Could there be a connection between 9-11 and the CEOs coming clean? Could it be that the loss of large accounting firms’ offices in the Twin Towers (and the secrets they’ve held) possibly removed a shroud of paperwork and red tape once serving as a smokescreen protecting CEOs from expsoure?
In other words, could it be that Enron and Worldcom were forced to come clean? And, other dominoes are still waiting to fall?
I’ve yet to see anything connecting the WTC sneak attack with Enron’s denouement. Enron really just had time run out, which is inevitable when you build a bubble into your books.
I am not inclined to look to 9/11 as a motivator/impetus for the accounting scandals. I see the scandals as more of a “second wave” hangover from the Booming 90’s. In other words, the first hangover was the explosion of dot.com speculation. Now, 18 months or so later, after that dust has started to settle, we are confronted with the actions that the non-dot.com companies were taking in order to keep up with the dot.coms’ (what we know know to be) completely unrealistic performance. Once the dot.coms collapsed, the non-dot.coms were left with their own houses of cards. It was only a matter of time, which, of course is true with any speculative stock market buildup we have experienced in our history…
9/11 simply happened at a time when this business/stock market cycle was playing itself out. The absolute tragedy of the attacks has exacerbated reactions to the scandals, but, IMHO, that is about it.
If you want loopy connections, talk to James Burke. The conditions that would eventually crush Enron and WorldCom were in place long before Sept. 11. WordMan’s dotcom connection sounds valid and more major collapses will follow over the next several years.
If there is a Sept. 11 tie-in, it may take form in the Democratic campaign of 2004 which will hammer Bush for getting into bed with big business and not anticipating the attacks.