For the past four weeks gold has been in to doldrums, hanging around the $1,330 range. Some hedge funds sold out their positions. Analysts were on the tape saying that gold has lost its luster and is ready for a fall.

Now, today, you look at the gold price and it's up. $15.80 at $1,364 per ounce. And you are wondering what's going on. You look at today's news and you read that China has just raised interest rates. So as a trader you decide to sell the gold short because gold does not like higher interest rates. Wrong! The market turned around like a vengeance. By noon it was up $13.00. It wasn't logical, but it happened anyway. The shorts quickly covered their positions.

Forgive me if I stray slightly, but I could not help thinking about how ironic it would be if someone leaked information as to the whereabouts of Wikileaks founder and "fearless leader" Julian Assange -- who is in hiding!

It would be even more ironic if a CIA operative who had his cover blown by Wikileaks decides what goes around comes around. Let's face it, in its own way Wikileaks has become a rogue nation, so why wouldn't the CIA get involved?

In the mean time, this has probably helped world markets as it has overtaken everything else as the big story of the past 48 hours. In a bizarre way, Assange may have achieved one of his goals by bringing the world closer together, sort of.

Banks could face another mortgage crisis, according to Barron's, if they are forced to buy back subprime, Alt-A and options adjusted home mortgage securities they've sold prior to the financial crisis, mostly as mortgage-backed securities. Already some buyers, like Fannie Mae (FNMA) and Freddie Mac (FMCC), have enjoyed some success returning defective mortgages. And this could be just the beginning.

The banks, of course, are fighting vigorously to fend off these demands. As usual, the courts will have to settle the matter. The focus of the debate seems to be founded on the issue of representations and warranties that may or may not have been violated.

There are no surprises among the 11 banks mentioned. It is the conspicuous absence of names you might expect to find that is.

In case you need to be reminded to look closely at the books, today's poster boy for erroneous ledgers, Bernie Maddoff, should be a constant reminder. Furthermore, when you are looking at the books, remember that Benjamin Graham, mentor to "my pal Warren," advised buying stocks for less than their intrinsic value. And book value is the starting point in attempting to establish that.

Two weeks ago, I posted an update on my toxic stock picks. These were six unloved stocks where I felt the stage was set for market beating returns. The same is true again for today's market-beating group, although it is not the headlines that tied this group together, but their standout bargain metrics.

Wednesday morning, brokerage house UBS (UBS) upgraded fellow broker JPMorgan Chase (JPM) to buy from neutral. UBS believes that JPMorgan is currently at an attractive entry point that reflects its earnings and risk while overlooking potential offsets and better footing.

UBS added that it sees "current universal bank valuations as an opportunity to get into top quality names, and JPM is as good as it gets." UBS also believes that the regulatory reform will be less strict than initially thought. In addition, UBS feels that JPMorgan's broad business mix should help the brokerage.

The financial crisis, employment market and social media explosion have converged, providing a new level of clarity into what is happening in the world around us. Where was ground zero for this financial catastrophe? Well, according to the LinkedIn blog, five companies have shown the most action: Barclays (BCS), Credit Suisse (CS), Citigroup (C), Bank of America (BAC) and JPMorgan Chase (JPM). Interestingly, Goldman Sachs (GS), among the biggest winners now that we're pulling out from the recession, didn't see as much play.

JPMorgan Chase (JPM) wanted a piece of what could be the most interesting insurance IPO of the year, but it won't get a taste.

American International Group's (AIG) Asian life insurance unit, American International Association, is going to go public in Hong Kong for an estimated $10 billion, and JPMorgan isn't being allowed to play, insiders say, because of a sour relationship that stretches back to the September 2008 financial crisis. As a result, it will be the only major investment bank not being admitted to the party.

Food stamps are pumping up revenue at retailers across the country. Costco (COST), Wal-Mart (WMT) and others are seeing rushes an hour before funds are credited to electronic benefits transfer cards. Wal-Mart's CFO, Tom Schoewe, has noted the trend, telling Reuters, "Once the clock strikes midnight [on the last day of the month] and EBT cards are charged, you can see our results start to tick up."

