2008年重击华尔街和国际金融市场的大地震依然余震未断。不信？不妨问问鲍勃•戴蒙德，巴克莱（Barclays）的首席执行官……或者应该说，巴克莱前首席执行官。

    戴蒙德这位风云一时的美国银行家一夜之间被拉下了这家英国银行的首席执行官宝座。巴克莱操纵伦敦银行同业拆借利率（Libor）的丑闻所引发的巨大公众压力和投资者的愤怒情绪最终迫使戴蒙德宣布辞职。听到这一消息的其他国际大行首席执行官们不消说也人人自危。理应如此。

    我曾经花费大量篇幅写过，金融大鳄与政治盟友、以及金融自我监管部门之间沆瀣一气，摧毁了公众信赖。主流金融媒体并未充分反映这一现实。因此，彭博社（Bloomberg）承认银行业已经开始腐烂（There's Something Rotten in Banking）这个长久以来很多人都已经知道的事实时，我有点意外，但并不感到鼓舞，虽然这是一个转折点。

    我们不支持痛打银行，也不要求监管部门捆死大银行。但如果一个行业拿假的利率数据来欺骗市场，骗取其他银行和客户的钱财，让人还怎么为它辩护呢。

    悲哀的是Libor案暴露出了当今银行业文化中已经腐烂的一些东西。我们希望调查能曝光害群之马，将明知故犯、操纵市场者送入监狱，并驱逐参与或纵容此类行为的高管和董事。

    彭博打了华尔街和这个城市狠狠一记耳光。活该。要求将害群之马送入监狱，与我日前的想法相吻合。

    为什么要这样做？在巴克莱和解文件中，监管部门披露了证据确凿的电子邮件，表明银行交易员（希望能捍卫利润和奖金）和银行司库部高管（希望让市场相信银行没有陷入财务困境）之间肮脏交易的猖獗。这两个部门本不应互通，但显然已经暗通款曲。

    随着这一事件进一步发展，公众愤怒情绪继续升级，我敢肯定处于这场丑闻中心的银行高管们早已向美联储（Federal Reserve）、美国财政部（U.S. Treasury）的高官寻求庇护。正是美国公众的愤怒和随之而来要求全面透明的呼声才让整个丑闻事件彻底曝光。

    2008年的金融海啸波及所有银行和全球经济，巴克莱当然不是孤岛。还有多少金融机构正满头冒汗，担心将来审查内部沟通文件可能审出什么问题来？不管银行高管们怎么说，巴克莱曝光的电子邮件无疑是爆炸性的，所反映出的文化可能不只是巴克莱一家，而是整个银行业。

    The earthquake that rocked Wall Street and the global financial markets in 2008 continues to reverberate today. Just ask Bob Diamond, CEO of Barclays (BCS)... or I should say, the formerCEO of Barclays.

    Diamond, the once high-flying American banker, was dethroned overnight as the chief executive of the UK-based bank as public pressure and outrage grows over the Libor price-fixing scandal. Do not think for a second that the CEOs of other large global banks are not sufficiently concerned of their own standing this morning. As well they should be.

    I have written at length of the destruction of public trust due to the incestuous nature of the relationship between financial titans, their political partners, and compliant financial self-regulators. Major financial media have shied away from fully addressing this reality. In what I would define as a tipping point, I am surprised yet heartened to to read Bloomberg acknowledge what many have known for far too long, There's Something Rotten in Banking:

    We don't countenance bank bashing. Nor have we ever called on regulators to bust up big banks. But it's difficult to defend an industry that defrauds the market with fake interest rate figures, thereby stealing from other banks and customers.

    Sadly, the Libor case reveals something rotten in today's banking culture. We hope the investigations expose the bad actors, lead to jail terms for those who knowingly manipulated the market, and force out the senior managers and board directors who participated in, or overlooked, such conduct.

    Bloomberg hits Wall Street and The City hard. Deservedly so. The call for jail time echoes my sentiments expressed yesterday.

