what I was commenting on is

a) if people think that the big hand of big brother is hanging dark and shadowy over them, so that they are not in control of their situation, it does something to their psychology. Propoganda is used to control crowds. Think about this not only in terms of the public who are generally invested in the general stockmarket but also those invested in pms. That is the creation of the feeling by other participants that you are not in control of your investment. Propoganda as a manipulation on reality will gave way to a multitude of 'alternative' theories

b) When Bear Sterns went down a number of other investment bans were also labouring under substantial short positions, including Lehman and UBS. Lehman up until they released better than actual results. So allowing that rubbish was hitting the fan across the board so to speak, are we surprised that lower put prices were introduced in worsening conditions

Funds use quantum systems which measure sentiment, sentiment moves in waves, so if traders were of the opinion that the market was moving lower and still some, there may be a technical reason for doing what they did.

c) Bear Sterns failing would have had major market fall out all over the world, if either of the two parties involved in that process made some financial benefit out of avoiding a collapse, is that a negative?