Posted 1:25 PM by Blah blah

Chatted with Sam this morning about what he calls his "emotionally gutwrenching" experience talking to an 18-year-old homeless girl, which "smashed [his heart] into so many pieces." I hope you feel better, Sam, and have the chance to do something practical with your sense of outrage! He will update his site more later.

Since poor Sam is my foil to talk religion, what do you think of this? Sam?? As Rabbis Face Facts, Bible Tales Are Wilting (NY Times):
__________________
Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.

Such startling propositions the product of findings by archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25 years have gained wide acceptance among non- Orthodox rabbis. But there has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with the laity until now.

The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called Etz Hayim ("Tree of Life" in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine document.

"When I grew up in Brooklyn, congregants were not sophisticated about anything," said Rabbi Harold Kushner, the author of When Bad Things Happen to Good People and a co-editor of the new book. "Today, they are very sophisticated and well read about psychology, literature and history, but they are locked in a childish version of the Bible."
__________________
Great interview with one of my favorite actors, Sir Ian McKellen, or Gandalf from The Lord of the Rings (The Observer):

" 'Well, it's easy to underestimate someone who doesn't wear shoes and who's only got two shirts and they're both the same colour and never cuts his hair. Peter Jackson doesn't look like a major director who can organise vast troops. He looks like a... hobbit. But a major director is exactly what he is, and he did it with massive equanimity and humour and devotion. So I should have known it would be all right, but I didn't, not until I saw it complete.'...

McKellen famously came out in 1988 during a radio conversation with Peregrine Worsthorne, and went on to co-found the gay rights group Stonewall. Why, in retrospect, had it taken him so long, given that he was in the world of acting, at a time when closet doors were swinging open everywhere?

'I'm the guy who gets cowed by authority,' he says. 'Which means you resent authority but you don't necessarily fight it. I do feel I should have spoken sooner, yes. Suddenly a huge weight dropped. All that stuff with parents' friends, you know - "why is so-and-so 45 and still not married?" "Oh it's just because he hasn't met the right girl" - and I didn't quite lie but didn't quite tell the truth. Deep down, I was ashamed of the fact that I wasn't normal, I didn't think I was normal. In 1969, I was breaking the law in Edinburgh; it was still an offence for two men to make love; I was a criminal. And if your instinct is to be accepted, and yet you think yourself odd, then you find yourself lying.

'But this has all made sense to me only over the past 15 years. And now I can go on David Letterman, as I did recently, and answer about Christmas, saying I had a very pleasant time with my boyfriend, and it's unchallenged! But, currently, there's maybe less politics. It's the problem with being happy. I'm currently a bit inward looking, concentrating on being happy myself rather than telling everyone how as a nation we should organise, and if I was on a march at the moment I would just be saying to everyone... be honest with each other. Admit there are limitless possibilities in relationships, and love as many people as you can, in whatever way you want, and get rid of your inhibitions, and we'll all be happy - but how do you put that into legislation?'

Coming from a new-age proselytist, it would sound faintly ludicrous. Coming from the knight, the thrilling Coriolanus and perhaps the best Macbeth of last century, his mobile face suddenly rigid with sincerity, it makes a certain sense.
__________________

Andersen at the brink. The Enron fallout.

The U.S. Justice Dept. indicted Arthur Andersen today under felony criminal charges, for obstruction of justice related to its shredding of documents in the Enron scandal, threatening the very survival of one of the world's most prestigious and oldest (88 years old) accounting firms! Andersen cried foul, saying this indictment is a "death penalty" for the firm. Imagine, 85,000 employees may be scrambling for jobs while the firm may be forced to declare bankruptcy. Any thoughts, Sophia, as an accountant, on what this means? What do you think about the need for reform of the accounting industry?

About the shredding:

Andersen Is Said to Rule Out Plea (NY Times):

Separately, officials from the Securities and Exchange Commission have begun discussing contingency plans with the rest of the Big Five accounting firms on how to handle a possible collapse of Andersen, according to people who have taken part in the discussions. Such a collapse, if it occurred, would require a virtually simultaneous transfer of auditors by almost 20 percent of the publicly traded companies in the United States....

Indeed, the document destruction that began in Houston appears to have been more widespread than previously believed, according to the findings of an internal investigation conducted for Andersen by Davis Polk & Wardwell and Mayer, Brown.

According to the findings, partners in the Houston office directed Andersen offices in Portland, Ore., and London to destroy records relating to Enron. Those instructions were issued after Andersen partners were aware that the S.E.C. had begun a preliminary inquiry into the Enron matter, the findings say.

The document destruction in the Portland office was limited, the findings say, because many employees were told to disregard the instruction. There is no description of the amount of shredding in London.

In addition, the findings concluded that Andersen's national accounting experts in Chicago, known as the Professional Standards Group, engaged in document destruction in September. However, at that point, there was no S.E.C. inquiry into Enron and thus no official proceeding that could be obstructed.

Still, the internal investigation found no evidence that Andersen's management played a role in the document destruction, which the findings say was initiated by the Houston office.

Indeed, the investigators found, in the three days after Oct. 23, when partners assigned to the Enron audits held a series of meetings, at least 26 trunks of records, as well as 24 other boxes of Enron-related paper, were shredded.

