believes that some people down the line, working at a desk, out around the water cooler decided to target our group or any other group. but where it started, where initiated from, we have no idea, but we look forward to the irs providing us with the answer. neil: amazing. you might have to wait a little while. bruce, thank you very, very much. did you ever ask yourself, how the heck stuff like this could happen? what makes people cross the line and then stomp out the line? to the whistle-blower at enron who saw for herself, and says, she is seeing it all over again. sharon watkins is here and only here, next. [ female announcer ] at jcpenney, we never stop being amazed by you.
up being ignored because we re trying to finish something by the end of this month or next month, and people feel like their protests are fruitless. so turns out there were others at enron that went before me, too, and they were ignored. neil: the argument was we all have to be on the same page, and they questioned your argument that what they re doing is illegal. so i m thinking, there s sharon at enron screaming that this isn t kosher, more or less, got some serious issues, but that everyone had to get the same talking points out there. some of them i m going to give th the doubt didn t think what they were doing was illegal but they knew you were not going with the flow and you were being disruptive. right? and also, for someone like me, i came forward because i felt also if what i said, enron might implode because of accounting scandals. i was concerned whiff whether the company would exist.
anything, it wag ignorance. he didn t know what was going on. and that is ultimately what those who are the focus of an investigation cling to, adapt know what was going on. i went from being active, hands on managers, to mr. magoos. is that your sense of the ken lay strategy? yes, but at some point, i m the young boy saying you re the emperor with no clothes. are you saying could she be right? or are you saying she better be wrong because we re paying arthur anderson a million dollars a week to make sure have on clothes. so at what point is your leadership style affecting the information you receive? sharon what continues took a lot of heat to speak up when she did. think of the time she did it. that was. the sharon watkins with us now. he blew the whistle on big tobacco companies, and it blew up so big they made a movie
slipping, lying. she saw all the signs and was in the bunker and knew and knows well the bunker mentality. sharon, help us understand how these things happen. how in a rational environment let s say the irs, just within the irs, that it doesn t have any outside influence they are targeting a group, and obviously it has to be a couple of people agreeing, we want to target these groups. how does that group think happen? well, they ve got a goal that seems laudible, and potentially it s, this group is for less taxes, they re bound to be trying to create some loopholes that might not be on the up and up. let s vent the. there s some goal that seems laudible and they don t question their means to get there. and that s typically how wrong-doing happens. people don t intend to violate policy or procedure or law, but they take a look at a goal they
too early to say. we re not going to jump the gun and say this was al qaeda. i only relate it back to you, sharon to say, what is the line between trying to make sure everyone is speaking the same point versus lying about that point? well, i think some of it has to do with people not wanting to be wrong. so people that might have helped the transaction be put in place and maybe the todd was hard to spot on the front end, they don t want to admit it was a problem because then they re part of it. i have a young daughter. i see that it seems seems to be ingrained in us when we do something wrong we want to deny and blame someone else, find an excuse. it s it goes back to adam and eve. the woman, you made me. we just don t want to accept fault. neil: but it was eve s fault. everything was eve s fault. but, sharon, finally in ken lay s case he was always above the fray or deemed before the fray that if he was guilty of