[Southack]

"If, however, it's based on something you read about what some Andersen employee supposedly said, then it's a mighty weak assertion."

There are really two ways to look at this scenario from a big picture perspective:

1. Andersen (Accounting) is inept, hence Enron's badly inflated public 10k and audit, or
2. Andersen (Accounting) is corrupt, hence Enron's badly inflated public 10k and audit.

There is certainly evidence that executives at Enron are corrupt. This evidence includes one $20 million deal that went to Enron's CFO, in the name of a new corporation formed by that CFO. Further evidence includes Forbes listing of a $500,000 payment to a close relative of an Enron executive. Non-evidence, but still rather suspicious behavior, is that Enron's CEO turned down his $60 million golden parachute.

What remains to be proven is whether the corrupt executives at Enron took advantage of merely "slower" executives at Andersen, or whether those executives voluntarily colluded to hide insider deals and inflate Enron's balance sheets.

[lewislynn]

There is certainly evidence that executives at Enron are corrupt.

So true, and yet because narrow minded nitwits have a thing (right or wrong) for Gray Davis we're expected to believe Enron and other energy traders never manipulated the ("deregulated"?) market or gouged Californian citizens in the phony "deregulation" mess...