What proof. Your proof of dishonesty seems to be the fact that Arthur Anderson is somehow involved. Thats not proof. Its not evdience. Its not even much of a hint that anything is shady or underhanded about AMDs model numbers.
Tim
I don't know what kind of upbringing you had, or what kind of world you live in, but it has been my experience that past behavior is a VERY good indicator of current and future behavior. They're linked.
Are you not watching the news clips of Congressional Hearings? They certainly seem to think that Arthur Anderson LLP is capable of lying and dishonesty. If you lie about one thing, you'll lie about others.
The fact that Enron was one of AA's biggest Accounts makes it IMPOSSIBLE for me to believe that the highest level members of the company didn't know exactly what was going on. Most likely the whispers at the water cooler made everyone at AA aware, as verified by memo's that are starting to surface, and the employees complete willingness to shred the evidence. Overall, with only 1 or 2 noteable individual employee exceptions, it doesn't seem like AA is too honest a company to me.
When you condone dishonesty in one area of your company, you're likely to condone it elsewhere. This puts all of AA's dealings into question, and if you don't think that Congress is going to examine all of that, especially with the Democrats smelling blood in the Bush Administration water, then you weren't watching them in action during Clintongate....
More people are going down at this company, and by the time the "smoke" clears, nobody is going to believe anything that AA says about anything. That's the point...
Semi |
