Thompson seems very much complicit.

As for those arguing along the line that murder is never justified, I think such people who truly believe that live in a very barren moral universe, as most of the great heroes of history and mythology, Putin, Caesar, Charles de Gaulle, George Washington, Odysseus, and so forth were murderers of some persuasion. In my opinion, there is a lot of pearl-clutching in an effort to appear educated or morally superior regarding the sanctity of life, which I'm not sure applies in this case.

If they succeeded in killing Trump, would you say the same thing about pearl clutching? What if they killed Elon Musk, who also has a ton of haters, would you support it? Jordan Peterson? The problem with "vigilante justice" is it's more likely to kill someone who is not evil or whom you actually like. With people being so disinformed, would you really trust them to identify the baddies effectively? The baddies have really good PR departments and are good at redirecting public anger away from those who actually pull the strings.

In fact, we are so divided that everyone is literally Hitler depending on whom you ask. You'd basically end up with war on anyone rich or powerful with each side killing the other side's people. Only by sheer chance would any actual bad guys get killed, as the public cannot identify them with any kind of reliability or any kind of consensus. And who would step in to fill the power vacuum? Say hello to the new boss, same as the old boss.

I don't know what it would take for the public to actually realize who their enemies are and how they operate. But if/when they do, killing them becomes entirely unnecessary - their entire power structure depends on our ignorance and obedience. Remove those things and the guys in suits might as well not exist. That's the real challenge though - enlightening the population. And if you can't enlighten them, you can't save them from their own ignorance by any other means. As Pierre said, no one can save another. It's frustrating, but any attempt other than "self rescue through knowledge" seems to be doomed to have the opposite effect, and strengthen the status quo instead. It's like that saying - one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. Until the average person can reliably know who the terrorist is and who the freedom fighter is, we better not rattle that hornet's nest or everyone will get stung.

 

[Nević Nenad]

Are we still don't know killer's motives? Any story why he did that? Or is anything yet clear was a CEO scumbag or not?

If I remember correctly (and the case could be that I'm not), the Cs said something that its just human philosophical construct. There was something like that.

 

[Beau]

Are we still don't know killer's motives? Any story why he did that?

He had a back injury that was operated on, the doctors inserted screws, and even after the operation he was apparently still in lots of pain which affected his daily life. He also had written a manifesto, which many media outlets have quoted from but not posted in full. Ken Klippenstein has a source that shared it with him:

“To the Feds, I'll keep this short, because I do respect what you do for our country. To save you a lengthy investigation, I state plainly that I wasn't working with anyone. This was fairly trivial: some elementary social engineering, basic CAD, a lot of patience. The spiral notebook, if present, has some straggling notes and To Do lists that illuminate the gist of it. My tech is pretty locked down because I work in engineering so probably not much info there. I do apologize for any strife of traumas but it had to be done. Frankly, these parasites simply had it coming. A reminder: the US has the #1 most expensive healthcare system in the world, yet we rank roughly #42 in life expectancy. United is the [indecipherable] largest company in the US by market cap, behind only Apple, Google, Walmart. It has grown and grown, but as our life expectancy? No the reality is, these [indecipherable] have simply gotten too powerful, and they continue to abuse our country for immense profit because the American public has allwed them to get away with it. Obviously the problem is more complex, but I do not have space, and frankly I do not pretend to be the most qualified person to lay out the full argument. But many have illuminated the corruption and greed (e.g.: Rosenthal, Moore), decades ago and the problems simply remain. It is not an issue of awareness at this point, but clearly power games at play. Evidently I am the first to face it with such brutal honesty.”

 

[Nević Nenad]

So, vigilante with personal mission. Nothing new there....

Thanks on a summary Beau.