You enter contracts which require people to increase the queue.

While there is no explicit scenario for environmental [or] catastrophic damage for any business line or corporate area, exposure related to participation in commodity markets primarily resides in the damage to physical assets risk category…

Goldman's commodities trading arm is an exclusive marketing and sales agent for the coal produced by those mines.

So there is no doubt, since Wentworth is a shell, that if anything goes wrong it is Morgan Stanley that is on the hook.

You agreed it is all one deal?

Well, were you horrified by what you saw?

You know that. You are a business person, a very active business----

Well, at least two of the three of these banks apparently are planning to exit the field, although somewhat gradually, that has caused so much concern, which has grown so vast, which has created such risk and which creates such potential…

So is it fair to say these basically followed a joint Goldman-Metro decision?

So the Chinese Wall Policy, even if it is not a tissue paper, is a one-way information barrier.

I just do not think we can rely on a private policy to make sure that this does not happen.

Do you think when Goldman runs a company the way it did--buys the company.

The result was the following: That the line, the queue, to remove metal from these warehouses went from 40 days to 665 days.

If they wanted the benefit of our economics in this deal, then they had to do that, yes.

So it was a joint decision to go ahead.

I take it you are not going to answer the question as to whether or not it was important to you that they cancel the warrants.

in 2010 the Federal Reserve Commodities Team undertook a 2-year in-depth review of the physical commodity activities being conducted under the grandfather clause at Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.

Did you agree to the deal?

too many Wall Street financial holding companies are ready and willing to engage in market manipulations and will do so until they are caught.

One of the reasons that JPMorgan wanted to get into the power plant business was to increase its access to important market information.

Does that type of shell arrangement increase the chances that Morgan Stanley would be held liable if that plant were struck by a disaster?

Exactly. It was important to you, however, that they move to another warehouse. Is that correct?

Morgan Stanley has been an active trader in the natural gas market for decades.

When you say 'causes'----

I believe we have got to have regulations that make that Chinese wall real, in law.