"This volume compared to a weekly average of less than one trunk during the preceding week," the findings said. "In addition, there was also an almost threefold increase in the volume of e-mail deletions that week."

According to the findings, by the time the document destruction began, Andersen partners in Houston — including David B. Duncan, the partner in charge of auditing Enron — were aware of the S.E.C.'s request for documents from Enron.

The Houston partners also learned from Enron on Oct. 22 — the day before the shredding began in earnest — that an S.E.C. letter requesting accounting information was expected soon.

Mr. Duncan's lawyer did not return a call seeking comment.

The findings also indicate that there were efforts by Houston officials to mislead others in Andersen about the document destruction. In preparation for demands from the S.E.C., an Andersen partner who had experience with the agency traveled to Houston during the week that shredding was taking place. The partner, John Riley, met with Mr. Duncan. "Riley had a conversation with Duncan in which he apparently denied that any unusual shredding activity was in process," the findings say.

"Instead, Duncan apparently acknowledged that he understood it would not be a good time for the engagement team to be shredding work-related documents."

Through his representatives, Mr. Duncan has maintained that the document destruction came after he received an e-mail message from Nancy Temple, an Andersen lawyer in Chicago, reminding the auditors about Andersen's document retention policy, which required the destruction of certain material once an audit file was completed. But the findings said that the e-mail message was not a likely trigger for the shredding, which occurred 11 days later.

Ms. Temple has testified before Congress that the purpose of her e- mail message was to remind the auditors to follow the firm's policies on destruction when working on draft memos in progress.

However, the findings say, "given the broad scope of the firm's document policy as it then existed, it is possible to read the Oct. 12 e-mail as not limited in the way that Temple testified she intended."

Is Arthur Andersen's Number Up? (Washington Post):

It's not just that several dozen clients have already announced they are taking their business elsewhere -- it's also that hundreds of others are reported by competitors to be quietly shopping around as well.

Key partners, meanwhile, have reportedly begun serious discussions about jumping to rival firms -- a recognition of the fact that their equity in the firm is almost sure to be wiped out and that, going forward, they are likely to make more money working somewhere else.

And hopes for selling the firm dim as other firms conclude there is no way to wind up with the valuable parts of the Andersen franchise -- the clients and the experienced practice teams -- without also running the risk of inheriting the liabilities that might be owed to the shareholders, creditors and employees of bankrupt clients. Just yesterday, Ernst & Young and Deloitte & Touche announced they had ended discussion about possible combinations with the global Andersen organization....

One other second-tier player, Chicago-based BDO Seidman, has made a run at the big time but with only limited success. The problem, explained Lee Graul, head of its public company practice, is that Wall Street analysts and investment bankers tend to frown on companies that don't have a Big Five seal-of-approval on their financial statements.

Ironically, one reason Wall Street prefers the biggest accounting firms, said Graul, is that they are thought to have the "deepest pockets," with the biggest insurance policies, in case things go wrong and shareholders want someone to sue. With Andersen, that belief may now have been shattered.

In addition to competition issues, a number of leading critics of the accounting industry -- including [former Federal Reserve chairman Paul] Volcker and former SEC chairman Arthur Levitt Jr. -- warn that the collapse of Andersen may scotch the best opportunity in decades to clean up problems that are widespread in the accounting profession.

Their argument is that if Andersen can be "reformed" along the lines outlined by Volcker -- without the temptation to cut corners on audits to win lucrative consulting contracts -- it will create a tough, quality auditing firm sought after by corporations now eager to allay shareholder anxieties.

In the resulting competition, other firms would eventually be forced to emulate the "new Andersen," in the process enhancing auditor independence and audit quality across an industry where questionable practices and audit failures have not been limited to Andersen.

"My purpose is not to save Andersen but to finally bring some reform to an industry that has resisted it for decades," said Volcker. "Maybe its a romantic notion, but I thought it was worth a try."

But skeptics wonder whether, even with Volcker's help, a firm as tarnished as Andersen can suddenly brand itself as the guarantor of financial reliability -- and whether such a tough-minded firm would suddenly become a market leader.

"The fundamental problem has never been with the auditing firms -- it's with corporate America," said Arthur Bowman, publisher of a widely read accounting industry newsletter. "Up till now they've gotten the kind of audits they wanted. And there is no reason to believe their preferences have changed."

A number of top corporate executives have stepped forward in recent days to defend themselves and their accountants. Lawrence J. Ellison, chief executive of Oracle Corp., said yesterday that his company would stick with Andersen despite what he termed the "mob rule" that demands punishment for thousands of Andersen employees for the still-unproven mistakes of a few "rogue" colleagues in the Houston office.

But harsh as it may seem, industry's critics say such punishments are the only way to change accounting industry behavior.

If you are curious about some of the ideas behind this whole Enron mess, why not take these quizzes from the Washington Post? Financial Literacy Quiz and Economy Quiz.
__________________
Thanks to Rose, I discovered a new quick-and-easy blog commenting system: Netcomments.

I had a good exam yesterday, followed by a lousy parking ticket. Was feeling down when some people (you know who you are) had a nice chat with me last night. Felt much better afterwards, thank you =) !