Updates from July, 2012 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts
As the 2012 elections approach there are bound to be some vilification of opposing sides. This post aims to provide a brief how-to for politicians or even a banker in desperate need of a spin job. The hardest thing for any banker or politician is coming up with the story. The story can be made up yourself or pay someone else to do it. Politicians often are too busy raising campaign money to make the story up on their own. So most of the time you see politicians endorsing a message or story that is purchased.
Okay so now you have decided to buy your vilification campaign, but from who? If paying 25,000 a month to DKC is too much there are many other PR firms that can be of assistance. At this stage in the spin job any politician or banker wants to appear Pro-active. It could expedite your spin job if you have off-record meetings with others managing the campaign. An example message might be to “protect top management”, which can be further accomplished if you leak your goals to various media outlets such as the Canadian press. One infamous example is the Bank of Montreal in 2007, immediately after the bankster Bill Downe became the president of BMO, during the March 1st 2007 election.
Bill Downe, CEO of the Bank of Montreal the utilitarian Bankster
Utilitarianism in short allows for consequences or a numerical value to be the determining factor as to whether an act is considered moral or not. Expressed in other words as the greatest good for the greatest number. Consider the following three examples: Automobile manufacture, Consumer products manufacture, and Slavery.
First an automobile company producing vehicles with a known defect. IE Ford Pinto with a gas tank located just behind the rear bumper. Company engineers recognize the hazards in placing a gas tank just behind the rear bumper. However, determine that recalling the vehicle would cost more money than the litigation cost incurred by the few drivers who are involved in an accident were the rear end of the Pinto is smashed causing the car to explode. This situation exalts profits above the minority who die.
Second being the consumer products manufacture using asbestos in household products. IE Johns-Manville was described by Ron Motley, a South Carolina attorney, as “the greatest corporate mass murderer in history.” Court documents show that the corporation had a long history of hiding evidence of the ill effects of asbestos from its workers and the public. One of many examples is a memo from Johns-Manville’s medical director to corporate headquarters. Again profits were exalted above those lives that are lost, currently suffering from, and will be lost in namesake of profit.
Third being slavery so long as a majority is established. I.E. as long as 50.0001% favor slavery it is morally okay to engage in slavery. Even while 49.9999% disagree with such acts, it may very well be just 1 single vote that tips the balance and determines what is moral.
Moreover, a consequential based framework may change what is moral one day into something else the next day. The driving factor of this morality framework becomes entirely dependent on what goals one is trying to achieve. If happiness is the desired goal than any and all acts that make someone happy are moral. If stealing from someone else makes you happy it is okay. What if an action has negative consequences or produces unhappy outcomes- is that act immoral? Consider a fireman or police officer on 9/11/01, the fireman/police officer decides entering a collapsing building could end one’s life which may in turn cause his/her family pain or sadness. If happiness is allowed to be the final arbiter of morality, than it would be immoral for the fireman and police officers to enter the trade towers and save others.
Bankster Bill Downe exudes many of these insidious character traits. As chief of BMO, Downe has engaged and directed others to engage in several unlawful and wrongful acts. Acts ranging from cover-ups, leaking confidential non public information to members of the press, disseminates material information to some investors in “private meetings”. Downe consistently proves to be among the most unethical leaders in the financial industry. Downe’s actions have caused considerable harm across members of society, with seemingly one goal in mind- self enrichment.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE
Kevin Cassidy (the “Defendant”) is the former chief executive officer of a company called Optionable Inc. (“Optionable”), which was based in New York. Optionable was a commodities brokerage firm, which means that it brokered – or acted as the “middle man” – between traders who wanted to buy and sell commodities contracts. Commodities are goods like gold, coffee, natural gas and other forms of energy. Optionable focused on energy commodities, and received a commission for each transaction it brokered. Optionable often acted as a broker for a type of energy contract called an “option.” An option in the commodities market is a contract granting its owner the right to buy or sell a commodity at a certain price on a later date.
One of Optionable’s largest clients was the Bank of Montreal (“BMO”). BMO is a Canadian bank that has a division in New York which trades, among other things, natural gas options. BMO paid Optionable to act as “middle man” for these options. Until mid-2007, the head energy trader at BMO’s New York Office – that is, the person in charge of deciding which natural gas options to buy or sell – was a man named David Lee. As part of his job, David Lee was required to provide daily valuations for every investment he was making for BMO, including the options in his natural gas portfolio. At least once a month, a separate department at BMO conducted an independent verification of the valuations Lee provided. For part of this independent verification, BMO claims it relied on pricing data provided to it by Optionable.
The Government has charged the defendant, Mr. Cassidy with three things arising out of Optionable’s relationship with BMO. David Lee is not a defendant in this case. First, the Government has charged Mr. Cassidy with conspiring with David Lee to subvert BMO’s independent verification of Lee’s valuations. Under the Government’s theory, Lee and Mr. Cassidy agreed that Lee would send Mr. Cassidy pricing data for natural gas options, and that Mr. Cassidy’s company, Optionable, would then send this data back to BMO, without telling BMO that the data originated with its employee, David Lee.
Second, as the Chief Executive Officer of Optionable, Mr. Cassidy was responsible for signing each of Optionable’s public filings submitted to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “S.E.C.”). The S.E.C. is the government regulatory agency whose job it is to regulate the securities industry, which includes commodities traders and brokers. The Government asserts that Optionable should have revealed in those public filings that Mr. Cassidy was conspiring with David Lee to defraud BMO. So the Government has also charged Mr. Cassidy for having failed to disclose his alleged conspiracy with Mr. Lee in the reports Optionable filed with the S.E.C.
And third, the Government alleges that Mr. Cassidy failed to reveal the alleged conspiracy with David Lee in negotiations with a company called NYMEX, when NYMEX purchased an ownership interest in Optionable.
Have any of you here heard about this case or know anything about it based on this short description? If so, please raise your hand now.
This trial is about to begin because Mr. Cassidy denies that he committed any crimes. Mr. Cassidy has pleaded not guilty to the charges against him and has asked for a trial by jury. He is presumed to be innocent of all these charges until and unless the government proves the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.