Pls decipher Butler AIG Mumbo Jumbo... To me it doesn't pass a 9th graders homework. If Butler just wants to persist in starting from a "silver manipulation is a fact" base without his referred to 'evidence', which is wrong to do, he still needs to beef up his article which doesn't show anything about AIG practices that passes a smell test. This article was terrible. Nothing to support his conclusive paragraph except innuendo and unproven accusations about others that he smears AIG with. He needs to improve his journalistic ethics or get an editor who will enforce such.
From the PAAS board
by: canucanoe1 12/11/03 04:34 pm
Msg: 12901 of 12957
Can someone please decipher the mumbo jumbo of Butler regarding AIG? His last paragraph, usually a conclusion one, is not supported by what was written by him. I'd be interested in learning the following:
>>>I had written to AIG's CEO and Chief Counsel in July (as I did the other Silver Managers, as previously disclosed), and received a prompt reply from the Chief Cousel that he saw no need for an internal investigation. I am asking them to reconsider and look at AIG Trading's possible involvement in the silver manipulation. There is just too much evidence pointing to that involvement. <<<
Evidence? Can someone please first present evidence of a manipulation. Ted said "evidence" not conjecture...
>>>Since the time I wrote to them the financial world has exploded with shocking revelations of wrongdoing never imagined. Sadly, the scandals being uncovered daily could have been avoided if the companies involved heeded clear warnings and cleaned up thier own acts, instead of now being forced to do so by outside regulators and prosecutors.<<<
What AIG acts does Ted present as wrong? Trading? And why does he make reference to other situations that have no connection yet with AIG? This smacks of Ted's manipulation and fanning the fires of nonsense.
>>>It will be a lot more painful and expensive to have someone else clean up your own mess.<<<
What is the AIG mess? Ted didn't present anything but an historical look at AIG's trading business and the fact that they seemingly made good on an obligation by delivering silver. What is wrong with AIG's acts? Or is there something wrong with Ted?
This was a poorly written article that doesn't even present smoke at AIG, let alone fire. Ted should present his arguments. Instead he wants to rabblerouse and send a mob on a witch hunt.
Ursa, I have not asked for proof. I have asked for what Butler wrote in his article, =>'evidence' of manipulation. Please don't misquote me. If Mr. Butler can't present such, his who article is unsupported. And his accusations only attract the crazies =>who are known to trek to places like Jonestown for comfort and satisfaction. I don't wish to go there, I don't wish to have to clean up after Butler.
Now we've attracted anti-Butler silver bugs. I recently had a debate with one of the other PM sites regarding Butler's "conspiratorial", no-evidence of a manipulation critic. The problem is that the Mafia and other secret criminal consirators never talk or tell. When they do (under threat of prosecution), their mouthpieces tell us that the witness is now unreliable and and a crook. So who's left to talk? Think AIG's going to talk?
My own choice of evidence is to simply look at the price action on the COMEX. Long term charts show the tendency for PM to go UP on foreign markets, DOWN on the COMEX. Sorry guys, that to me is mathematical proof of manipulation. This can't happen in an unmanaged market. And since the price is suppressed on the COMEX, please explain how this happens without manipulation?
When I presented my argument, the Butler critic stated that "all markets are manipulated". Silver is no different. Oh yeah? Then why have a market? Let political contributors set prices and be done with the hypocracy.
You ask why should PM go up in price in one marketplace and down in another? We could start with it being valued in one region and not in another. It is as valid as your presentation stating otherwise. As for the price being supressed on the Comex, seems to me it is rising - as it is in other markets.
Reviewing the posts over the past few days, I find many passionately against, many strongly for, many questioning my credentials, but none that don't understand what I've written. If you have difficulty in comprehending what I'm writing, ask specific questions and I will answer (provided you're not too rude). If all you're doing is a general bitch and whine, then go stuff yourself.
Mr. Butler... if it is you... please read my post and respond. You will note that my post specifically points out:
a. You have shown no 'evidence' that there is silver market manipulation. I would like you present your 'evidence' before moving on to AIG behaviour.
b. Your article's thrust is unsupported. Your headline and conclusion have no relationship to the body of your article. Example, you have presented the history of AIG's trading group and Wall Street problems. Spent a long time doing so. You show no correlation between them, nor how this applies to your silver market concerns. Then you jump to some perceived AIG misbehaviour. Yet you present nothing of the such in your details, just AIG delivering silver to the Comex. A businesslike act that should be percieved as 'contract honest' unless you show otherwise. Would you please let us know:
...1 What was wrong with AIG delivering silver to COMEX? Other than this being a large quantity, what else do you have toshow that this is 'improper'? Surely 'large' is not what you will hang your hat on!
...2 What has been improper regarding past AIG trading in silver? If nothing, why are you writing such nasty articles full of innuendo?
...3 You smear AIG with innuendo about past Wall Street abuses by others. Why do you do this without showing how AIG deserves this from you?
There was no bitch and whine in my post. Just a lack of respect for an unsubstantiated, poorly written article. If you do not want to support your article, please don't smear my request that you do so. I look forward to a reply with the 'evidence' you speak of. If you don't mind, feel free to define the word 'evidence' for me...