    Why so exercised? In the Barclays settlement documents, regulators released smoking-gun e-mails that reveal the extent of the dirty dealing between bank traders (looking to protect profits and bonuses) and senior officials in bank treasury units (hoping to convince markets that their banks weren't in financial difficulty). The two aren't supposed to collude, but it's obvious that the Chinese walls between them come with ladders.

    As this story continues to unfold and the public outrage mounts, I would bet executives at the banks in the crosshairs of this scandal might have already called senior officials within the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury looking for cover. Public outrage and accompanying demands for total transparency here in the States are required to expose the truth of this entire scandal.

    Barclays was certainly not an island in the tsunami that overwhelmed all banks and the global economy in 2008. How many other institutions are currently sweating profusely wondering what may be revealed in a review of internal communications? Despite what banking executives might say, the e-mail expose emanating from Barclays is explosive and indicative of culture not only at that organization but the industry as a whole.

    天知道写下下面这些邮件内容的家伙将来会是什么下场？他们会被指控操纵市场吗？至少他们应被指为愚蠢。在“绝非虚构”的小标题下，彭博披露：

    巴克莱驻纽约的一位高级交易员就3个月利率给报价的伦敦银行家写了一份电子邮件：“嗨，伙计们，未来三天我们有一笔3个月的libor大单。接下来几天能把Libor定在5.39吗？如果是这样，那就大忙了。我们不希望定价高于这个水平。多谢。”

    报价的伦敦银行家回信显示，这种要求似乎已经司空见惯。邮件中写道“愿意为你效劳”，“搞定了……兄弟”。交易员再表示感谢，“老兄，欠你个人情！”“哪天下班后过来，我们开瓶Bollinger香槟。”

    巴克莱交易员还和其他银行的对手方协调。根据一项即时聊天记录，一位巴克莱交易员给另一家银行的交易员写道：“如果你能保守秘密，我可以给你透露点口风。我们将把现金利率推低……我知道我们司库部的能量……别告诉别人，否则就不管用了。”

    如果最好的防卫是主动出击，其他可能卷入丑闻的银行早已行动起来。怎么行动？日前，《华尔街日报》（WSJ）报道，已有多家银行要求法院驳回Libor案。且慢，先生们，先查查公司的往来邮件吧。

    我一直说，不能相信银行业的自我监管。巴克莱丑闻曝光能推动这方面做出必要的改变吗？

    Larry是华尔街资深人士，曾在第一波士顿、贝尔斯登和Union Bank等银行就职。他的博客地址是www.senseoncents.com

    译者：早稻米

    Who knows what the future might hold for the individuals who wrote the following. Will they be indicted for market manipulation? They should certainly be indicted for stupidity. Under the heading of "you cannot make this stuff up," Bloomberg reveals,

    Here's an e-mail about the three- month rate from a senior Barclays trader in New York to the London banker who submitted the rates: "Hi Guys, We got a big position in 3m libor for the next 3 days. Can we please keep the lib or fixing at 5.39 for the next few days. It would really help. We do not want it to fix any higher than that. Tks a lot."

    Bankers submitting rates responded to such requests as if they were routine: "For you, anything," and "done … for you big boy," according to the e-mails. Not that the efforts went unappreciated: "Dude. I owe you big time!" one trader wrote to a Libor submitter. "Come over one day after work and I'm opening a bottle of Bollinger."

    Barclays traders also coordinated with counterparts from other banks. In an instant message, one Barclays trader wrote to a trader at another bank: "If you know how to keep a secret I'll bring you in on it, we're going to push the cash downwards. … I know my treasury's firepower … please keep it to yourself otherwise it won't work."

    If the best defense is a good offense, other banks likely to be dragged into this scandal are already hard at work. How so? Late yesterday afternoon, the WSJ reported Banks Seek Dismissal of Libor Suit. Not so fast, gentlemen. Let's see the e-mail exchanges first.

    I have long maintained, that the banking industry shouldn't be trusted to regulate itself. Will this scandal bring about the necessary change on that front?

    Larry is a Wall Street veteran, having worked at such banks as First Boston, Bear Stearns and Union Bank. He blogs at www.senseoncents.com