Spending via EBT is not only increasing, it generally happens quickly. JPMorgan (JPM), which runs EBT programs for more than 20 states, reports that buyers run through 85% of food stamp funds within the first three days of their availability.

Maybe Goldman Sachs (GS) does care what outsiders think about it. The company has come under plenty of fire this year for its post-financial crisis bonus payments, especially after having accepted TARP money from the government. In order to keep the world off its back, the bank is going to pay managers their annual bonuses in stock this year instead of cash.

And the stock issued will have to be held for five years. So, recipients will have a long-term stake in the company. But it seems they're being compensated for that, too as GS is spending a total of over $20 billion in compensation.

Tech sector IPOs surged by a factor of five in terms of value from 2008 to 2009. A mere $749.2 million raised in 2008 jumped to $3.8 million so far this year, according to data from Thomson Reuters. In 2008, only three went public, while 10 tech companies made the plunge in 2009. And, expectations are even higher for 2010.

Paul Bard, a research analyst at Renaissance Capital, forecasts between 40 and 50 tech industry IPOs next year, in which $4 billion to $5 billion in capital would be raised. "We've been expecting an uptick in technology because it has really been underrepresented in the market over the last few years," says Bard. The IPO market for high-tech companies was strong in 2007, but it seized up along with virtually every other form of capital raising when the financial crisis erupted in 2008.

In running a very tight stock screen recently for value plays Burlington Northern Santa Fe (NYSE: BNI) showed up on a list of 14 stocks. Interestingly all the large railroad stocks did. This reminded me of several stories I have done on the subject, the most recent being Chasing Value: Watch BNI -- the heck with Citigroup.

To summarize, about six weeks ago a Citigroup (NYSE: C) analyst declared it was time to sell the stock when BNI was trading in the mid $60s -- I said investors should do the opposite, it was a great value. Friday the stock closed at $76.98. Even at this price it is a value and ever more so with oil prices steadly creeping up.

"What can get this market going again?" asks Chuck Carlson. In The DRIP Investor he says, "It's helpful to understand what stocks within the Dow need to do well for the index to do well."

"Not surprisingly, IBM (NYSE: IBM), the highest-priced stock in the Dow, carries the greatest weighting at more than 9% of the index. Obviously, with such a heavy weighting in the index, IBM will need to be a decent performer for the Dow to do well going forward.

"And when you total up the exposure of IBM with the other tech stocks in the Dow - Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT), Intel (NASDAQ: INTC), and Hewlett-Packard (NYSE: HPQ) - the total tech weighting in the Dow is 16%. Thus, tech stocks matter to the Dow, so it is diffcult to see the Dow sustaining a move upward without a nice rebound in the tech sector.

A spokesman for JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM) Thomas Kelly said his firm has not disclosed what it did with the $25 billion in emergency bailout money it has received. In fact, JPMorgan Chase is declining to provide any such disclosure.

AP has reported that none of the 21 banks that received $1 billion or more from taxpayers is tracking, or at least willing to disclose how they are using the money. Let me be clear -- THIS STINKS TO THE HIGH HEAVENS!

What kind of deals did Treasury Secretary Paulson make with these favored financial institutions? The money would be very easy to track. Why wouldn't that be a part of the bargain?

Paulson obviously did not read Conservative bankers? Surely you jest!, but he should have. Of course, having former Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) CEO Paulson negotiate with his Wall Street buddies on behalf of the taxpayer is highly suspect. At a minimum we have the good 'ol boy network operating in full form.

The banks simply are avoiding what should be required scrutiny by pleading ignorance. I don't believe the money can't be tracked, or even traced now after the fact. What happened to the idea of more transparency? More cover up I fear!

The banks should be subject to full disclosure. The use of the funds should be subject to review. Government money should be subject to the Freedom of Information Act. Why all the secrecy?

PS: Personal emails I have been receiving and the initial comments indicate strong sentiment about this issue. I encourage those that care to forward this story to their elected officials and friends encouraging full disclosure -- as promised! Obama used the internet to help win the White House, lets use it to get someone to listen with an internet blast from all over the country!

Sheldon Liber is the CEO of a small private investment company and the principal for design and research at an architecture and planning firm. He writes the columns Chasing Value and Serious Money.